Skip to content

July 21, 2011

7

The Communizing of America I

by rogueoperator

A Brief History of Communist Subversion

The American flag is under attack.  The reference to “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance is under attack.  And now the very Pledge of Allegiance itself is under attack.

Part of the communists’ plan for subverting the country is to remove loyalty oaths and other expressions of patriotism from the public sphere.  One could probably point to all of our nation’s serious troubles, show how each problem relates in some way to communist subversion, and document it, but instead I will provide some sources for the reader to put the pieces together himself.

Online resources for assessing how far along we are in the communizing of America:

  • KGB defector Yevgenni Bezmenov explains role of “active measures” in subverting the U.S. (videos).
  • The ten planks of the Communist Manifesto (annotated).
  • Communist Goals, House report (1963). [Number 13: "Do away with all loyalty oaths."]
  • The Communist Party’s Cold War Against Congressional Investigation of Subversion, House report (1962).

The last is perhaps the least well-known, and it is appropriate to quote an extended passage here, from the testimony of one Robert Carrillo Ronstadt:

Before the bank can be robbed, the guards must be disposed of.
Before subversive forces within this country can achieve their goal, the country’s internal security instruments and agencies must be destroyed or rendered powerless.
Laws against subversion, the agencies charged with formulating such laws, and those charged with investigating violations of them are integral parts of this country’s internal security guard, a guard which the Communists must destroy before their objective of imposing a Soviet-style dictatorship on this country can be attained.
It is only logical, therefore, that the U.S. Communist Party should do everything in its power to discredit, weaken, and destroy -
(a) the security laws, regulations, and programs of this country;
(b) congressional committees created to investigate subversive activities for the purpose of formulating legislation designed to frustrate its efforts; and
(c) The FBI and State and local police subversive squads which have the special mission of obtaining evidence of Communist lawbreaking.
Because the Communist Party knows that, operating under its own name, it cannot win the support of the overwhelming majority of Americans for these or any of its objectives, it uses fronts-false
faces-to promote its aims in this as well as in other areas. The fronts, in turn, use false words to present to the American people a concept, idea, or picture that is the opposite of the truth.
Thus, for example, the names of the fronts will indicate, and their propaganda ,vill assert, that they promote and defend civil liberties, fundamental rights, and the Constitution. Behind this camouflage, however, their immediate aim is the destruction of a certain agency or law designed to protect American liberties, rights, and the Constitution- and their ultimate aim is the imposition of a tyranny which would tear the Constitution to shreds and strip the American people of every liberty and right that flows from observance of it. The party’s fronts use lip service to the principles this Government was created to establish and preserve in order to destroy this Government and those principles.

By any rational assessment, the United States has been penetrated by socialists, communists, radicals, fellow-travelers, and “progressives” hell-bent on destroying the United States as it was founded. How did we get to this point, on the precipice of freedom and full-blown tyranny?

As explained in an earlier post, subversion was the key strategy used by the Soviets to try to bring down the U.S.:

To avoid the impression that this analysis lacks real-world grounding and is just an exercise in sophistry tinged with an unbalanced measure of conspiracy, we can briefly cite what socialists themselves have said in regards to their project of turning America socialist. The influential American socialist Norman Thomas said, “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.” Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev famously said, “Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will pour the dirt over your faces” (Нравится вам или нет, но история на нашей стороне. Мы вас закопаем). Stalin himself did not predict the direct overthrow of Capitalism, but rather said, “We will sell the Capitalists the rope with which they will hang themselves.” All of these rather illustrative quotes by well-known Socialist leaders suggest an indirect strategy of subversion, rather than of outright direct conflict.

We may be quickly approaching a red dawn, when freedom-loving Americans will see the ghosts of the founders led to the gallows and hung before their very eyes. The antipathy and outright hostility to The Constitution, to individual rights, even to human life itself, among intellectuals in the journalism, law, education, and entertainment professions is dumbfounding.  Between 90%-95% of all those who work in these industries are staunch Democrats, if not “progressives.” Wonder why that is?

It is because the left has conducted a Gramscian “long march” through our cultural, educational, and informational institutions, while Fabian socialists have eroded free market capitalism and placed the economy in the hands of central planners.  One side could not bring America to the edge of communism by itself; it took two fronts working in tandem to accomplish this precarious state of affairs.  Even more disturbingly, both parties may be cooperating to bring America to the brink of collapse and to usher in some kind of police state; first domestic in nature, and then international.

