Dialectical unity of self-contradictions

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Dialectical unity of self-contradictions is an ironic expression coined by Slovak author Ladislav Mňačko in his satirical novel "Comrade Münchhausen" where he, in a grotesque allegory, pointed at the demagogic aspects and lack of consistency in materialistic philosophies, notably of Marxist origin, which illegitimately usurp the label of "scientific world view."[1] In his 1932 book "Toward Soviet America", William Z. Foster, leader of the Communist Party of the United States of America, claimed that the future "American Soviet government" will further "the cultural revolution" by means of grouping the schools, colleges and universities under the National Department of Education and enforcing "revolutionized" curriculum that would be based on Marxian dialectical materialism thus "cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of bourgeois ideology". Religious schools would be abolished and organized religious training for minors prohibited. Freedom would be established only for antireligious propaganda.[2]

Dialectical Unity of Self-contradictions in Gender/LGBT+ ideology

Dialectical Unity exposed
"Sexual Orientation is Fixed, but Gender’s Completely Fluid. And 2 + 2 = 5."
— Joseph Sciambra[3]

Like the trial lawyer who has no hesitation to argue two entirely inconsistent theories of defense as long as the jury brings in a wished verdict on either one of them, "LGBT" advocates also seek verdict of public opinion on the basis of two clearly self-serving contradictory arguments:

  • When they wish to enjoy their supposed Constitutional freedom of sexual preference or lifestyle, they speak frankly of what they do in terms of sexual conduct. In that context, the exercise of personal choice is freely and openly acknowledged. For example, Allan Metcalf, a champion of so-called gender studies, claimed: “So young people nowadays have choices to make that they didn't face before. And it's not a once-for-all choice; they can question and redefine themselves at any time. ... it's your choice to be called lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning, intersex, asexual – or something else. ... We have reached the point that regardless of anatomy, you can choose your gender identity. And you can choose to change your gender identity as often as you change your clothes.[4][5]
  • But when, on the other hand, they are trying to obtain the rights of minority groups like race and gender, then it is expedient for them to speak in terms of status and the argument is made that homosexuals have no choice about who they are sexually.[6] For example, in 2015, an article titled “'Gay genes': science is on the right track, we're born this way. Let’s deal with it.” popped up in The Guardian.[7] Another example is radical homosexual activist Dan Savage who shifts the burden on proof on the opponents of the "LGBT" demagoguery while asking them to prove the negative for the claims of no choice for vaguely defined, and beyond the reach of scientific scrutiny, "LGBT people".[8] This cultural myth that homosexuality is inborn and immutable was trumpeted by John Kerry in front of an audience of 51 million during the final presidential debate in 2004. Flying in the face of the facts, he − as nominee for President of the United States on behalf of Democratic Party − misled the public by declaring: "If you talk to anybody, it's not a choice." No doubt this assertion pleased gay activists seeking credibility for the view that homosexuality is normative and should be embraced by society.[9]

After Val Kalende had renounced her former lesbian lifestyle and reidentified herself from LGBT to TBGL – Transformed by God's Love, LGBT activist Stella Nyanzi has tried to undermine Kalende's transformation by suggesting she can “relapse” back into homosexuality because “sexuality is fluid.” Many LGBT activists intensely dispute the notion that sexual attraction can be changed, though in recent years some voices such as Lisa Diamond have advised their allies to “stop saying ‘born that way and can’t change’ for political purposes, because the other side knows it’s not true as much as we do.”[10]


  1. Ladislav Mňačko (1990 (First edition:1972)). Súdruh Münchhausen (Comrade Münchhausen) (in Slovak). Slovenský spisovateľ (First publisher: Index), 44, 50, 149, 239, 296. ISBN 80-220-0256-9. “Celkove musíme tento jav hodnotiť v jeho zložitej protirečivosti. ... Obávam sa, že to nebudem vedieť vysvetliť svojim čitateľom ani po skvelom expozé súdruha Hnidu. Západná časť sveta nie je schopná rozmýšľať v takých zložitých dialektických protirečeniach, lebo si neosvojila revolučnú vedeckú teóriu, a to už vôbec nehovorím o revolučnej vedeckej praxi. ..."Tu sa opäť stretávame zo zložitými javmi dialektického vývinu. ... Pritom aj zo spisov klasikov vedeckého svetonázoru, potvrdeného historickým vývojom, najmä v tomto storočí, vyplýva, že... ako to vyjadril klasik vedeckého svetového názoru ..." Pravda, to bolo v čase, keď som sa ešte nenaučil myslieť v dialektickej jednote protirečivostí.” 
  2. William Z. Foster (2016 (originally 1932)). Toward Soviet America. Pickle Partners Publishing. 
  3. Joseph Sciambra (31 Jul 2017). Sexual Orientation is Fixed, but Gender’s Completely Fluid. And 2 + 2 = 5.. The Stream. Retrieved on 30 Jan 2018.
  4. R. Albert Mohler, Jr. (2015). "5.Transgender revolution", We Cannot Be Silent: Speaking Truth to a Culture Redefining Sex, Marriage, and the Very Meaning of Right and Wrong. Harper Collins, 77–8. ISBN 978-07180-32487. 
  5. Allan Metcalf (19 Aug 2014). LGBTQQ2IA. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved on 9 Oct 2017. “But as researchers in gender studies delved deeper, they discovered ever more variants on the theme. And people with these other variants began emerging from the crowded closet, asking (or demanding) that their kind of sexuality be recognized and protected against discrimination. ... But neither LGBTQQ2IA nor Quiltbag is likely to be the last word. As gender-studies research continues, and discussion proliferates, other variations are likely to emerge.”
  6. Frank LaGard Smith (1993). "5.Confusing War of Words", Sodom's second coming. Harvest House Publishers, 59–60. ISBN 9781565071544. “"Sexual orientation": Deceptive Buzzwords ... A matter of choice” 
  7. Qazi Rahman (24 July 2015). 'Gay genes': science is on the right track, we're born this way. Let’s deal with it.. the Guardian. Retrieved on 2 January 2016.
  8. Dan Savage reminds Ben Carson: Christianity is a 'choice,' but being gay is no. CNN. Retrieved on 19 Oct 2018. “Whenever someone says that being gay or lesbian is a choice I always look at them and say: OK, prove it, choose it! If it is something that you can choose, reach with your hand and flip an switch and be a gay or lesbian or bisexual, then flip that switch and show us how it's done. It's not a choice.”
  9. Caleb Price (29 Oct 2004). John Kerry's 'born-gay' science. WorldNetDaily.com. Retrieved on 4 Nov 2018.
  10. Calvin Freiburger (3 Aug 2018). Prominent Ugandan LGBT activist renounces ‘sin’ of homosexuality. LifeSiteNews. Retrieved on 3 Nov 2018.

See also