Socialist Infiltration of America

by

Gadfly

We are hearing a lot more about socialism in the current news.  Older generations understand the irony and danger in this development, because they are closer to the history of its nihilism and brutality.  Younger generations are not so concerned because they have been exposed to a different “education.”

For older generations, they know socialism led to the death of millions in its communist and fascist manifestations.  They are sisters of socialism.  Communism is its leftward manifestation and fascism a rightward (still well left of the political center) manifestation.

 

The left loves to demonize white supremacy or white nationalism as a right-wing phenomenon.  Right-wing based on what?  The political center?  The socialist center?

I contend classical liberalism (individual liberty, private property, limited government, free market/free enterprise grounded in the Judeo-Christian tradition) is the political center of a Constitutional Republic, with leftward manifestations being lesser adherence whereas greater adherence is rightward leaning.  Socialism is a left of center ideology.  Economic freedom is right of center.

Racial supremacy is contrary to the notion of classical liberalism because the latter’s fundamental view of humanity is one of equality and individual liberty.  Any notion of privilege or supremacy is contrary to this philosophy.  Is it any wonder then that leftist social justice achieves its full potential by coercively applying privilege as in affirmative action measures, redistribution of wealth, proposals for reparations, and so forth?  Recall that the last surviving commandment in Orwell’s socialistic Animal Farm was, “All animals are created equal, some are more equal than others.”

Am I suggesting that the Republican Party, as a right of center political party practices classical liberalism?  For the most part, yes.  Modern conservatism is mostly aligned with classical liberalism.  Unfortunately, once in office, Republicans tend to capitulate on the levels of spending that violate a limited government principle.  This is the hubris of power in modern politics.  The most to blame for this corruption, however, is the general public—Americans who are living in comfort zones and essentially outsourcing self-governance to a small percentage of elected and unelected officials.

Younger generations have not been taught any of socialism’s history.  Rather, the focus has been a new form of patriotism:  a progressive patriotism that looks toward a perfected future—utopia.  It is pure socialism.  Progressives have been successful in taking prayer out of schools and other public venues, facilitating a trend toward atheistic nihilism.  According to Gallup surveys, those affiliating with Judeo-Christian religions have decreased by well over 30% since 1956 (when 99% of those surveyed affiliated with Judeo-Christian religions).  Other surveys show similar declines in church membership, with Catholics showing the sharpest decrease (likely a result of the public narratives on abuse scandals—even though there are mitigating circumstances such as communist and homosexual infiltration as reported by Bella Dodd in here memoir, School of Darkness and Enrique Rueda’s analysis of the homosexual political movement in The Homosexual Network:  Private Lives and Public Policy). These trends allow the state to increasingly fill in as the moral authority.

 

Marx would be proud of socialism’s success in America.  Education has played a critical role.  In the Manifesto of the Communist Party, education is mentioned 68 times.  The Manifesto states: “All children will be educated in state establishments from the time when they can do without the first maternal care.”  Colorado just approved funding for all-day kindergarten.  Nation-wide, teacher’s unions exercise tremendous power in classroom curricula, manipulating the composition of school boards, and funding political candidates.

Closely related to the role of education by the state is the need to dismantle the family—that is, a traditional family with a mother and father and children.  Marx believed the family was a critical foundation for capitalism.  Current political movements to disrupt the traditional family are critical to achieving socialism.  The fact that many suffer moral injury are of no concern—they are instruments in the overall cause.

In memorializing his experience as a prominent British Communist, Douglas Hyde, in his book I Believed, described communist infiltration efforts when Churchill became an ally to Joseph Stalin:

In that campaign, [sic] experience was gained which not long after came near to bringing about the affiliation of the Communist Party to the Labour Party.  In addition, important new contacts were made in trade union and cultural circles in particular which are still being exploited to this day.

The British Labour Party is similar to America’s Democrat Party.  In addition to exploiting teacher’s unions, the Communist Party clearly exploits all unions, to include those to which a significant percentage of government employees belong at the federal, state, county, and municipal levels.  Examples of these unions include the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL–CIO), the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE),  American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), the National Education Association (NEA), and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), among others.

Randi Weingarten, President of AFT, demonstrated socialist ideology in a recent column, “A Defining Moment for Democracy.”  The message was very anti-Trump and socialist in its themes.  Communism emphasizes “democracy” as a necessary condition for socialism.  This is why today’s public-school education avoids the founder’s rationale for a republic because they knew the dangers of democracy.

Assuming the reader agrees with the argument that socialists (many use the label progressive or modern liberal) have controlled the education process to facilitate socialism, then how do they control the political process?  They use tried and proven methods as clearly described by Douglas Hyde in his more recent book, Dedication and Leadership.  The following is an excerpt from the book’s back cover:

On March 14, 1948, Douglas Hyde handed in his resignation as the news editor of the London Daily Worker and wrote “the end” to twenty years of his life as a member of the Communist Party. A week later, in a written statement, Hyde announced that he had renounced Communism and, with his wife and children, was joining the Catholic Church. 

The long pilgrimage from Communism to Christ carried Douglas Hyde from complete commitment to Marxism, to a questioning uneasiness about Soviet Russia’s glaring contradictions of ideology and action, to a final rejection of the Party.

In Dedication and Leadership, he advances the theory that although the goals and aims of Communism are antithetical to human dignity and the rights of the individual, there is much to be learned from communist methods, cadres and psychological motivation. Hyde describes the Communist mechanics of instilling dedication, the first prerequisite for leadership. Here is the complete rationale of party technique: how to stimulate the willingness to sacrifice; the advisability of making big demands to insure a big response; the inspirational indoctrination; and the subtle conversion methods.

According to the US Geological Survey (USGS), there are 3,141 counties and county equivalents in the 50 States and the District of Columbia.  The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) employed its 50/3000 model during the 2018 midterm elections.  That is, CPUSA has active cells in 3,000 counties in 50 states.  John Bachtell, national leader of CPUSA, boasted that they were successful in generating 12 million more votes (45 million versus 33 million) for Democrat candidates.  As in their success in aligning with the British Labour Party in the past century, the Communist Party has blatantly aligned with today’s American Democrat Party.

CPUSA gets a lot of support and collaboration.  The media, Silicon Valley (see, for example, this disturbing Congressional testimony), and Hollywood cabal control the public narrative, to include technology and smear tactics to censor opposing views.  Groups like Media Matters for America and the American Independent Institute.

 

The leading think tank for the progressive movement is the Center for American Progress.  It was founded by former President Clinton’s Chief of Staff, John Podesta.  While the infamous Wikileaks publications during the summer of 2016 featured sinister actions by Podesta, the left’s concern was less about actual content and more about the fact that this information was made public.  In their opinion, only “trusted” leftist sources such as The New York Times or The Washington Post are allowed to “leak” sensitive information.

Another organization, Organizing for Action (OFA), has recently changed its www.ofa.us link to a page called All On the Line.  Its predecessor names were Obama for America (OFA), Organizing for America (OFA), and then Organizing for Action (OFA).  Here is a recent progress report by Katie Hogan, Executive Director of Organizing for Action.  She reports:

62,243 people trained on skills needed to make an impact at no cost to them

7,572,171 online action-takers

145 active chapters from coast to coast

30,924 grassroots events in all 50 states and D.C.

OFA is just warming up, and it can count on healthy funding from the Obama Foundation, which is a magnet for progressive donors.  It is not limited to America.  Socialism is not bound by national borders.  The socialist mantra, “workers unite” has a global thrust.

More specifics on progressive tactics were captured in a recent Patriot Post article.  The tactic involves converting red counties into blue counties.  It involves dark money.  The article provides specific details on how they templated the tactics with a county in Tennessee.

  

The purpose of my book, The 2012 Political Contest in America:  Conversations with a Gadfly, was to sound an alarm about the progressive (socialist) movement in America.  At the time, some wanted to compare Obama to Lincoln.  I disagreed and presented a case that Obama was more aligned with Vladimir Lenin.  The following table from p. 64 of the book is included here with permission.

Among the Bolsheviks, Lenin was considered a demigod who tailored Marxism for the Russian people.  That is why we still refer to Marxism-Leninism to describe Communism in Russia, the former Soviet Union, and in China (even today).  Here is a cartoon that reflects anti-Bolshevik sentiment that Lenin (in the red robe) sacrificed Russia to a statue of Marx.  Note:  Lenin advanced the Bolshevik Party, also known as the Russian Social Democrat Labour Party.

Not widely published (let alone recognized) is Obama’s Lenin-style and demigod arrogance.  Despite it’s recent history for slanted coverage, On March 26, 2018, CNN reported on Obama’s wish to clone millions in his and Michelle’s images.  Here is the headline: “Obama hopes to create ‘a million young Barack Obamas or Michelle Obamas’.”  The article starts off saying: "Former President Barack Obama says he aspires to create 'a million young Barack Obamas or Michelle Obamas' who will pick up the baton in what he describes as the 'relay race that is human progress.'"  This is exactly the method Communists employ in achieving "dedication" that Douglas writes about in his memoir, I Believed, and in Dedication and Leadership. The following is the picture that accompanied the article.

        In closing, those of us who firmly believe in a Constitutional Republic--gifted to us by Founders and Framers who pledged their Lives, Fortunes, and sacred Honor--should all be asking to what extent the former Soviet Union’s Nikita Khrushchev was correct when, speaking at the National Press Club in 1957, he declared to America:

. . . I can prophesy that your grandchildren in America will live under socialism.  And please do not be afraid of that.  Your grandchildren will not understand how their grandparents did not understand the progressive nature of a socialist society” (cited in J. Edgar Hoover’s book, Masters of Deceit, 1958, p. 3).

Today’s talk about socialism is not mere rhetoric and wishful thinking.  It is here.  Either give in to it and prepare for its inevitable slide into brutal tyranny, or fight it.  We can do this peacefully at the ballot box and in respectful conversations.

 

Until Democrats distance themselves from the Marxist utopian ideology that is American progressivism, a vote for a Democrat is a vote for socialism.