The New York Times and its curious campaign to rehabilitate the murderous image of communism

In a series of articles commemorating the “Red Century,” the 100 years of communist oppression, misery, and murder, The New York Times has embarked on a curious campaign to rehabilitate the image of communism. With an almost teary-eyed nostalgia, the old Grey Lady is combing through communist propaganda to remind everyone of all the great things communism claims it has done for humanity.

Conspicuously missing from the articles, however, are the terror; misery; violent repression; starvation; and the enslavement of billions. Moreover, the Times fails to make a single reference to the over 100-million people who lost their lives because of communism.

Paul Kengor examines this curious campaign in The American Spectator:

New York Times Newsflash: Communism — Great for Chinese Women!

Even if that meant the one-child or else limit — which the Times is too polite even to mention.

I recently wrote here about a wondrous story in the New York Times peddling a piece of political agitprop we would’ve once expected from the Daily Worker or Pravda. The mighty Times ran a peculiar article informing its wide-eyed readership that Soviet Bloc women enjoyed better sex under communism.

For the Times and its liberal-progressive base, obsessed as they are with sex and gender, there could be scarcely higher praise for an ideology.

This was merely one such article in a celebratory series by the Times on the so-called “Red Century,” marking this year’s centenary of the Bolshevik Revolution. Normal human beings might prefer to solemnly mark those 100 years with more significant facts like, oh, the 100 million dead corpses produced by communist governments in those years, and still accumulating in places like North Korea, Cuba, China, and even Venezuela with its bold Chavez-Maduro “21st century socialism” (which is really just 20th century communism).

But not the folks at the New York Times: the Times informs its sophisticates that communism… well, it wasn’t so bad after all.

Nope, quite the contrary, dear progressive, communism was damned good stuff for women.

Well, on the heels of its communism-gave-women-better-sex canard, the Times struck again last week with another whopper that once upon a time in a saner America would have been immediately recognized by normal people as silly communist propaganda fomented by a party organ in Moscow or Havana. Last week, the Times doubled down with another jaw-dropper on how communism has been just fabulous for women — this time in China.

“The Communists did many terrible things,” began this latest Times contribution to the national discourse, quoting a Chinese communist grandmother. “But they made women’s lives much better.”

Hmm. Do tell us more, dear comrade!

The piece stems from predictable left-wing pabulum: communism graciously delivered women into the workforce, communism generously took care of women’s (burdensome) children in daycare centers, communism bestowed upon women magnificent new rights (read: abortion), communism handed women great “free” education, and communism generally turned the lucky women worker-bee of the Proletariat into a dazzling new Communist Woman.

Schools. Factories. Farms. Abortion clinics. And 24/7 state daycare for the worker-child.

Not too shabby — eh, comrade?

To today’s university-trained progressive, this litany is a bountiful buffet of ideological eye-candy. The Times reader sipping her latte at Starbucks as she mulls over her latest gender options licks her lips at this cornucopia of collectivism that Chairman Mao had bequeathed to her faraway sisters.

Yep, pretty pathetic. Actually, downright tragic.

Continue reading HERE.

1 thought on “The New York Times and its curious campaign to rehabilitate the murderous image of communism”

  1. The NYT is like the proverbial perro huevero of the old Cuban adage. It is incorrigible, not least because it is so thoroughly self-enamored and self-satisfied. It has been overrated and “validated” far too much for way too long, and it has come to believe it is indeed the non plus ultra of journalism, no matter what it does or doesn’t do, as if just being the NYT were enough. Alas, its partisans are essentially people que cojean de la misma pata, forming what amounts to a vicious circle.

    The psychopathology involved is quite interesting but also highly repugnant–enabled, entitled and arrogant perversity always is, especially when it poses as righteousness. To our great misfortune, Cuba attracted the NYT’s, uh, ministrations at a critical time, and it did critical damage (which of course the NYT will not own, much less try to atone for or make right). To this day, it remains (or pretends to be) convinced that Cubans are better off than they would have been without the “revolution” it helped so much, which is as grotesquely obscene as it is flagrantly false. No entity that takes such a position is credible, let alone respectable.

    And yes, the NYT does presume to “get” communism better than its victims. Talk about obscenity.

Comments are closed.