Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

January 25, 2017

Is George Soros promoting a color revolution against Donald Trump?

Filed under: conspiracism,Soros — louisproyect @ 8:18 pm

George Soros

Recently one of the trolls who visits my website on occasion presented a rather unique interpretation of why the Kasama Project came to an end, differing with my analysis that it was a surfeit of Maoist sectarianism that was the cause.

Interestingly, the site flded [sic] quickly after the trolls began making connection between Kasama, BLM and George Soros. It’s interesting to note Kasama’s involvement with Occupy which is another Soros project. This helps to confirm the trolls assertion that Kasama (and RCP) are Soros fronts.

Could Occupy Wall Street have been a “Soros project”? Well, the first thing that came up when I googled Soros and Occupy Wall Street was an article in RT.com titled “Is George Soros behind Occupy Wall Street?” dated October 14, 2011 and strongly implying that the answer was yes. Meanwhile, Russia Insider went one step further. It published an article titled “George Soros: The Ugly Face Behind Many Protest Movements” that posed the question:

What do the “Arab Spring”, the “Maidan Protests”, “Black Lives Matter”, “Occupy Wall Street”, “Open Borders” and many other movements have in common? George Soros.

Further research revealed that among the other schemes Soros has hatched deep within the bowels of his Open Society, which for websites such as Russia Insider assumes the character of the villain’s lair in a James Bond movie, is the protests that took place in the USA on January 21. It was, as conspiracist Michel Chossudovsky par excellence put it, a “colored revolution”. He repeats the arguments of the Russian Insider as if they had been written by the same person:

What is at stake is a “color revolution” Made in America which is marked by fundamental rivalries within the US establishment, namely the clash between competing corporate factions, each of which is intent upon exerting control over the incoming US presidency.

The OTPOR-CANVAS-CIA model is nonetheless relevant. Several foundations involved in funding color revolutions internationally are involved in funding the anti-Trump campaign.

Moreover, while CANVAS’ mandate is to oversee “color revolutions” internationally, it also has links with a number of NGOs currently involved in the anti-Trump campaign including The Occupy Wall Street Movement (OWS). OWS launched by Adbusters was funded via the Tides Foundation which in turn is funded by a number of corporate foundations and charities, including the Ford Foundation, Gates Foundation and the Open Society Institute. Ford is known to have historical links to US intelligence.

Iran’s PressTV was in sync with Professor Chossudovsky and Russian Insider. They ran an article titled “Soros orchestrating color revolution against Trump: Analyst” that began “Jewish business magnate George Soros has orchestrated a ‘color revolution’ against US President-elect Donald Trump, says an American political analyst, pointing to nationwide anti-Trump protests as evidence.” Very important to get that “Jewish” thing going on except most of these types of commentaries are a bit more discreet about their anti-Semitism like when RT.com published an article about a trip Soros made to the Ukraine: “Soros, born György Schwartz in Hungary, fled in the 1940s for the UK and later became an American citizen.” How can anybody trust someone with a name like György Schwartz, I tell you.

The “analyst” referred to in the PressTV article is one E. Michael Jones, the editor of Culture Wars Magazine, who asserted: “What we are seeing here now is George Soros once again intervening in the internal politics of the United States by creating a color revolution.” Wow, very radical. Succumbing to my insatiable curiosity, I visited Culture Wars Magazine and learned that it is behind a publishing company called Fidelity that includes titles by Jones and like-minded deep thinkers. One by Jones is titled “The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and Its Impact on World History” that according to one sympathetic critic makes the case that “when Jews rejected Christ, they rejected Logos in all its forms and became enemies of the social order”. I confess that sounds a bit like me.

Jeff Rense, an anti-Semite second to none, wrote a glowing review of the book that includes these intriguing insights:

The true “Jewish revolutionary spirit” is “to overturn” God and replace Him with Lucifer who represents the self-interest of the Illuminati (i.e. central bankers, Organized Jewry and Freemasonry.) This also was confirmed by Christian Rakovsky in his KGB interrogation.

