When I go to the store to buy products, I like to check the labels to see what the difference is in the higher to lower price ranges. Sometimes I find a Product X new on the market, purchase it and use it for a year. Then the next year that product comes out with a “new and improved” version called XB. The next year then a new product is introduced which combines Product X, XB, and adds its own extra thing to become “Product C”. Each time a higher price and different packaging occurs but if the labels are compared, the core product remains the same.
That is exactly what has happened to the Communist Party. Around the 1918 until the 1950’s, it boldly proclaimed its name and membership was active including names across the country from DC to California. It states clearly on its website that its aim is socialism. The Progressive Party emerged in the 1912 and included presidents as well as many financial gurus which pushed a social agenda of free everything. In the late 1970’s membership waned for the Communist Party after all the rioting of the 1960’s created a hue and cry over their methods. In the 1973 a “newer” version targeting big government and denouncing the use of the Democrat Party as a vehicle emerged to become the Socialist Party which in essence took the basic communist platform and the progressive platform then merged them into a newer outlook.
The Progressive Party of today is the “Product XB” hidden in plain sight within the Democrat Party because any hint of the label “communism” is still looked on with disfavor. It sits between both ends of the ideological Marxist spectrum. The Communist Party tends to back the Progressives believing that one day they will again emerge under the title Communist. The Socialist Party as a hardline version tends to stand alone and actually placed nominees in the 2016 election cycle. But in all cases, the outcome is a totalitarian government featuring some form of Marxist ideology where big government rules every aspect of the lives of citizens and where a republic with its personal freedoms is eradicated.
The Democrat Party today is a conglomeration of ideology but mostly it is seen as The Progressive Democrat group for now. Times may again be changing soon though if the Muslim Brotherhood becomes the DNC leading group. Their efforts and religious doctrine is to bring about Sharia Law and destroy any ideology not in line with their religious hardline belief.
In the case of the Communist Party information, it is interesting to note that of all the major player names they could have written about only four stand out on their website – Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and reluctantly Hillary Clinton. Which begs the question, why? All we have to do really is look at the current level of chaos and activity both in the streets and in Congress to get a sense of the truth. Progressivism is the Brand XB because it is more palatable to the general public.
CPUSA articles by them and others demonstrate this:
April 23, 2012 – Aim.org – Elizabeth Warren has picked up the endorsement and fundraising support of entertainer Harry Belafonte. A long-time supporter of the Castro dictatorship, he has more recently been singing the praises of Venezuelan Marxist ruler Hugo Chavez… A radical in her own right, Warren proudly claims to be the intellectual author of the Occupy Wall Street movement and is running as a “consumer advocate.” But she had previously benefitted from a fundraiser hosted by George Soros.
September 10, 2012 – American Thinker – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, resulting from the Dodd-Frank legislation, and constructed by Elizabeth “Cherokee” Warren, is a practical step toward Marxism’s key goal of eliminating private banking.
November 21, 2012 – CPUSA – Democrats unexpectedly strengthened their hand in the Senate and House, new progressive voices, like Elizabeth Warren, are coming to Washington…communists, socialists, and left and progressive people come into the picture. For some time now our Party has recognized powerful progressive trends in the labor movement..the option for the working class and people in the near and medium term isn’t to retreat from electoral and political struggle…In the longer term, the option is socialism – a society in which Marx’s “associated producers” and their allies govern and rule in the interest of the immense majority.
June 5, 2014 – CPUSA – “In Massachusetts we have defeated the ultra-right…The Democrats have a super-majority in the state legislature…Republican Scott Brown fled to New Hampshire in an attempt to revive his political career following his defeat by Elizabeth Warren. After we defeat the ultra-right we will find ourselves increasingly at odds with the Democrats. In Massachusetts we are already there. The Communist Party must begin to elaborate a strategy beyond the horizon of defeating the ultra-right. It should be recognized that many comrades in our party have done powerful organizing with Democrats.”
October 4, 2016 – Accuracy In Media – The Communist Party had a staffed table for all three days of the Progressive Central organized by Progressive Democrats of America. Longtime pro-Russian communist Angela Davis announced that she would vote for Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee for president.
February 4, 2017 – CPUSA – At its best, Marxism is a way of using a set of philosophical methods (materialism and dialectics) along with concepts drawn from the analysis of history (class, revolution, etc) to move beyond bourgeois science in understanding the development of social, economic, and political relations… tactic has been to accuse Marxism of being ‘dogmatic’: ideologically rather than scientifically driven, lacking objectivity, etc…The main arrow in their quiver was accusing Communism of being too ideological. We’re still dealing with the fallout of this. For example: how establishment Democrats dismissed Bernie as an ideologue with no practical vision, or how pro-TPP Democrats pilloried Elizabeth Warren for her ‘dogmatic’ opposition to free trade.
On February 7, 2017 Elizabeth Warren was silenced on the Senate floor until after the Sessions final vote for her remarks. My real question is WHY the Democrat Party even exists any more since many of the members belong to the Congressional Progressive Caucus? The CPC was established in 1991 by six members of the United States House of Representatives: U.S. Representatives Ron Dellums (D-CA), Lane Evans (D-IL), Thomas Andrews (D-ME), Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Maxine Waters (D-CA), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT).
The current CPC co-chairs are Raúl Grijalva is known for his militant radical past with close past ties to Atzlan and Raza Unida Party and Keith Ellison with close ties to CAIR and Muslim Brotherhood. Their First Vice Chair Mark Pocan has close ties to AFL-CIO and ACLU. Seriously, who viewing names on their membership roster can doubt where the CPC is headed?
In realistic terms, why hasn’t the Democrat Party simply rebranded itself as the Progressive Democrat Party? With their party in such disarray, one would think it is now time for their new or improved version to be released. Certainly Keith Ellison’s name is being bandied about for DNC chair so what else can we expect from the Democrat Party in the future? Presumably according to rumor, Elizabeth Warren as POTUS?
Now look at those who completed her task despite the ruling :Bernie Sanders, Jeff Merkley and a one or two others.
It is time we recognized that the Democrat Party is no longer bound to or by the Constitution of the United States but has at its core the exact opposite – Totalitarian Regime. If allowed to continue to take over the Democrat Party, the Congressional Progressive Caucus will in essence either become the Communist Party style or the Muslim Brotherhood style ruling class over the next few years. Unless of course the two factions actually begin infighting for the power then hopefully they will implode. As of now, I would say it looks like from that membership list that the jihadists are gradually edging out the others as those with communist ties are now aging rapidly.
Sounds like a successful new book series for someone.