We begin with showing the Democratic Party as not being the party for the people, but rather being a party of the Masters of the voters that are kept in place to vote Democratic so they can continue to obtain their free stuff. Just how did the Democrats come from being 100% supporters of slavery to modern day ideology to keep their people voting so they keep their benefits, welfare, food stamps and so on? We have to go back to 1932, when Democrats elected Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who built his “New Deal” with the coalition of liberals and Southern (DEMOCRAT) segregationists.
In the “solid South,” Democrats for generations grew up in one-party states whose voters would “rather vote for a yellow dog” than any candidate of the party of Lincoln. Check it out: the Democrats supported the segregation of the races and did so in a “shadowy” way. In 1944, the Socialist Party realized that the people of the United States would never openly accept Socialism/Communism, but they understood this and changed the Socialist Party to merge into the Democratic Party under the shadow of “Liberalism.”
Norman Thomas, the six-time Socialist Party candidate for U.S. President said the following in a 1944 speech: “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened…. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
The Democratic Party adopted the Socialist Party ideologies and continues that today. The Democratic Party does not have the people’s hopes and dreams in their visions; they would much rather have all the “people” to be their slaves and they the masters of them by forcing Government control onto them, as they began with the Obamacare act. These are facts, but it becomes even crazier when we look into what happened to the Democratic Party in the 1960’s. It was then that the Socialists and Communists knew they could convert the Democratic Party into a Party they could control using the single word, “Liberal.”
The 1960s were the heyday of the radical, anti-American movement known as the New Left. By the early 1970s, however, the New Left had spent its political capital and was a dying movement. But its adherents remained committed to the cause, altering their tactics so as to work within the political and social system in a manner the New Left had previously chosen not to do. These latter-day leftists incorporated the tactics of Saul Alinsky, seeking to change society by first infiltrating its major institutions – the schools, the media, the churches, the entertainment industry, the labor unions, and the three branches of government – and then implementing policies from those positions of power.
Most notably, the ex-New Leftists found a home in the Democratic Party. By 1972, they had seized control of the party, as evidenced by the nomination of George McGovern as the Democratic presidential candidate on an antiwar platform that cast America’s military involvement in Southeast Asia as an immoral, imperialistic venture. Though McGovern lost 49 of the 50 states in the 1972 election, he and the anti-war radicals who flocked to his campaign moved the Democratic Party dramatically to the left. By way of its political ascendancy within the Democratic Party, the New Left, in a political sense, effectively killed off the classical centrist liberals who had vigorously opposed Communist totalitarianism. After accomplishing this parricide, the New Left occupied the corpse of authentic liberalism (i.e., the Democratic Party) and appropriated the name, “liberalism.”
Here, we see the name of Saul Alinsky coming into the work of the Socialist/Communist to help “Change” the Democratic Party into a party that by all standards was now working for the ideologies of both the Socialists and Communists of the times. It was very easy to lead the people supporting the Democrats, even in the last election of 2016; Hillary Clinton stated that Democrats were easy to lead because they were stupid. But today, we clearly see the word Liberal displayed with any Democratic idea. That by itself should wake some people up, but they fail to see the intricate connection of Liberalism and the ideologies of both Socialists and Communists. The proof that the Democrats use their name as a front to the hidden Socialistic/Communistic ideologies is clearly shown by statements made in April of 2010. In April 2010, the official website of the Social Democrats USA (SDUSA) revealed that organization’s ties to the Democratic Party. Describing itself as a “Party Within a Party,” SDUSA stated the following: “The Social Democrats, USA kept the name Socialist Party for our political arm because we are the party of Eugene Debs, Mother Jones, Helen Keller, Carl Sandburg, Norman Thomas, A. Philip Randolph, Bayard Rustin, and thousands of people who worked to build the civil rights and trade union movements in this country. Many good folks gave their lives in these movements.
“The Socialist Party, USA, in 1956, chose to stop running candidates of its own, except on rare occasions. During the 1960’s, we began to work in the Democratic Party. This is where our allies in the civil rights and trade union movement worked and continue to work politically. We are proud of what we helped accomplish within the Democratic Party, particularly the civil rights legislation and anti-poverty programs of the 1960’s. The struggle continues….
“Our movement has been involved in the left wing of the Democratic Party since 1947. Socialist Party members helped found Americans for Democratic Action. ADA is this country’s premiere “anti-Communist, liberal” organization. We are proud of our long relationships with Eleanor Roosevelt, Hubert Humphrey, and others. We look forward to forging a good working relationship with our fellow pro-labor, anti-totalitarian, left Democrats.”
Late in 2010, Communist Party USA member C.J. Atkins called for his comrades to drop their “communist” label, so that they could work more effectively inside the Democratic Party. Soon thereafter, Joe Sims, co-editor of the CPUSA publication Peoples World, acknowledged not only that collaboration with the Democrats “will be an area of engagement for those wanting to make a difference,” but also that communists might someday be able to “capture” the Democratic Party entirely. Sims warned, however, against dissolving the CPUSA entirely into the Democratic Party. Rather, he advised his organization to remain a separate entity, working both inside and outside the Democratic Party as circumstances required.
In January 2015, Communist Party USA National Committee chairman John Bachtell published an essay in People’s World stating that American communists were eager to work with the Democratic Party in order to advance their goals.
Again, with all this documented information, Democrats will deny what they really know to be shown here. Many Democrats will never freely admit they were or currently are members of either the Socialist Democratic Party or of the Communist party. Think of what was just stated: ONLY the Socialists and Communists could infiltrate the Democrats, mainly because the Unions are based upon the Socialist ideology and the Civil Rights movements. Why is this? Mainly due to the fact that Democrats since 1856 have held the idea that they should “Control” the people, not allowing them to “Control” their own ideas or their government. That of itself is directly against the very Constitution that Democrats took an oath of office to, uphold, defend, and protect.
We hear of what many in the Democratic Party call the “New Left,” an idea based upon not just Socialism, but linked to Communism, as well. This “New Left” ideology of the Democratic Party places it directly inline with what Nikita Khrushchev had stated.
In February 1956, nearly three years after the death of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin, his successor Nikita Khrushchev delivered his historic “Secret Speech” to a closed session of the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In that address, Khrushchev denounced Stalin for the cult of personality he had cultivated, and condemned Stalin’s regime for its gross “violation of Leninist norms of legality.” In the aftermath of Khrushchev’s revelations about Stalin’s abuses, most of the world’s Communist parties abandoned Stalinism and, to varying degrees, adopted the moderately reformist positions of the new Soviet First Secretary. The American far left likewise sought to distance itself from Stalin, rebranding itself as the so-called “New Left,” a counter-cultural movement that would hold fast to the overriding ideals of Marxism-Leninsim while formally abjuring the horrific crimes of Stalinism. But before long, this New Left would romanticize the neo-Stalinists of the Third World, embracing a whole new set of totalitarian heroes such as Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Pol Pot, and Daniel Ortega.
The core of the early New Left was formed by the Students for a Democratic Society(SDS), a radical organization that aspired to overthrow America’s democratic institutions, remake its government in a Marxist image, and help America’s enemies emerge victorious on the battlefield in Vietnam. Many key SDS members were “red-diaper babies,” children of parents who had been Communist Party members or Communist activists in the 1930s.
Established in late 1959, SDS held its first meeting in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1960. Its first President was Alan Haber, and its first impression on the political landscape was the Port Huron Statement of 1962, drafted principally by Tom Hayden, a former editor of the University of Michigan’s student newspaper. The Port Huron Statement adopted the position of “anti-anti-Communism,” refusing to support the West in the Cold War. The statement identified and denounced America’s many sins: racism, abundance, materialism, industrialization, and militarism. Its prescribed solution to Cold War tensions between the U.S. and the Soviet Union was to entirely dismantle America’s “permanent war economy”: “Universal controlled disarmament must replace deterrence and arms control as the [American] national defense goal.
With all this going on inside the Democratic Party, why would anyone wish to support them as they wish to control every thing one does and they wish to make slaves out of every Democrat to keep them voting for the very people that keep them both poor and uneducated. It is time to have the Democratic Party displayed for what it really is, a modern day party filled with Socialists and Communists that do not wish good for the United States. It is time to either send them packing or make them remove all factions of the Socialists and Communists now working within their party. That will not happen, as they love to control people and keep them ignorant and poor to keep their votes coming into the Democratic Party