 This also was confirmed by Christian Rakovsky in his KGB interrogation. “Christianity is our only real enemy since all the political and economic phenomena of the bourgeois states are only its consequences,” Rakovsky, says. Peace is “counter-revolutionary” since it is war that paves the way for revolution.

It’s not every day when you run into something like this. A convergence of Iranian clerical reaction, anti-Semitism and a defense of the legitimacy of the Moscow Trials. But then again after 6 years of deepening insanity on the left about the role of Iran and Russia in the world, I suppose anything is possible.

Turning to the question of “color revolutions”, I admit to originally having the same kind of Pavlov dog’s reaction as most people on the left, especially when I was writing about the Balkan Wars. Just mention the word Soros and I’d begin to salivate. But when I saw some on the left defending Putin’s invasion of Chechnya in 1999, I was sickened by the response. The carpet bombing of Grozny that became the template for the disaster in East Aleppo was unacceptable and no amount of “anti-imperialism” could justify it.

One of the first color revolutions took place in Ukraine in 2004. At the time, as far as I can remember, I was not quite a supporter of either the Orange movement as it was called or the Kremlin, largely a result of lingering concerns about NATO’s role in Yugoslavia. But it never occurred to me to look too deeply into what drove people to demand a break with Russia.

It was the “Green Revolution” in Iran in 2009 that helped me clarify my thinking. By that time I had become a friend and comrade of Reza Fiyouzat, an Iranian living in the USA who was part of the Iranian revolutionary movement. He was blogging at http://revolutionaryflowerpot.blogspot.com/ at the time, a website that is no longer active but that still can be accessed for a first-rate introduction to Iranian Marxist thought. Unlike most of the left, Reza was able to stake out a position that was distinguished from both Ahmadinejad and his opponent in the 2009 elections, Mir-Hossein Mousavi who was a leader of the Green Revolution supported by Nicholas Kristof, George Soros and all the other usual suspects. He wrote an article for CounterPunch in 2009 that could serve as a guide to all of these “color revolution” scenarios:

Where Ahmadinejad has made loud claims of victory — e.g., pushing forth Iran’s nuclear program — the ‘reformists’ hit back with the assertion that the nuclear program started some 25 years ago (when the ‘reformist’ candidate, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, was the prime minister), and that Ahmadinejad should stop pretending as if he was the sole creator of the nuclear program.

Where the ‘reformists’ have piled on the accusations of economic mismanagement, topped with a 25% inflation, Ahmadinejad has hit back with (I’m paraphrasing here): “It does not take a mere four years to be in such economic mess. Did it all just start with my government? Was there no unemployment before my government? Were there no addiction problems? Was there no inflation? Was I handed a spotless Garden of Eden created by you (Mousavi) and your reformist colleagues, which has now turned into ruins?”

If you see the conflict between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi as analogous to the current polarized situation in the USA, it is necessary to make distinctions that would be lost on conspiracist minded figures such as Michel Chossudovsky and other pro-Kremlin websites that have been propagating the nonsense about a color revolution taking place in the USA (including such Assadist strongholds such as Zero Hedge, 21st Century Wire, Signs of the Times and the Wayne Madsen Report).

It is certainly true that Soros is funding groups that are opposed to Trump but they would exist without his money, which seems to be rapidly vanishing. Apparently, Soros has lost a billion dollars on a gamble that the market would plummet after Trump took office. That’s on top of another two billion he lost betting against the possibility of a Brexit. People haven’t gone to Washington to protest Trump because Soros has funded them. It is because he is deeply unpopular as this graph would indicate:


Soros’s goal is not to foment a coup. It is to throw his weight behind an emerging movement that is clearly designed to channel discontent into supporting Democratic Party candidates in Congressional elections, culminating in a recapture of the White House in 2020.

What is the role of the left in all this? As was the case in Iran, we should be for channeling that discontent into specific issues where the Democratic voter might be moved to rally around a struggle that has a class dynamic such as the pipelines that Trump has given the green light to, the right of a woman to have an abortion, his ban on immigrants from Syria, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen, the proposed wall separating the USA from Mexico, etc.

Some on the left are wary about the Women’s March because so many Democratic Party officials were involved with it. I have some experience dealing with such issues as a socialist and Vietnam antiwar activist. In 1969, David Hawk and Sam Brown, two staff members of the unsuccessful 1968 Eugene McCarthy campaign, proposed a Moratorium as a deliberate alternative to the coalition that the SWP had been part of. If we had taken a sectarian position, we would have denounced it and kept our distance. Instead we embraced it and joined the organizing drive to make it as big and as successful as possible. So instead of a watered-down and pro-DP festival, the Moratorium turned into one of the most powerful protests of the 1960s.

People who have not become radicalized always tend to follow the cues of bourgeois politicians. When I was 21 years old, I kept hoping (and even praying) that a peace candidate could be elected and end the war in the same way people today hope that a liberal Democrat could replace Trump and be a far better keeper of his or her promises than Barack Obama. While Bernie Sanders might run again in 2020, I expect that the candidate will be someone much more in the Elizabeth Warren mold. Soros is pumping money into groups that are promoting such hopes. It will be up to the left to figure out a way to exploit the rising discontent with Trump to channel it into mass actions that can have the same kind of impact that the Standing Rock protest did. Condemning this ferment as “reformist” would be a mistake but none so nearly as rotten as those on the far reaches of the American “left” that have the low political IQ to take Michel Chossudovsky, PressTV and RT.com seriously.


  1. “People who have not become radicalized always tend to follow the cues of bourgeois politicians.”

    I am sure this line will be used by the ultra’s as proof positive that Louis is a shill for capitalism, pushing reformist lines.

    But, thank you Louis for formulating it; it expresses a key conceptual truth in the simplest form possible. To paraphrase an old thought, we ‘wake up’ in THIS world.

    When we awaken and realize that we have to push back, we take the helping hands (or ideas) of those with whom we are familiar. When people realize their rights are about to be restricted or eliminated altogether, or learn that their livelihoods are threatened due to some government action, at least some of them will become politically active. Now, most likely the first political steps are not going to be purely socialist. In fact, it almost never is. At the same time, the *potential* for such a turn is there and alive at all times. Which gives us the optimism of action/will.

    Those hands we take in assistance and solidarity are holding other hands as well. Each of us therefore at any moment can be taken this way or that, depending on how actively the hands we are holding are INTERVENING in the world, and which direction their intervention is pointing. This necessitates skepticism of the intellect, and compels us to be critical always and persistently. But the most basic law of existence is: To affect any situation, one must be present in it.

    The ultra’s have an easy-to-recognize trick: Find fault with, or ‘expose’ a conspiracy behind, every movement that takes shape. This way, they don’t have to do anything or even start any conversations. If they show up, it is to sell their newspaper only, not to start a genuine dialogue. They show up smugly, instructing people to do political decathlons when in fact the people they address in one-way directives have only just taken their first baby steps in politics.

    For the ultra’s, if people cannot immediately and spontaneously, on a hugely mass scale, do full-on, one hundred percent correct and pure socialist politics in exact alignment with their internal secret radical platforms, then people better just go home. They sound revolutionary but are in fact the most conservative, in that they advocate non-action and non-participation in every movement that comes and goes on a regular basis in any capitalist society.

    If you don’t do anything, there’s nothing to hold you responsible for.

    Comment by Reza — January 26, 2017 @ 4:26 am

  2. Interesting. Long, but length and detail are unavoidable when answering conspitacists.

    Comment by journeesjulesdurand — January 26, 2017 @ 8:15 am

  3. Anyone who experienced the contrast between the staged, sinister, and ineffective anarchist protests in DC as vs. the organized but spontaneous and highly effective Women’s March can testify that something was going on in the latter that wasn’t in the former.

    And why set fire to some poor schmuck’s limousine for hire when the bastard was only trying to make a living? What an act of petty-bourgeois snobbery. Do these people buy their carefully coordinated black protest ensembles at Nordsrom’s?