As the House report (1963) put it: “Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.”

It is impossible at this time to verify if both parties are indeed “captured.” A pattern of behavior by both parties that disturbingly fits the communist template and playbook has emerged, nonetheless. A potentially shared agenda becomes visible once one stops seeing the Democrats and the Republicans as two opposing parties, but rather one party – a Communist party – with respective delegated responsibilities to subvert The Constitution and to impose economic servitude to the state on the American people. The Republicans set themselves up for such speculation with absurdly predictable weak and non-ideologically based opposition despite the preponderance of center-right support for their self-described policies, which never seem to get implemented despite adequate political power. The absurd continuity of many policies of the Bush administration and the “hope and change” Obama administration, from TARP to bailouts to domestic security to wars overseas, clues one in that, at the very least, these parties are not that far apart ideologically. Indeed, in the absence of dogged resistance, the two parties may soon converge somewhere on the socialist-left side of the spectrum.

Why do people tolerate this? Why can’t some people see what is taking place right in front of them?

While economic marxists, or “paleomarxists,” had tremendous difficulty convincing Americans to forsake their freedoms and to adopt socialist slavery, cultural marxists have been more successful adopting a strategy of critical theory. Essentially, cultural marxism sought to replace “capitalist” aka patriotic American culture with godless, amoral or immoral, soft socialistic culture, critical theory is the technique in practice of diffusing threat perception that the country is being subverted.  Critical theory seemingly fragments the lockstep marxian movement into several “interest groups” – in practice, race-baiters, homophobia crusaders, male-bashing feminists, Muslim terrorist apologizers – what we see most commonly are “victim” groups who unabashedly attack the white male middle class and justify exploitation, expropriation, and suppression of “class enemies.”

Political correctness is the psychological muzzle intended to keep the real victims from speaking up and coordinating with fellow attacked Americans to take action against their actual oppressors. The stain of white guilt from the forever weeping scar of slavery in America’s past seemingly applies to all whites in perpetuity.  Because of the fact of slavery alone, the very notion that a white male middle class person could actually be oppressed by minority groups is indeed laughed off by left-wing media and most academics.

So while opposing the first black president for any policy was once decried as “racist,” white, mentally unstable Debbie Wasserman-Schultz can go on the House floor, call black decorated war hero and Congressman Allen West everything but an Uncle Tom, and the media is automatically on the Democrats’ side. While the American media celebrated the potentially “historic” runs for president of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, there is no such enthusiasm for the potential candidacies of Latino sensation Marco Rubio or former Sarah Palin, both Republicans.  And indeed, the candidacy of Michelle Bachmann is already drawing vicious, irrelevant attacks from the left – the exact kind that would draw cries of foul play if it were Hilary Clinton.  Sarah Palin’s kids, including mentally challenged Trig, are also fair game in the minds of the media, although Hillary’s daughter Chelsea is “out of bounds.” What is going on here?

Maybe political correctness isn’t really about principle, but about attacking political opposition and then playing the victim when it retaliates? No, couldn’t be.

About these ads
7 Comments Post a comment
  1. M082844
    Jul 22 2011

    This article is a good piece of gear. I’m loving your strategy. Makes more sense now.

    Reply
    • Jul 22 2011

      Thanks, mo. I had to break the original up into two parts, and I’m going to tweak the second part slightly. I don’t want to get too down on the Republicans, because I might damage their brand. They may suck, but they’re the main vehicle for conservatives and those who agree with them on fiscal issues.

      Reply
  2. Jul 31 2011

    Good essay. A good read to get the history of the encroachment of Socialism into the mainstream of American life is the book by John A. Stormer, “None Dare Call It Treason.” I found it at the recycling center, of all places. You would be amazed at the complicity of some of our ‘revered’ leaders of the past.

    Mike G.

    Reply

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. The Communizing of America |
  2. The Communizing of America (via Rogue Operator) « blogsense-by-barb
  3. The Communizing of America I (via Rogue Operator) « That Mr. G Guy's Blog
  4. Yuri Bezmenov – Deception Was My Job (1 of 9) « News Worldwide

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Note: HTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to comments

%d bloggers like this: