Joe “McCarthy” Biden

 

by

Publius

After he was awakened to the terrible virus called communism, Joe McCarthy, has been reincarnated as his evil “mirror image” twin.  The original version “Evil Joe 1.0” was a master media manipulator and destroyer of people and lives in the name of rooting out communism. He was at the end of the day, a monster created by the times. The 50s decade was a dark time in our history, not because there was not a communist threat, but because a politician perverted his power to find a communist wherever he looked. Businesses, Hollywood, and the Media were complicit in destroying people without reason or cause because Joe told them to do it.

 

It’s clear that communism, since its introduction by Karl Marx, has destroyed more lives, diminished more lives and oppressed more people than any other ideology, religion or movement in the history of the world.  How many were killed for the communist cause in Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, and others?  Some historians say it’s hundreds of millions of people. We have continually heard for more than 100 years that Marx’s promised communist utopia will occur next time or the next time or....

 

Conversely, capitalism has enriched more lives, lifted more people and provided greater hope than any other economic approach. The standard of living within the masses has grown during the entire existence of the United States of America. If you want proof, look at history as depicted by Hans Rosling in his book, Factfulness.  He clearly describes the wonderful economic progress of his own family in Sweden over the past century.  Any person that has paid any attention to history over about the past 250 years knows that America became the arsenal of freedom for the world and the beacon of hope for oppressed or enslaved people anywhere on planet Earth. 

 

In fact, the coveted view of capitalism is clearly evident in the newly anointed Democratic Oligarchy of Joe Biden. His is the party of love that cherishes immigrants over existing, legal citizens. His slogan “Everyone but Americans First” has become the mantra of his Party and Comrades. The Biden/Harris Administration has embraced the lives of so many illegal aliens that instead of calling the frontier to the south, the U.S. border, we should rename it the “Starting Line to the American Dream.”  The Welcome signs at the border say, “Greetings from your new Leader, Joe Biden, to any and all future Democrat voters regardless of race, gender, age, ideology or country of origin to the most racist, misogynistic, homophobic and selfish country in the world.  We will forever be your Big Brother!"

 

So more than 60 years after McCarthy, it’s as if we’ve arrived in an alternate world that’s been turned upside down.  Enter “Evil Joe 2.0” and after 120 days of his reign, it’s clear that we are in an even more sinister time of misguided politics.  Party Leader McCarthy Biden can find a racist anywhere he sees a white person or a police officer.  Once again, Businesses, Hollywood and the Media have put on the mantle of complicit evildoers in responding to their idol, Evil Joe 2.0.  Additionally, Evil Joe 2.0 knows there are others putting our newly minted Communist Republic at risk. Joe is finding “thought criminals” in the military, Republican Party and every Trump voter. This “Resistance” must be crushed by silencing, cancel culture, Social Justice Warriors and Antifa.  This putsch has been ongoing for years but has accelerated over the past 12 months.  Re-education of salvageable miscreants must be achieved through Critical Race Theory indoctrination. Business, military and government leaders are mandating re-education under the umbrella of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion training. While this brainwashing has been successfully proliferated across college campuses for more than 60 years, the new frontier of elementary education is training new converts and Woke adherents in how implementing Racism will solve “systemic racism.”  Embracing “New Think” can eradicate what people already know to be true and help hasten them into Marxist nirvana. 

 

Joe Biden’s ultimate goal is to “Reimagine” the Constitution into the Communist Manifesto. Only time will tell whether we can turn the U.S.A. into the promised “Marxist Utopia”. 

 

“From each according to his ability...to each according to his need.”

 

Remember to vote in 2022 & 2024 for those candidates that believe in American greatness.

Dictators’ First Steps

 

by

A Follower of Thucydides:

One who hopes to not only adhere to Thucydides’ standards of history using evidence gathering and analysis of cause and effect without interference by the gods (or media) but to also use that history to educate people when the gods (or media) cloud their vision of the truth

Read and Study History!!!!!!!

     Look up the first things every dictator from Lenin to Maduro did upon gaining office.  They changed voting procedures to ensure they would stay in power and they called out the military to protect their stay in power which is tenuous as they start their “reforms.”  As time wears on, the military is corrupted by new “training” that is a thinly disguised indoctrination to weed out non-supporters of the revolution.  This “new and improved” military supports the Administration and its stranglehold on what was a Constitutional Republic against their fellow citizens who remember what it was like as a Republic.  At this time, there is little chance of a peaceful vote due to the early changes to voting procedures and may result in an open rebellion. 

     If you have any doubt about my statements above just read the historical timelines of Communist USSR, Cuba, China, Venezuela, or Fascist Italy and Germany before the true stories are erased by this Administration.  For your convenience, here is an article about Venezuela.  If one cannot see or refuse to consider the parallels, he or she is either a committed Communist or Fascist; a person who hated the media’s distorted version of President Trump so much he or she was willing to go into Venezuelan Hell to get rid of him; or a partisan ideologue, which now is equivalent to number one in this list and its “oppressor versus oppressed” ideology.

     In 1936, Harvard Professor George Santayana forewarned: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" (Reason in Common Sense, p. 284).  

     Are Americans doomed to repeat Communist and Fascist atrocities--already manifesting in terms of media censorship, social media deplatforming, and "cancel culture"?  Where is the left in denouncing any of these developments?  The absence of any pushback speaks volumes about intentions and motivations.

The Power Elite

by

Gadfly

       During my Doctor of Philosophy course work, I discovered the writing of C. Wright Mills, a Columbia University sociology professor.  One of his books was The Power Elite, published in 1956.  According to Mills, the "power elite" are those that occupy the dominant positions in the dominant institutions--military, economic and political.  Their decisions have enormous consequences, nationally and globally (this explains why we hear about globalists—Obama, Clinton, Soros, etc. in the public narrative).  The evolving institutions (e.g., succeeding weaker predecessors), which they head are a triumvirate of groups -- two or three hundred giant corporations, a strong federal political order that "now enters into each and every cranny of the social structure," and the military establishment.

Importantly, Mills explains that the elite themselves may not see their elite status, "often they are uncertain about their roles" and "without conscious effort, they absorb the aspiration to be ... The Onecide" (e.g., on the right side of ideology; thus, they tend to be intolerant of other views and values).  Mills sees them as a quasi-hereditary caste, often entering into positions of societal prominence through educations obtained at eastern establishment universities like Harvard, Princeton, and Yale, and to a certain extent the older Service Academies of West Point and Annapolis (examine the resumes or biographies of Cabinet officials, the judiciary, and Congress; you will find Mills’ assessment is on target).  In this manner, the mantle of the elite generally passes through families.

According to Mills, the resulting elites can be generally grouped into one of six types (quoted from Wikipedia):

·        the "Metropolitan 400": members of historically notable local families in the principal American cities, generally represented on the Social Register

·        "Celebrities": prominent entertainers and media personalities

·        the "Chief Executives": presidents and CEOs of the most important companies within each industrial sector

·        the "Corporate Rich": major landowners and corporate shareholders

·        the "Warlords": senior military officers, most importantly the Joint Chiefs of Staff

·        the "Political Directorate": "fifty-odd men of the executive branch" of the U.S. federal government, including the senior leadership in the Executive Office of the President, sometimes variously drawn from elected officials of the Democratic and Republican parties but usually professional government bureaucrats

       One of the motivations for Mills’ book, The Power Elite,  was Franz Leopold Neumann's book Behemoth: The Structure and Practice of National Socialism in 1942.  Neumann explained how a democratic state like Germany provided the conditions for Nazism.  Mills claimed that Behemoth had given him the "tools to grasp and analyze the entire total structure and as a warning of what could happen in a modern capitalist democracy."  This should explain why America is in turmoil today—the left’s push for democracy has provided similar conditions for the chaos and turmoil preceding socialism (and the violent tension between the communists and fascists) in Germany.

       The Power Elite received significant criticism, not surprisingly from members of the various “power elite” institutions.   Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. said, "I look forward to the time when Mr. Mills hands back his prophet's robes and settles down to being a sociologist again,” cited in a New York Times essay, “The Deciders,” by John H. Summers, May 14, 2006.

 

Summers went on to say:

The historical value of "The Power Elite" seems assured. It was the first book to offer a serious model of power that accounted for the secretive agencies of national security. . . ..

Much of "The Power Elite" was a tough-talking polemic against the "romantic pluralism" embedded in the prevailing theory of American politics. The separation of powers in the Constitution, the story went, repelled the natural tendency of power to concentrate, while political parties and voluntary societies organized the clash of interests, laying the people's representatives open to the influence of public opinion. This "theory of balance" still applied to the "middle levels of power," Mills wrote. But the society it envisioned had been eclipsed.

The two key points in Summers’ analysis relate to national security institutions and “romantic pluralism.”  Already in the 1950s, Mills saw the corruption taking place in the national security institutions of America:  The National Security Council, the Defense Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and so forth.  This corruption grew to the point that we now face a crisis in which the national security regime attempted to remove a duly elected President of the United States.  Comey, Clapper, Brennan, the generals and admirals singled out below, and a host of other members of the power elite, spied on Trump and his coterie, deceitfully pursued prosecutions, impeached the President for a fabricated crime, distorted Trump’s response to the COVID-19, induced fear in the public to shut down a booming economy, and now demonstrate the same Behemoth tactics spawned by the George Floyd folklore that are creating the necessary conditions for socialism, as in fascist Germany and a communist Russia.

 

There are credible reports (Note this link has since been removed by YouTube) that a Floyd-type incident was the basis for planning the type of rioting that took place in Minneapolis (and in other Democrat-controlled metropolitan areas).  Floyd was just a pawn in their strategic effort to “fundamentally transform America.”  Obama and his Organizing for Action enterprise play a critical role in this effort.  They have teamed up with Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and the Communist Party USA.

Mills’ treatment of “romantic pluralism” is what the left calls diversity and multiculturalism.  The original understanding of American pluralism was an appreciation and tolerance for different views and values that joined in a common purpose as American citizens.  Academic institutions at the time, such as Harvard, Princeton, and Yale were primarily focused on preparing Americans as religious clergymen and public servants.  Today, those same institutions have evolved (“succeeded weaker predecessors”) into secular humanistic elite production centers.  Their emphasis on diversity and multiculturism have nothing to do with uniting America—just the opposite.  So to hide this ideological push, the left accuses President Trump of dividing the nation.

  

When I first read The Power Elite, I rejected Mills’ arguments that included the military as one of the three “power elite” institutions.  After all, as a Service Academy graduate (the USAF Academy), I had ascended to the rank of a senior officer in this institution and considered myself a true public servant.  I still do in my role as a private citizen, patriotic to the flag, our republic, and one nation under God.  I pity those who do not.  Based on cowardly performance of National Football League celebrities who surrendered to the politically correct narrative, I may not be watching the NFL for a while.

       So, when I now read about retired generals and admirals speaking contemptuously about the President of the United States, I see why Mills wrote what he did.  Here are recent examples: generals (Mattis, see here and here; Kelly, see here, here, and here; Allen, see here and here; Powell, here, and here; and Honoré, see here) and admirals (Mullen, see here; and McRaven, see here).  There are others as well.  Do they not see what a dangerous example they set for other members of the armed forces?  One of the Articles of the UCMJ prohibits contemptuous language such as theirs.  If they gave up their military pension and rank, reverting to a private citizen, then perhaps their sacrifice would justify their impulse—but then they would have no credibility.  To use their rank to justify their credibility and message is a gross ethical violation, and potentially a criminal action (see Victor Davis Hansen’s recent article here).  Shame on them.

       These generals and admirals rebuke a duly elected President with assertions backed by no facts.  They also demonstrate their own lack of understanding of what America’s Constitutional Republic is all about.  For example, William Cummings in a USA Today article states:  “Former Secretary of State Colin Powell says that he will once again not vote for Donald Trump, calling the president's approach to politics ‘dangerous for our democracy’ and asserting that Trump has ‘drifted away" from the Constitution.’”

 

A properly educated American would know that our Framers feared the extremism of democracy and the extremism of autocracy (see Federalist Papers 10, 14, 26, and 63).  A republic was the “golden mean” between the extremes of autocracy and democracy.  This understanding helped make America the most unified, peaceful, and prosperous nation in the history of the world, at least until the Progressive Era when Americans drifted from the history of our founding and the power elite pushed for democracy.

 

In Powell’s defense, Americans are no longer being taught these distinctions because the left controls education (as mandated by Marx and Engels in their 1848 Communist Manifesto), and they push for democracy while celebrating diversity, multiculturalism, and new norms that violate the Judeo-Christian tradition; all of which divide our nation.  They believe the majority rules, even if it is only perceived thanks to the media’s amplification of a minority voice (as in the very public protesting and rioting we keep watching on the news).  This is the fruit of democracy:  mobocracy.

       The danger at this critical point in our history is that polling and voting tend to follow public sentiment.  Public sentiment is shaped by the media, Hollywood, and academia.  All are far left of center.

       For over three and a half years, President Trump has been viciously attacked by the left.  His political agenda is consistent with the fundamental concept of a republic, which is intended to constrain autocratic and democratic impulses and passions.  His agenda is a threat to the left’s design to fundamentally transform America.

Soviet, Chinese, and American communists have been hard at work to influence the ideological leanings of America’s media, Hollywood, and academia.  While there is a growing body of literature to confirm this assertion, this interview by Soviet KGB defector, Yuri Bezmenov, provides an explanation about who is behind the George Floyd riots.  The left is working overtime to produce Soviet- and Chinese-style propaganda such as this recent article by Adam Serwer in The Atlantic Magazine.  Despite outright falsehoods, Serwer somehow believes it is expected not to be nice (more so hateful) to people who are not part of your ideology.

       An Italian Archbishop, Carlo Maria Viganò, who has courageously addressed corruption in the Roman Catholic Church, understands President Trump’s motivations, agenda, and dilemma.  He calls out a fellow American Archbishop, who criticized President Trump for his visit to and photo op at the National Shrine of Saint John Paul II.  Viganò reminded the Archbishop and other clergymen and citizens that we are experiencing a battle between the children of light and children of darkness.  See his recent letter to the President here.  Bravo for his courageous letter.

       The generals and admirals were trained to fight enemies of our Constitutional Republic and American way of life.  Yet, they align themselves with the children of darkness who strive to destroy the American way of life.  Archbishop Viganò clearly sees this and knows the children of light have truth and prayer for their weapons.  

       The generals and admirals likely were honorable men at earlier times in their lives.  Perhaps there is hope for a return to those times.  As Mills pondered, “elite themselves may not see their elite status, ‘often they are uncertain about their roles’ and ‘without conscious effort, they absorb the aspiration to be ... The Onecide.’” Until then, shame on them.

Hints of Totalitarianism

by

Gadfly

           What is totalitarianism?  The Oxford dictionary defines it as “a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.  Wikipedia provides a more comprehensive description:

Totalitarianism is a political system or a form of government that prohibits opposition parties, restricts individual opposition to the state and its claims, and exercises an extremely high degree of control over public and private life.  It is regarded as the most extreme and complete form of authoritarianism.  Political power in totalitarian states has often been held by autocrats which employ all-encompassing propaganda campaigns broadcast by state-controlled mass media.

  

Examples of autocrats are V. I. Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini, Adolph Hitler, Mao Zedong, Kim Il-Sung, Hugo Chavez, and Fidel Castro.


           America’s political left wants us to believe President Donald J. Trump is such an autocrat and thus a threat to America and the rest of the free world.  After all, the left (i.e., House Democrats) impeached him without a single Republican vote last night.  No crimes were listed in the charges, just abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.  Technically and more precisely, the obstruction was resistance to the abuse of power by the Democrat Party.  The effort was so overwhelming and compelling, by Democrat standards, that the Speaker is now considering not sending the articles of impeachment to the Republican-controlled Senate unless she and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer can dictate the terms for the trial.  Of course, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and the majority of Republicans in the Senate do not find the Democrat case for impeachment to be enough, let alone appropriate, for exercising the power of impeachment.
  

Despite three years of investigations and propaganda by the left, they still believe “the evidence to support what they want to believe is still yet to be found.”  Like true totalitarians, they also believe only one Party should be in control.  As Douglas Hyde (author of I Believed) and other Communist Party members clearly believed, it was the company line that mattered—facts did not need to get in the way.

As most will recall, from day one, President Trump was assaulted by leaks and anonymous sources in series after series of articles critical of his personality and agenda.  This phenomenon is not unique.  It has been tried and tested by ideologues for a long time, especially Marxists.  A former member of the American Communist Party and editor of the Daily Worker, Louis Francis Budenz explained how these tactics were used in his book The Techniques of Communism, published in 1954  Here is a lengthy excerpt (for its historical significance and for the extent of ideological infiltration) from the Chapter, “The Role of the Communist Press” (Note:  Budenz’s mention of “conspiracy” refers to Communist infiltration):

There is one practice of the Communist press which must be known if we are properly to appraise what it is up to.  It is the accumulation of a series of articles around a given subject.  It is used at times in order to cover up the Communist designs in vague phraseology, these being clarified and made definite by articles which follow up on the same topic.  The Communist functionary has this constantly in mind, and of course reads all Communist material as a whole.  It is only by doing as he does that the full content of certain official directives can be intelligently studied.

When in 1936, the American Politburo decided to support Franklin D. Roosevelt for president, the announcement was not made bluntly, and most of the country did not know that this was the Communist policy.  The official Red declarations accomplished this purpose by saying a few words critical of Roosevelt and then assaulting his opponents—the Liberty League and the “Hearst-McCormick-Patterson axis”—as “Fascists” and enemies of American liberties.  In accompanying articles, both in The Communist and in the Daily Worker, rising to higher tones of stridency as the campaign went on, the denunciations became centered entirely on the president’s opponents.  In this wise, concealed Communists in all sorts of organizations did everything in their power for the election of Mr. Roosevelt, swaying hundreds of thousands to favor him.  The sole cause for this attitude was that Moscow had divined that Mr. Roosevelt would be more favorable than his opponents to saving Soviet Russia from the Hitlerite regime which the Communists had helped to create.  But, as is always the Communist custom and as the CIO committees state in their findings against Red-ruled unions, this real object of the fifth column was hidden in a welter of charges against Roosevelt’s opposition on domestic issues.

And so in 1953, the “Resolution on the Situation Growing Out of Presidential Elections,” issued by the National Committee in February and July, 1953, would be almost unintelligible were it not for the articles in Political Affairs accompanying the resolution.  Without those articles, it could be seen that the Communists (taking advantage of the Trojan Horse policy in Moscow) plan to penetrate anew the Democratic and Republican parties.  This could be understood from the conclusion that the two-party system is still strongly entrenched in the United States and that the Communists must recognize this reality.  It could be gleaned from the statements indicating that “McCarthyism” is the main menace and that “pressure” must be exercised on certain politicians to combat this danger to the conspiracy.  It could be caught sight of in the declaration that “the masses” still cling to the Democratic Party, and that the Communists must not remain aloof from “the masses.”  But the official resolution becomes more sharply understandable in reading two concurrent articles, “Labor and the Democratic Party” and “The Anatomy of McCarthyism.”  From the former I must repeat what I have quoted earlier in this chapter: “The left today in any event needs urgently to reacquaint itself with the real situation in the local and state Democratic parties (and in many areas the Republican party).”  There is also instruction for “the left forces in the CIO and AF of L (as well as in independent unions) to explore new possibilities for united labor action in the legislative and electoral field.”  All of this is for the purpose of advancing in a “pro-peace direction” (that is, in the “peace direction” which Moscow desires) and to compel large sections of the Democratic party to speak out “for an all-out struggle against McCarthy and his crowd.”

From the second contribution, we learn definitely: “The immediate and broadest rallying ground in the struggle for democratic liberties in the fight against McCarthyism.  This means the fight against Joe McCarthy the individual, against each and every McCarthyite—the Jenners, Veldes, and McCarrans—and against all manifestations of McCarthyism.”  This fight is to take place everywhere, but particularly “in the political field.”  (For an intelligent examination of this matter, consult Political Affairs for June and July, 1953.)

From these directives, it is plain that the Soviet fifth column in mid-1953 planned to penetrate the Democratic party (especially its “liberal” wing, to which definite reference is made) and also areas of the Republican party.  The objective of this penetration was to halt all effective action against the conspiracy, which is labeled “McCarthyism,” and even to punish anyone who would dare oppose the conspiracy.  How far the Communists plan to go is exemplified by an editorial in the Daily Worker of July 30, 1953, entitled: “Expel the Stool Pigeons.”  This declaration demands nothing less than the discharge from his position of any person daring to testify at Congressional inquiries or elsewhere against the Soviet fifth column.  This bears out the contention that many of those who cry out about “academic freedom” and “civil liberties” in defense of the Communists, in the majority of cases have no interest in these topics.  They are bound by their Communist viewpoint that the civil liberties of all non-Communists must be destroyed.  They are bound immediately by the Daily Worker directives that all those acting against the conspiracy must be deprived of a livelihood.

In addition to the official publications mentioned, the Communists have built up auxiliary magazines and newspapers in the United States, as they do in all other countries.  One of the best known of these in the U.S.A. is Masses and Mainstream, published for the intellectuals at the same address at which Political Affairs is published.  Another pro-Stalinite voice, with considerable influence, is Science and Society, a quarterly devoted to the Marxist interpretation of higher intellectual subjects.  A number of foreign language dailies and weeklies, issued in almost every immigrant tongue, reach out into the “language communities,” and follow the line laid down by the Daily Worker. On the West coast is issued the Peoples World, a localized edition of the Red daily organ published in New York.  The Daily Freiheit, issued in the Yiddish language, is the second largest Red organ in circulation, after the Daily Worker, and is edited and printed in the same building with that paper.

Through these many channels, the Communist Party is able to transmit Moscow’s orders in the most diversified and speediest fashion.  By the uniformity of line which is established, and the readiness with which this line goes out of the Communist press into other journals, the publications under Moscow’s control are among the most powerful in this country.  They have not yet had the effect they had hoped for among “the backward masses,” for the man in the street in this country has shown an instinctive abhorrence for the Communist cause and its line which many others, far better educated, might well have imitated. The strength of the Red press, it must be repeated, lies in moving concealed Communists and their allies to prevail upon non-Communist organizations to speak out for the Kremlin’s position at any given time (pp. 146-149).

There are three major take-aways from this excerpt.  First, unlike the recent impeachment whistleblower, Budenz relates first-hand experience.  Second, Communists clearly backed and campaigned for Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who ushered in today’s monolithic administrative state (the centralization of power and its extreme control over public—i.e., the emasculation of President Trump—and private life through excessive regulatory control that Trump is working to reduce).  Third, what we know of McCarthyism is more folklore than fact, thanks in no small part to the propaganda campaign waged by American Communists in concert with Democrats.  For more on this, read M. Stanton Evans book, Blacklisted by History:  The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy.  Evans threads together substantial documentary evidence to show significant collaboration between Communists and Democrats to thwart McCarthy’s effort to prove significant Communist infiltration (conspiracy) of American institutions.  American Communists are still at work.  They thrive today, see my article The Socialist Infiltration of America.

One other take-away not obvious from the above excerpt is that, while the centralized Communist line went away with the dissolution of the Communist International in Moscow, the Marxist ideology and its organizational and communications infrastructure are still in place.  The ideology is the organizing principle, much like militant Islamism. 

As I have written elsewhere (see for example America’s Dreyfus Affair), hatred and contempt are critical features of a political movement such as America’s current progressive movement (clearly Marxist by its manifested nature).  The means are in support of achieving ultimate political power.  The left fully expected to win the American presidential election in 2016.  We are learning more and more about the immoral means used to achieve it.  Then, there was the Mueller investigation.  When that failed, the left manufactured another means—impeachment.  I suspect Comrade, correction, Speaker Pelosi never read Hannah Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism.  Arendt explained how the Dreyfus Affair signaled the hatred and contempt that contributed to the conditions for the emergence of totalitarianism.

Many Republicans and the general public (the “backward masses” Budenz cites above) have seen enough over the past three years to truly understand that what President Trump believed, with his Make America Great Again agenda, is the importance of restoring our Constitutional Republic as a critical measure to prevent totalitarian urges by the left.

            

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.