    This is not to sanction the grotesque overreaction of the government to the relatively minor violence of one faction of anarchists. To imprison 230 protesters for ten years on felony charges after who knows what torture is the act of a stinking, worthless, cowardly, subhuman, illegitimate, and illegal tyrant and buffoon. One can only hope that this piece of shit will prove to be as ineffectual on the larger scale as he is ridiculous personally.

    I often think with great pleasure of the video of Ceausescu and his wife being led out to be shot. One sees them in death’s antechamber bitching and making empty threats right up to the last moment. Then they exit. Then the shots ring out. Then, blessed silence. And there is that beautiful picture of Mussolini and Petacci strung up like sides of pork after getting what all fascists deserve.

    The just unfortunately had to suffer the pains of Hell for decades before getting to enjoy these moments of bliss.

    In the meantime, the Women’s March–and it will prove anticlimatic and lead for a time to a huge letdown–shows the only way forward.

    Comment by Farans Kalosar — January 26, 2017 @ 1:30 pm

  4. When I hear about these paranoid characterizations of Soros, I think of Dr. Mabuse from the Fritz Lang films of the early 1920s and early 1930s:


    Comment by Richard Estes — January 26, 2017 @ 9:26 pm

  5. The primary conspiracy theory of our time is that Russia influenced the US election. This conspiracy is a classic case of substitution, substituting those that actually voted for Trump and the reasons why they voted for him for a devious plot by evil Russians, the types who appear as hired assassin’s in many a Hollywood brainwashing product.

    If as a citizen you were to only get your daily diet of news from the main media outlets you could only possibly be an ignorant cretin, surely one contributing factor to the election of Trump. If these brainwashed and profoundly ignorant people had sought to get their news from outside the dominant media they could only have been more informed. The irony of Proyects position is that it is precisely Trump’s supporters who will most likely be won to such Russophobic propaganda. Except for expediency the liberals now reveal their true colours, as ruthlessly pro imperialist and as as ready to use scapegoating as the most rabid far rightist.

    Another contributing factor to Trump are the liberal imperialist policies so beloved by Protect. How can a war on terror and an aggressive imperialist policy to protect sit’s interests not lead to anything other than sharp reaction at the heart of the empire?

    If you someone to blame for Trump and you want to avoid blaming those who actually voted for the monstrosity then forget Russia, take a look at the free media and the pro war left who cheerlead from the shadows.

    Comment by Herbie — January 28, 2017 @ 11:20 am

  6. Herbie, Man, did you even read the post before leaving this comment? Better yet, have you read ANYthing on this blog? It seems the trolls are getting lazier by the day, just copying and pasting, without reading what they comment on. Boy, has our educational system deteriorated!

    Louis should set up a comprehension test. You know; what’s the main idea, what are the supporting details, etc.? Maybe even have a vocabulary part in the test. If you don’t pass the comprehension check, you shouldn’t be allowed to post comments!

    Comment by Reza — January 28, 2017 @ 6:01 pm

  7. […] momentum for (George Soros/CIA?) sponsored color revolution in […]

    Pingback by Psychological Warfare Value: Syria | Ronmamita's Blog — April 8, 2017 @ 7:15 pm

  8. Would it be OK if I cross-posted this article to WriterBeat.com? I’ll be sure to gmive you complete credit as the author. There is no fee, I’m simply trying to add more content diversity for our community and I liked what you wrote. If “OK” please let me know via email.


    Comment by Autumn Cote — May 11, 2017 @ 7:39 pm

  9. […] May someone named Autumn Cote (autumncote@writerbeat.com) asked my permission to crosspost an article I had written about whether George Soros was promoting a color revolution against Donald Trump on her website. […]

    Pingback by Writer’s Beat — BEWARE!!! | Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist — August 11, 2017 @ 3:41 pm

  10. […] a series of protests that led to new governments in Eastern Europe in the early 2000s. Soros has been accused by conspiracy theorists and fringe sites of being the motivating force behind revolutions […]

    Pingback by Five myths about George Soros – Tent of Abraham — August 6, 2020 @ 11:02 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: