by E. Jeffrey Ludwig
-- we are facing an intent to subvert the electoral will of the American people
Are you aware that we are facing a political and cultural tragedy right now? The Democratic Party, one of two great parties of the USA, has been co-opted by the communist ideologues, the power-mad neo-Marxists, in our political establishment. They can call it liberalism or social justice or togetherness, but it is my considered judgment that, without exaggeration, we are facing an intent to subvert the electoral will of the American people.
Based only on "unnamed sources," the Washington Post, NY Times, and CNN have accused President Donald Trump of sharing top-secret information with Russian officials. Imagine: this is "news" without any named source, without even a whistleblower ready to risk his job for the country. This is a mainstream media cause célèbre, even though CNN wrote online, "The President did not directly reveal the source of the information, but intelligence officials told CNN that there is concern that Russia will be able to figure out the highly sensitive source." Without accountability, and only the most limited information, the left-wing press is lambasting Trump. This trash is being published as "news" – i.e., as if it were fact. And this is being done with the tacit approval of the Democratic Party leadership. This is all part of the Democrat narrative that Trump is a Russian mole occupying the Oval Office.
How did we get to this point, where the hissing vipers have come out from under their rocks to poison the body politic? While we could go back to Eugene V. Debs, the socialist candidate for president at the beginning of the 20th century, or even before him to "Big Bill" Haywood and the International Workers of the World (IWW), the modern threat began to reveal itself in the 1960s. David Horowitz, in his collection of articles in the Black Book of the American Left, Vol. 7, sees a direct line between the Henry Wallace candidacy and the politics of the 1960s. But the important understanding we need to draw is that "direct line" is a line whereby the extreme left of the Democratic Party has moved from being rejected (1948 faction led by Henry Wallace) to becoming the center of the Democratic Party.
The success in drawing the Democrats leftward was the ability of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) to unite youthful opposition to the Vietnam War with the urgent push for desegregation and "freedom" by the civil rights movement. While the civil rights movement was divided between the middle-class, church-going, nonviolent program of Martin Luther King, Jr.; Ralph Abernethy; and Andrew Young and the Black Power advocates like Bobby Seale and Huey Newton, who espoused violence in varying degrees, both factions were able to agree in their anti-war stance. If SDS could be characterized as the brains of this trinity of rebels, King's organization could be considered the idealists, and the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), led by Stokely Carmichael and the Black Panthers, could be considered the gangster-lite aggression. Thus, intellect, idealism, and aggression or thuggery became fused to create a new neo-fascistic trend. Love of country played second fiddle to "needed change."
To characterize the trend as neo-fascistic is in no way in opposition to seeing that trend as communistic. A common anti-democratic thread runs through both fascism and communism. Although fascists are hyper-nationalistic or chauvinistic in one sense, they have internationalist ambitions as shown in their urge to conquer. Economic and political imperialism is central to their modus operandi. Further, government for fascists does not exist to facilitate competition, nor even to merely regulate some of the negative fallout that inevitably occurs as business grows. Rather, fascism affirms tight political control over the economic sphere even if it does not take ownership of major industries or of all commercial dealings, as did the USSR under Josef Stalin or Mao Zedong in the PRC.
Communism sees itself as expanding two ways. It is moved forward by historical necessity whereby the dialectic of history is moving towards proletarian ownership of the means of production. The historical dialectic ends in a violent revolutionary struggle where the bourgeoisie are overthrown forever. But communists are also willing to expand via military aggressions and conquest against nation-states, as we saw in Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, and Eastern Europe. Although there are nuanced differences, both fascism and communism are opposed to laissez-faire capitalism, political liberty, constitutionalism, federalism, any idea of checks and balances, competition, and religion espousing the brotherhood of man under the fatherhood of Almighty God, Creator of Heaven and Earth. Love and forgiveness, humility, and righteousness as central tenets of Judeo-Christian values are rejected as stultifying or bourgeois.
Thus, distinctions blur as the movement into the center of power accelerates. Fascistic communism or communistic fascism are both appropriate labels for the new thrust we have seen from the late sixties and early seventies to the present. The Democratic Party increasingly expresses this evil marriage.
The virulent response to President Trump is a manifestation of the poisonous life lodging under the rocks. The vipers have emerged as the Black Lives Matter movement; so-called student riots against Trump; race and criminal riots in the streets of Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas, and other cities; gallons of vitriol and ridicule poured out by late-night TV "comedians"; literal threats against the persons and lives of conservative pro-Trump speakers at our colleges and universities, and attacks mobilizing against Israel in a thuggish manner by the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) on our campuses. All of these are developments aimed at destroying our legal, social, and economic order.
At the same time, the Democratic Party is sending out a message of "understanding" of the concerns that have "caused" these outrages. They will say of the rioters and provocateurs that you are not handling your grievances in the most constructive way possible, but they will, at the same time, emphasize that their destructive tendencies are oh, so understandable. The growing menace to the peace and well-being of society is consistently downplayed by Democratic Party spokesmen, from Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton to "Chuckie" Schumer to Dick Durbin to Debbie Schultz, etc., etc. Instead of reprimands and rebukes and calls for respect for our democratic institutions, we see the alliance of intellect, idealism, and aggression that was birthed in the 1960s. No longer are the street thugs and anti-Americans rioting against the Democratic Party, as they did at the 1968 Democratic Convention that nominated Hubert Humphrey to run for office. Now the goals of the rabble are manifesting with the blessing of Democrat leadership that has bought into the fascistic and communist program.
Further, look at the reporting of these events on ABC, CBS, NBC, and other major outlets. When there is a fire or an explosion, the news anchors feel comfortable expressing their horror at the scene, at the thought of property destroyed and persons injured or killed. But the civil disturbances by the menacing mobs are reported matter-of-factly, without a sense of horror or outrage about property losses or personal injury or death. The anchors adopt serious facial expressions but proceed in a matter-of-fact way. This is all a part of "not taking sides," but in fact, it means taking a side against law and order, against Trump, against Israel, against capitalism, against our system of government.
The press is participating in this anti-American carnage by issuing a spate of "fake news," hyperbole regarding Trump's alleged mistakes or wrongdoings, stories treated as credible against the present duly elected administration even though said stories originate from "unnamed sources," and other stories like collusion with the Russians to fix an election that was not fixed. They go on and on, pounding away at the same non-story and desirous of portraying Trump as a traitor from the outset of his candidacy. This is the daily portrayal by Democrats and the pro-Democrat media despite there being no evidence, and even no specific wrongdoing stated.
The Democratic Party is not only soft on this unrest, but encouraging the unrest and the lying, hyperventilating, and false reporting. It is morally bankrupt. With its alliance against constitutional values, federalism, free markets, freedom of property and liberty for the individual, it has crossed an invisible line from supporting America to being an enemy of America.
Based only on "unnamed sources," the Washington Post, NY Times, and CNN have accused President Donald Trump of sharing top-secret information with Russian officials. Imagine: this is "news" without any named source, without even a whistleblower ready to risk his job for the country. This is a mainstream media cause célèbre, even though CNN wrote online, "The President did not directly reveal the source of the information, but intelligence officials told CNN that there is concern that Russia will be able to figure out the highly sensitive source." Without accountability, and only the most limited information, the left-wing press is lambasting Trump. This trash is being published as "news" – i.e., as if it were fact. And this is being done with the tacit approval of the Democratic Party leadership. This is all part of the Democrat narrative that Trump is a Russian mole occupying the Oval Office.
How did we get to this point, where the hissing vipers have come out from under their rocks to poison the body politic? While we could go back to Eugene V. Debs, the socialist candidate for president at the beginning of the 20th century, or even before him to "Big Bill" Haywood and the International Workers of the World (IWW), the modern threat began to reveal itself in the 1960s. David Horowitz, in his collection of articles in the Black Book of the American Left, Vol. 7, sees a direct line between the Henry Wallace candidacy and the politics of the 1960s. But the important understanding we need to draw is that "direct line" is a line whereby the extreme left of the Democratic Party has moved from being rejected (1948 faction led by Henry Wallace) to becoming the center of the Democratic Party.
The success in drawing the Democrats leftward was the ability of the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) to unite youthful opposition to the Vietnam War with the urgent push for desegregation and "freedom" by the civil rights movement. While the civil rights movement was divided between the middle-class, church-going, nonviolent program of Martin Luther King, Jr.; Ralph Abernethy; and Andrew Young and the Black Power advocates like Bobby Seale and Huey Newton, who espoused violence in varying degrees, both factions were able to agree in their anti-war stance. If SDS could be characterized as the brains of this trinity of rebels, King's organization could be considered the idealists, and the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), led by Stokely Carmichael and the Black Panthers, could be considered the gangster-lite aggression. Thus, intellect, idealism, and aggression or thuggery became fused to create a new neo-fascistic trend. Love of country played second fiddle to "needed change."
To characterize the trend as neo-fascistic is in no way in opposition to seeing that trend as communistic. A common anti-democratic thread runs through both fascism and communism. Although fascists are hyper-nationalistic or chauvinistic in one sense, they have internationalist ambitions as shown in their urge to conquer. Economic and political imperialism is central to their modus operandi. Further, government for fascists does not exist to facilitate competition, nor even to merely regulate some of the negative fallout that inevitably occurs as business grows. Rather, fascism affirms tight political control over the economic sphere even if it does not take ownership of major industries or of all commercial dealings, as did the USSR under Josef Stalin or Mao Zedong in the PRC.
Communism sees itself as expanding two ways. It is moved forward by historical necessity whereby the dialectic of history is moving towards proletarian ownership of the means of production. The historical dialectic ends in a violent revolutionary struggle where the bourgeoisie are overthrown forever. But communists are also willing to expand via military aggressions and conquest against nation-states, as we saw in Vietnam, Korea, Cuba, and Eastern Europe. Although there are nuanced differences, both fascism and communism are opposed to laissez-faire capitalism, political liberty, constitutionalism, federalism, any idea of checks and balances, competition, and religion espousing the brotherhood of man under the fatherhood of Almighty God, Creator of Heaven and Earth. Love and forgiveness, humility, and righteousness as central tenets of Judeo-Christian values are rejected as stultifying or bourgeois.
Thus, distinctions blur as the movement into the center of power accelerates. Fascistic communism or communistic fascism are both appropriate labels for the new thrust we have seen from the late sixties and early seventies to the present. The Democratic Party increasingly expresses this evil marriage.
The virulent response to President Trump is a manifestation of the poisonous life lodging under the rocks. The vipers have emerged as the Black Lives Matter movement; so-called student riots against Trump; race and criminal riots in the streets of Ferguson, Baltimore, Dallas, and other cities; gallons of vitriol and ridicule poured out by late-night TV "comedians"; literal threats against the persons and lives of conservative pro-Trump speakers at our colleges and universities, and attacks mobilizing against Israel in a thuggish manner by the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) on our campuses. All of these are developments aimed at destroying our legal, social, and economic order.
At the same time, the Democratic Party is sending out a message of "understanding" of the concerns that have "caused" these outrages. They will say of the rioters and provocateurs that you are not handling your grievances in the most constructive way possible, but they will, at the same time, emphasize that their destructive tendencies are oh, so understandable. The growing menace to the peace and well-being of society is consistently downplayed by Democratic Party spokesmen, from Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton to "Chuckie" Schumer to Dick Durbin to Debbie Schultz, etc., etc. Instead of reprimands and rebukes and calls for respect for our democratic institutions, we see the alliance of intellect, idealism, and aggression that was birthed in the 1960s. No longer are the street thugs and anti-Americans rioting against the Democratic Party, as they did at the 1968 Democratic Convention that nominated Hubert Humphrey to run for office. Now the goals of the rabble are manifesting with the blessing of Democrat leadership that has bought into the fascistic and communist program.
Further, look at the reporting of these events on ABC, CBS, NBC, and other major outlets. When there is a fire or an explosion, the news anchors feel comfortable expressing their horror at the scene, at the thought of property destroyed and persons injured or killed. But the civil disturbances by the menacing mobs are reported matter-of-factly, without a sense of horror or outrage about property losses or personal injury or death. The anchors adopt serious facial expressions but proceed in a matter-of-fact way. This is all a part of "not taking sides," but in fact, it means taking a side against law and order, against Trump, against Israel, against capitalism, against our system of government.
The press is participating in this anti-American carnage by issuing a spate of "fake news," hyperbole regarding Trump's alleged mistakes or wrongdoings, stories treated as credible against the present duly elected administration even though said stories originate from "unnamed sources," and other stories like collusion with the Russians to fix an election that was not fixed. They go on and on, pounding away at the same non-story and desirous of portraying Trump as a traitor from the outset of his candidacy. This is the daily portrayal by Democrats and the pro-Democrat media despite there being no evidence, and even no specific wrongdoing stated.
The Democratic Party is not only soft on this unrest, but encouraging the unrest and the lying, hyperventilating, and false reporting. It is morally bankrupt. With its alliance against constitutional values, federalism, free markets, freedom of property and liberty for the individual, it has crossed an invisible line from supporting America to being an enemy of America.
E. Jeffrey Ludwig
Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/americas_betrayal_by_the_democratic_party.html
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment