“USEFUL IDIOTS”
Rancorous divide is evidence of desperate struggle behind the scenes
By Marilyn M. Brannan, Associate Editor
Unravelling The New World Order

"Not since the Civil War has the American political system been so polarized, or America's communities engaged in so comprehensive a cultural Armageddon." --David Horowitz, "Out of Many, One," FrontPageMagazine.com, November 24, 2003.

I would venture to say that the rancor of the current election campaign has shocked most Americans. The intensity of hatred—especially that directed toward President Bush—has not been seen in a presidential campaign at any time in the memory of most of us. Granted, the stakes in this election are very, very high. But the unrestrained anger and hatred—especially that coming from the Democrat party and directed at President Bush—has inflicted ugly wounds that are baffling to many.

Why such volatile anger? Why the hateful contempt, rampant especially in the Democrat party, for what America has stood for since its beginnings? Why is the political platform of the Democrat party so profoundly unlike what Democrats stood for fifty or sixty years ago?

One activist for the Left, Patricia Ireland of the National Organization for Women, stated at a political rally in January, 2001: “We’ve got to keep the anger and energy going from these last elections and turn it into dedicated activism.” Her comment is indicative of the rancor that has been widely promoted in the Democrat party since November 2000.

I have heard it said, ‘There isn't a dime's worth of difference between the political parties in this country.” I believe even the most disgruntled observer would be hard-pressed to defend that argument today. Striking differences between the parties have emerged just in the last two or three decades. The most observable, I believe, lies in the fact that one party, although it publicly declares its “love” for America, has at its base a motley assortment of malcontents whose sole political aim is to destroy America and construct something that bears little or no resemblance to the “one nation, under God” that our founders envisioned and that hundreds of thousands of Americans have died to defend.

Should we have expected such a radical—and rancorous—political reorientation simply because time passes and “change is inevitable”?

The answer is no. It was not inevitable. The harsh and un-American character of the Democrat party today is the result of a calculated effort on the part of the left-wing, anti-America bunch that wants to see its Marxist dream come to full fruition here. They see their opportunity, especially with the situation in Iraq locked in a furious (and seemingly endless) struggle, to agitate for radical change. The only reason socialism has not worked anywhere it has been tried, they insist, is that “the right people haven't been in charge.” Now, while the divisions among us (which they have worked mightily to encourage) are at their most virulent, these people hope to press forward with as radical an agenda as possible.

Hijacked by Socialist/Communist Bloc
The Left is enormously upset over recent challenges to their political power. They hate Fox News, conservative talk shows and their hosts, and the conservative Washington think tanks. They believe judges should have the power to continue to subvert democracy and rewrite law that supports their agenda. They want Congress to continue creating new entitlements so as to amplify the state of dependency among their constituents. They are continuing their aggressive assaults on the sanctity of life and marriage through their pro-abortion and gay marriage agendas.

In order to facilitate its grip on the levers of power, the Left has mounted a concentrated effort to involve Democrat members of Congress in their socialist agenda. This is not a new development. In January 1999, this publication featured a cover story entitled, “The Democratic Party Is Being Hijacked by Socialists.” In that article, we quoted the Conservative News Service:

“Fifty-seven Democrats in Congress are members of a policy group that is
working with and being promoted by the Democratic Socialists of America
(DSA), the domestic branch of the Socialist International Party” (CNS,
Nov. 11, 1999).

Our staff were able to view the names of the 57 House members at the Democratic Socialists of America website, www.dsausa.org/dsa.html. Interestingly, that information is no longer published at their website.

On July 23, 2004, The Democratic Socialists of America Political Action Committee (DSAPAC) released a statement urging its members to work for the election of John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.

The Communist Party USA also announced its support for John Kerry:
“We aren’t running a candidate for president this year simply because John Kerry embodies much of what we believe and wish to accomplish for this country. . . . Countries in the Middle East are terrified of Bush and his so-called war on terrorism. We trust Kerry will not pursue war there and [will] exit Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as possible. . . . Republicans completely disagree with our agenda and the Democrats mostly agree. Also it may interest you to know that Kerry has been endorsed by virtually all of the communist world to include Cuba, China and Vietnam.” That announcement appeared at the website of the Communist Party USA over the signature of Marc Brodine, Chairman.

Joseph Farah, Editor of WorldNetDaily, refers to the 57 socialist members of the U.S. House as “Congress’ Red Army Caucus.” The DSA has acknowledged that their chief organizing goal is to work within the Democratic Party, since (in their words) “The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture . . .” (Farah, “Congress’ Red Army Caucus,” WorldNetDaily, Nov. 23, 1998)

Useful Idiots
Obviously, all Democrats are not Marxists. But their problem is that they are in danger of becoming, collectively (and unwittingly) the “useful idiots” of a radical element on the far Left. Lenin is supposed to have referred to blind defenders and apologists for the Soviet Union in the Western democracies as “useful idiots.” Several years ago, Thomas Sowell made the point that even Lenin might have been surprised at how far these useful idiots would carry their partisanship in later years-including our own times. (“Useful Idiots,” Jewish World Review, Sept. 1, 2000)

Bearing this out is a comment by Soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev, who had this to say on the subject of FDR's “New Deal” paradigm shift:

“We can't expect the American people to jump from capitalism to communism, but we can assist their elected leaders in giving them small doses of socialism, until they awaken one day to find that they have communism.”

In order to revolutionize a free America it is necessary to destroy her identity, her form of government, her traditions of morality, her ideals of individual worth and liberty. The brash attack on these ideals is intentional, calculated to gradually destroy our unique identity (through Krushchev's “small doses of socialism”) so that ultimately, we believe the lie that we can no longer survive as a free and democratic republic.

The Left stubbornly ignores the fact that the great Marxist experiment has failed miserably wherever it has been tried. The Soviet Union is now only a memory, and China and most other states with centralized economies are experiencing a tectonic shift toward free-enterprise and the political challenges that accompany such a shift. Still, the Marxists in our midst are determined to bring their socialist/communist model to life in America, whatever the cost.

Who Are These People?
Specifically, they are the “motley assortment of malcontents” mentioned earlier, which includes anti-capitalist holdovers from Communist movements of an earlier age . . . multiculturalists that seek to promote every culture but our own . . . zealous atheists who resent the central role that Judeo-Christian beliefs and religious faith have played in American life . . . socialists who despise the free market . . . and moral anarchists seeking to overthrow the social conventions of the West. The huge irony is that all of these malcontent revolutionaries are utterly contemptuous of the uniquely American culture that offers the greatest tolerance for their inherently intolerant views.

These people do not, as a normal rule, stand on street corners waving placards that identify them for who they are. (The anti-war, anti-America demonstrators—the highly organized and highly visible element that has erupted routinely during times of war over the past century—are the exception.) For the most part, they move the revolution along by virtue of the fact that they occupy many of the administrative, teaching and cultural leadership roles on college campuses and in other learning institutions across the land, wielding a powerful but disproportionate influence on the political scene

Some have bought the deception that “Communism is dead, and socialism is a failed ideology that need not worry us.” They are wrong. Socialism is very much alive in the U.S., and its operatives are working diligently to implement it fully here in America. The plan—to hijack a political party already in place with a loyal following conditioned to expect government to feed, clothe, and employ them cradle-to-grave—appears to be well underway.