I get it. I sincerely do. Trump was not my guy, either. And it will not be with my full faith and trust that I vote for him. But, seriously, it’s time to muster up some intellectual honesty, no small amount of intestinal fortitude, and take and look at the alternative.
People’s World (PW), the “direct descendant of The Daily Worker“, which was a newspaper published in NYC by the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) from 1924 to the 1950s, has some bone-chilling things to say about the 2016 election. But first, I’ll let PW tell you a little about themselves:
“People’s World and Mundo Popular [Spanish version] are known for partisan coverage. We take sides. Yours. The editorial mission is partisan to the working class, people of color, women, young people, seniors, LGBT community, to international solidarity; to popularize the ideas of Marxism and Bill of Rights socialism. The websites enjoy a special relationship with the Communist Party USA, founded in 1919, and publish its news and views.”
In case there was ever any doubt, the People’s Party will not side with straight, white, middle to upper class males ranging from their mid 30s to late 60s. Basically, the people that make up the economic engine of the United States are in the PW’s crosshairs.
Now for the piece from PW, “A Radical Third Party? I Agree!“, by John Bachtell.
After an introductory scourging of Wall Street and both the Democrats and the Republicans for having the gall to do business with those reprobates, Bachtell unveils the CPUSA’s stratagem for the 2016 election.
There is a lot to learn from this and Republicans would do well to take heed.
“First, we are part of building the broadest anti-ultra right alliance possible, uniting the widest array of class (including a section of monopoly), social and democratic forces. This necessarily means working with the Democratic Party. This differentiates us from those left groups who underestimate the right danger and overestimate the readiness of key class and social forces to bolt the Democratic Party.”
This is no rallying cry for the vajayjay-clad feminist movement or Black Lives Matter cadre. Communism sees those puny “left groups” as merely disposable apparatchiks. But, to be fair, the broader movement of Communism sees the entire Democrat party as disposable apparatchiks, as Bachtell points out later.
That the CPUSA sees the ultra right as a threat should embolden us. Problem is, there are precious few on the ultra right that truly understand the threat of Communism. Schools don’t teach it. Right wing pundits don’t do as much educating as they do pontificating. Most Conservatives know the rhetoric and speak the jargon, but have very little knowledge about the very real danger Communism poses.
Because, the Cold War is over, right? And, well…ISIS.
“Second, our objective is not to build the Democratic Party. At this stage we are about building the broad people’s movement led by labor that utilizes the vehicle of the Democratic Party to advance its agenda. We are about building the movements around the issues roiling wide sections of people that can help shape election contours and debates.”
Did you catch that? The Democrats are disposable. They are just a vehicle for advancing the Communist agenda.
Building the movements around news cycle issues like the feminist’s rape culture narrative, Black Lives Matter, and raising the minimum wage is Communist-speak for getting people riled up against the “system”, convincing them they are victims, and then leading them to the Democrat Party for answers, legislation, media cover, or whatever.
“…we are part of building labor’s independent structures, including its electoral and political apparatus and its program to train union members to run for office. At last count, thousands of trade unionists have been elected.”
Train union members to run for office. Those guys and gals aren’t getting trained in Civics 101, they are getting pure, undiluted Communist activism. And they are being trained to infuse our state and local governments with huge doses of it.
“…we participate in coalition campaigns that challenge the Wall Street wing of the Democratic Party and galvanize forces around a progressive agenda, mainly in Democratic primary elections. These include labor activists, progressives, socialists and communists who emerge from movements and run as candidates, backed by broad coalitions. A campaign by socialist Bernie Sanders within the Democratic Party presidential primaries would help do just this.”
Bernie is shining example of how the CPUSA uses the Democrat Party as a vehicle for the Communist agenda. While Bernie doesn’t seem to be taken very seriously by the majority of Americans, it’s still unsettling to see the great uninformed rally behind his grandfatherly veneer.
As Ayn Rand so aptly stated in 1953:
“I am still a little astonished, at times, that too many adult Americans do not understand the nature of the fight against Communism as clearly as I understood it at the age of twelve: they continue to believe that only Communist methods are evil, while Communist ideals are noble. All the victories of Communism since the year 1917 are due to that particular belief among men who are still free.”
Discernment is in short supply around here.
If Bernie were to win, the CPUSA would leap out of obscurity and smack into the middle of American politics. The long and painful march toward socialism that we’ve been on will become a full-on sprint.
If Hillary, with the aid of the #NeverTrump crowd, wins don’t think the CPUSA will crawl back into their hole. Bernie’s popularity, though not enough to win an election, has galvanized and validated the closeted card-carrying CPUSA operatives within the Democrat Party. The march toward socialism might not be a sprint, but it will accelerate into a brisk jog.
For the record, both parties aid and abet Communists in their own way. Democrats see them as fellow comrades walking the halls, but like a high school clique of mean girls, don’t let them sit at the cool table. Optics, for a little while longer it seems, still matter. Republicans, in the throes of one of the worst identity crises in their history, either bump unaware into Communists roaming their halls or use copious amounts of hand-sanitizer after knowingly shaking their hands.
Trump, I suspect, would give a hearty slap on the back and a “How ya doing, Red?” as he passed a Communist in the hall. Not optimal, I admit, but in my speculations (because speculations shouldn’t be the sole property of the NeverTrump crowd), Trump will understand the maxim, “Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer”. So, for now, I’m choosing to vote for a guy who knows there are enemies within our government rather than vote for the enemies themselves. I’m also choosing to tell myself that Trump and I define ‘enemy’ the same way and that the bromance between Trump and Putin is strictly physical and not ideological.
But back to Bachtell:
“…we are part of movements to broaden democracy, including Move to Amend that would remove corporate cash from elections, repealing voter suppression legislation and expanding the right to vote, opening space for third parties, and promoting proportional representation.”
Repealing voter suppression is code for getting rid of voter ID, because you should get asked for your identification when buying a six pack, but not when voting for the next leader of the free world. Which flies in the face of common sense, but that ship sailed years ago.
“The Communist Party’s tactics for political independence rest on several interrelated elements. First, they occur within the constraints of the two-party system. We don’t operate in a parliamentary system which allows proportional voting. Instead, winner takes all, and during the general election it usually comes down to voting for one of two candidates most likely to win.
“That means candidates are backed by coalitions. Under these circumstances voting based on purity of positions is not a viable tactic.”
“Principled” conservatives who opt out because they don’t have a candidate who is pure as the wind driven snow need to take this on board. Voting based on “purity of position” in this election is a Utopian fantasy. There wasn’t a pure one in the bunch. And the Democrats are fronting two of the most radical candidates in their history, one an avowed socialist and the other it’s willing screeching puppet.
And, again, it’s not so much about the person sitting in the Oval Office, it’s the party behind that person and the ideology driving it. And the Democrats, Bachtell’s admitted vehicle of the Communist party, have proven more than willing to get in the passenger seat and let the CPUSA drive.
“While the Republican Party is led by the most reactionary sections of Wall Street capital including the energy extractive sector and military industrial complex, it also consists of extreme right-wing elements including the Tea Party, white supremacists, social conservatives, right-wing evangelicals, climate deniers, anti-reproductive rights groups, etc.”
Pretty sure Bachtell used electricity provided by the energy extractive sector to power up his computer to write this. But I guess it’s not energy or its extraction the CPUSA is against, it’s the money they make. He’d rather bankrupt those greedy capitalists and have the government run the entire energy sector.
What could go wrong?
In case you missed it, the Tea Party is on par with white supremacists and frackers.
“Coalition forces may disagree with a candidate on one or another issue, but find they must support candidates for strategic reasons – to advance issues and create a more favorable terrain of struggle.”
Speaking of a “more favorable terrain of struggle”, Ben Howe, Conservative and vehement anti-trumper, thinks opting for Hillary is a winning strategy. By his logic, Conservatism’s only chance for survival is four years in opposition to Hillary rather than four years in compliance under Trump. I’m not sure where Howe has been these last seven-and-a-half years, but Obama hasn’t been slowed down much by Conservative opposition. And the opposition he did get from the likes of Cruz was met with the stink-eye from Cruz’s fellow Republicans as they bent over for Democrats. What makes Howe think four years of Hillary (or Bernie) will render better results?
The people screaming that Trump is conservatism’s kryptonite need to get over their fear that Trump will become Conservatism’s new poster child and replace Reagan. Hillary in office with an emasculated GOP and a power-drunk and zero-accountability Democrat party will be what disheartens conservatives and causes them to seriously consider throwing in the towel.
As I’ve written ad nauseam, I’m no Trump fan, but I’d rather roll the dice and see what he’ll do rather than opt out and keep the country in the hands of the Democrats. Howe and others like him aren’t being strategic, they are choosing the wrong hill…the one our country will most assuredly die on.
I understand fearing the apathy and complacency that could take over watered-down conservatives if Trump is elected. But in my opinion, its a chance we have to take. I’m sure there will be enough Constitutionally hair-raising moments with Trump to keep staunch Conservatives in beast mode. But if these pundits want to save Reagan’s legacy they might want to start with not being willing accomplices to a full-blown Communist takeover, something I’m sure Reagan would not approve.
“Our tactics also occur within the framework of our strategic policy of building a broad coalition to defeat the extreme right, which we see as the main danger to democracy and social progress, embodied within today’s Republican Party.”
I love that the extreme right gives Communists reason to fear, but Bachtell needs to get his eyes checked if he thinks the extreme right is embodied within today’s Republican party. Where has he been? Tossing back a few with Howe? Republicans in DC have been doing the CPUSA’s job for them by giving anything even remotely Conservative the finger the last three years. The “broad coalition to defeat the extreme right” is called the GOP.
“There are voting constituencies that presently support the GOP that have to be won over. Such an approach sees the need to actively challenge right-wing and GOP ideas that influence sections of the people, especially working-class whites, for example, through hate talk radio. This includes racism and intolerance which are key issues dividing the working class.”
Many of the voting constituencies that supported the GOP are fed up and are willing to give their last gasp of support to the Republicans only because of Trump. Again, I think it matters little to the average American if Trump is a Conservative. What matters is that they know we desperately need to get the Democrats out of power.
Bachtell also exposes the CPUSA’s push to limit free speech…in the name of speech free… from what they consider to be hate…speech. It’s convoluted, but it’s a Leftist construct, so what do you expect?
We all know how this goes. In their Nirvana Rush and his ilk get booted off the air for exposing the truth, churches lose their 501C3 status for quoting the Bible on homosexuality, Leftist college students can get compensated for being “triggered” by chalk-written slogans that “offend” their political bias, and Facebook and Twitter jimmy with their analytics for the purpose of keeping Conservative news off the social media radar. Meanwhile, Party-compliant liberals of all stripes get a pass for saying and doing things that are the very definition of hate speech.
When Bachtell says racism and intolerance divide the working class, what he’s conveniently leaving out is that the flames of that great divide are intentionally organized and fanned to promote racism and intolerance or any manner of chaos that will warrant a government response or ratchet up a need for government intervention, Commie-Democrat style.
“We see this as one of the stages in the long struggle for advanced democracy and socialism. Without decisively defeating the most reactionary sections of monopoly capital [the energy sector and military], disintegrating Republican Party support at every level, it’s hard to see winning more radical and advanced programs and policies and waging a fight against the monopoly class as a whole.”
You shouldn’t have to read anything past “winning more radical and advanced programs and policies” to be convinced that four more years of the Democrats spells doom for our country.
Socialized healthcare, bankrupting the coal industry, the entire LGBT agenda, and abortion on demand…heck, they’re just getting started. Put Hillary in office and your Constitutional right to have an opposing opinion is all but gone along with your guns. Look for private schools and home school to take a direct hit. Neighborhoods will be organized to accommodate the Democrat’s vision of equality. Tax rates will become debilitatingly high. Our borders will leak like a sieve, and our sovereignty will be handed over to the UN.
I’m sorry, but the speculative list itemizing Trump’s potential policy nightmares pales in comparison to the fresh hell we already know a Communist-backed Democrat will usher in.
“We envision a prolonged process toward political independence, with many turns, advances and defeats, utilizing many forms, resulting in a radical third party based in labor, working-class neighborhoods, communities of color, and democratic movements. Such a coalition third party must extend its reach beyond urban areas, to suburbs, exurbs, rural areas, and in “red” states and congressional districts.”
Communism is a patient ideology. Slow, methodical, planned, and well-executed. We’ve had plenty of time to catch on to their agenda, but for various gutless and selfish reasons, the deniers on the left and (astonishingly) on the right have all but silenced those who have tried to warn us.
“These are realities that can’t be escaped.”