The most influential socialist organization in the United States
Bernie Sanders
The crowd roars. Young activists jump on stage and steal the mic from the speaker’s hands to partake in civil disobedience and public disruption. This is the event in Seattle a few weeks ago, where Black Lives Matter activists stormed the stage of a Bernie Sanders speaking event and stole the microphone to proclaim—black lives matter.
To truly understand that incident, it has to be asked, what is Black Lives Matter? For that matter, who is Bernie Sanders? Most importantly, what is the difference between the two of them? They both have the same politics. They both support Community Policing. They want the creation of a global carbon tax. They press for an overturning of Citizen’s United, total government funding of higher education, single-payer healthcare, a $15 minimum wage and an international agenda. It appears that the main difference between the two is…their tactics.
Their tactics? At the surface, one would believe that they have different tactics. Bernie Sanders—speak and vote. Black Lives Matter—shut down the city. The Bernie Sanders “movement” appears to have differences. But who is the Bernie Sanders movement? It is not just his supporters; it is those individuals and organizations which devote time and money to organizing Bernie Sanders’s campaign trail, message, and public image.
The point of this article is not to highlight only the background of Bernie Sanders. Bernie’s voting record in congress contains many choices which are supportive of the libertarian cause and these choices deserve to be condemned. I will mention that in another article though. The point of this post is to critique those who offer him his greatest support and influence. So who are these?
Democratic Socialists of America
There have been dozens and possibly hundreds of small local activist groups to participate. A total list would run for pages and pages and would be difficult to compile. If a total list were made, it would be clear to any observant reader that one organization in particular has an overwhelmingly strong influence behind directing Bernie Sanders’s campaign. The Democratic Socialists of America. (DSA)
Who is the DSA? The New York Times describes them as:
The Democratic Socialists, which for many years included luminaries like Michael Harrington and Irving Howe, have about 6,000 [members].
“It’s not easy to make political progress outside the two-party structure because people don’t want to waste their votes,” said Frank Llewellyn, 62, the national director of the Democratic Socialists, who became a socialist as a result of the civil rights and antiwar movements.
Rather than battling for power through elections, all three parties try to sway the national conversation through coalitions with labor unions and other mainstream organizations. Both socialist groups turned out at City Hall this month to protest budget cuts, at a rally that was largely organized by the unions.
In other words, the goal of the DSA is not to control the Democratic Party directly. It is to change the way the public thinks of politics and from there, both the Democratic and Republican parties move to the left. To do this, they work through fronts and by establishing cooperation with many progressive groups.
Notably, DSA has strong influence in some of Obama’s policies. During the 2008 election cycle, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney offered “Romneycare” as his alternative to “Obamacare.” It came out that one of Romney’s health experts was John McDonough, the same man that designed Obamacare. The Obama campaign used this as material to prove Romney offered no real changes. What wasnt mentioned by the Obama campaign was that John McDonough had served as a former long-time chairman for the Boston chapter of DSA. Quentin Young, Obama’s former physician, is a DSA member as well.
They also have control of the Democratic Party through influencing and sponsoring elections of certain labor union officials. Supporters of Sanders would note that he was mayor of Burlington, Vermont for eight years and he did some good for that city. In that respect, Sanders had successfully built a base of people within Vermont who are further to the left than the mainstream. As mayor of Birmingham in the 1980s, he hung a Soviet flag up in his office.
Local chapters partake in practically every progressive cause at their hand. Several members of DSA, including Sanders, founded and ran the Congressional Progressive Caucus—which currently boasts 68 members of congress..
Members of DSA, according to KeyWiki, include Bernie Sanders, Major Owens, John Conyers, Cornel West, Gloria Steinem, Quentin Young, Socialist Party USA Leader David McReynolds and the imprisoned Russian spy Kurt Stand. Their founder is Michael Harrington, a former adviser of Lyndon Johnson in the War on Poverty, whom formed the DSA in 1982 by merging his Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee with the smaller New American Movement.
On the topic of the DSA, KeyWiki founder Trevor Louden writes:
While sometimes regarded as a leftist pressure group inside the Democratic Party, DSA’s electoral tactics are in fact far more subtle and flexible. DSA members may join the Democratic Party and work closely with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, but also may work through the Green Party, the Working Families Party, or support local “progressive” coalitions or independent candidates such as Vermont socialist Bernie Sanders.
Now, lets let DSA speak for themselves. As quoted on keywki from DSA’s own words:
It is inaccurate to describe DSA as primarily working within the “left-wing” of the Democratic Party.” The 1993 DSA convention in fact resolved “that the imperative task for the democratic Left is to build anti-corporate social movements which are capable of winning reforms which empower people…The fundamental question for DSA is not what form that electoral intervention takes…Rather, our electoral work aims at building majoritarian coalitions capable of not only electing public officials, but capable of holding them accountable after they are elected.”
DSA’s main task is to build grassroots, multi-racial, progressive coalitions…Neither flying the flag of a third party which lacks a mass social base, or placing uncritical faith in isolated progressive Democratic politicians will build a powerful Left…
DSA is no more loyal to the Democratic Party – which barely exists as a grassroots institution –than are individuals or social movements which upon occasion use its ballot line or vote for its candidates…Veterans of the left will remember that the 1968 Peace and Freedom Party and the 1980 Citizens Party arose at moments of greater left-wing strength and did not significantly alter the national electoral landscape. Nor has, unfortunately, the New Party, which many DSAers work with in states where “fusion” of third party and major party votes is possible (such as the DSA co-sponsored Working Families Party in N.Y. State). [bold added]
Though with only an estimated six thousand members, DSA’s influence in national politics is far out of proportion to its small size. As quoted on KeyWiki, DSA National Political Committee member David Green in DSA magazine Democratic Left in the Spring 2007 issue wrote:
We have locals and activists across the country capable of organizing successful public events – as demonstrated by our Sanders house parties. We have “notables” capable of attracting non-DSA members to public events. We have academics, writers and speakers capable of elucidating public policy issues in clear and simple language. We have a solid relationship with several major unions-UAW, USW, IAM.
DSA uses influence in unions to help influence the past several elections of Presidents of the AFL-CIO. This information can be found on the KeyWiki pages about those individual high ranking unionists. Influence through AFL-CIO translates to influence in the Democratic Party. You can use KeyWiki as a way to investigate DSA connections with almost every progressive activism organization in the country. In the words of Trevor Loudon, DSA has considerable control of every major labor union in America, “you name it, they run it.”
In 1995, confirmed DSA member John Sweeney was elected to President of the AFL-CIO. The keywiki page states:
According to Democratic Socialists of America member and journalist Harold Meyerson, the “progressive coalition” of labor unionists which ousted conservative AFL-CIO president Lane Kirkland in 1994-95 and replaced him with DSA member John Sweeney was led by Gerald McEntee, John Sweeney, Richard Trumka, and George Kourpias (all identified DSA affiliates). The coalition selected Trumka as Sweeney’s running mate against the conservative faction’s choice Tom Donahue.
DSA is very good at networking. Through their networking, journalists have written pieces nearly identical to their positions. Salon, The New York Times, The Nation, Newsweek, TIME, Yahoo News, Dissent, MSNBC and other news outlets agree with DSA on many issues. DSA does not often advertise exactly how much they influence journalism. Often socialist writers hide what they really are. I have seen notoriously conservative news site The Federalist print articles very similar to positions of DSA–a specific example of when this has happened will be detailed later.
DSA is a semi-secretive organization and does not boast about which papers and news sites carry their members. Trevor Loudon founded KeyWiki to serve as a sort of database of leftists which he works on full time. As he stated in a speech, “What you read in the DSA’s blog will be the program of the Democratic Party tomorrow.”
He plans to make a documentary based on his research and is asking for donations to get it done.
Their facebook page links to articles on other sites. Using that information, one can figure which publications have a high probability that they are influenced, ran, or infiltrated by DSA members. But without an outright admission it is difficult to know for sure.
Bernie confirmed to be a DSA member
Founder of KeyWiki, Trevor Loudon, recently posted an article on his website that proves Bernie’s membership in the DSA. Up until now, his membership has only been speculated. DSA had sponsored many of his speeches before, but where was the proof Bernie was in the DSA?
For years, Bernie Sanders has been closely associated with Democratic Socialists of America, the country’s largest openly leftist organization. Senator Sanders has keynoted several DSA conferences, numerous DSA fundraisers have raised money for him, DSA backed his 2006 Senate campaign and now, the group is actively encouraging him to run for the White House in 2016.
But, as far as I’m aware, there has never been any evidence that Sanders is actually a DSA member.
Until now: Madison Democratic Socialists of America has confirmed Senator Sanders’ long suspected DSA membership on page one of their Fall 2014 newsletter (though getting his state of origin incorrect).
Though they may be graduates of Common Core geography, there is no reason to believe that the Madison DSAers were either lying or mistaken about Senator Sanders’ DSA membership status. Membership status is a big deal in leftist organizations. Dues-paying membership elevates one to the elite ranks of the Progressive movement. Formal “paid up” Party membership is not taken lightly. Clearly Sanders’ DSA membership is not for public consumption. Probably the “cheesehead” socialists believed that only sympathizers would ever bother to read their little newsletter.
After all, what’s a little secret between trusted comrades?
So, now I’ve established that Senator Sanders is probably a closet DSAer, why is that of concern?
My contention is simple. Despite using the word “socialists” in its name, DSA is, for all practical purposes, a communist organization. Because most DSAers are also active Democrats, or Green Party activists, the “socialist” label doesn’t meet the degree of resistance, that the more honest description “communist” would.
DSA works very closely with three of America’s leading communist groups – the Maoist leaning Freedom Road Socialist Organization, the “old guard” Communist Party USA, and the CPUSA spin-off Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. The four groups have even seriously considered merging in recent years. In June 2013, “The Future of the Left – A Conversation on Socialist Unity” was convened in New York City by the four groups, where the idea of eventual unification was discussed in depth.
DSA draws most of its ideas and inspiration from Chicago radical, Saul Alinsky, and Italian Communist Party theoretician, Antonio Gramsci.
Orange County California DSA acknowledged the organization’s debt to Gramsci in its February 1984 newsletter.
“Antonio Gramsci was a founder of the Italian Communist Party. He developed theories on “open ended Marxism” and independent Euro-Communism. His writings have remained influential among European parties of the left for several decades. They have also formed a vital part of the ideas that brought about the formation of today’s DSA.”
In this article, Loudon goes on to explain DSA’s beliefs more.
What is Socialism?
Pretend the year is 1968. The Soviet Union exists and is allied with Cuba, Algeria, Ghana and Poland. But no communist country in the world exists in 1968. In 1968, no country in the world refers to itself as “communist.” They all call themselves “socialist.” Communism is the term used to describe a utopian society that may exist in the future. Socialism is when there is total government control over certain parts of life so that the communist utopia may some day be created.
Engels wrote of a concept called “scientific socialism.” Scientific socialism stresses that the average person only needs so much food, living space and material items to live and no more. Should a socialist government restrict an individual to only his most basic needs, then the concept of materialism will fade away and a communist utopia may emerge. That is the theory though. Realistically, the socialists garner all of their power and keep it for their own ends.
The last paragraph of the Manifesto states:
[Communists] openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions.
“All existing social conditions” includes the family. It includes sovereignty and national independence. It includes culture. A communist utopia would replace the family with the collective. National independence would be replaced with globalism and world government. Culture would be replaced with a global culture and worship of the state.
The Communist Manifesto was not the product of a German writer working alone. Karl Marx was financed by the very wealthy Friedrich Engels. The Manifesto was not simply written for Marx’s own enjoyment. When it was first published it was published anonymously and as an official document of an organization. In 1847, a secret society named the League of the Just merged with the Communist Correspondence Committee to form the Communist League. Some of the most influential intellectuals in the world belonged to this group. Marx’s Manifesto was the result of a project he was assigned to do for the newly formed Communist League.
From the Manifesto:
By means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order…
In other words, when government offers a program to solve a problem, the solution offered makes the problem become worse. Then, to fix that problem, government grabs more power and makes more programs. In a communist nation there is no one law that abolishes the private ownership of land but rather a succession of laws that result in the loss of private property rights over time.
So let us now look at an article on Politico that was written by a self-admitted socialist:
Though Sanders speaks with more candor and vitriol about inequality and corporatism than most Democrats, he is more likely to call for a more muscular social safety net and higher taxes than for the nationalization of the banks.
In other words, insufficient economic measures which outstrip themselves, necessitating more laws.
Republican congressman Jeb Hensarling wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal entitled After Five Years, Dodd-Frank is a Failure. Hensarling uses official government statistics to show that on average, one community bank per day is going out of business. This is the rate banks were going out of business before the crisis of 2008 happened. Hensarling blames Dodd-Frank for the rate banks are going out of business right now. If, and when, another economic crisis happens, people will beg government to enact stricter regulations and make more insufficient economic measures which will eventually outstrip themselves. Coincidentally, an expansion of the size and scope of Dodd-Frank is part of DSA’s agenda. This would only mean more power to the Federal Reserve.
A note to Disinfonauts
I know that most Disinfonauts are supporters of Bernie. If this article does not change your mind, then take my advice: go to the DSA website, go to the “chapters” page, find the chapter of your state and contact them. If my article does not make you think twice about Bernie, at least my article can teach you how to become a member of Bernie’s “inner circle.” If Bernie has yet to have had a rally in your state, your local DSA chapter will be more than willing to tell you when and where he will be coming to your area! Have a shit ton of fun.
Democratic Socialists of America vs Black Lives Matter
So it is very clear isn’t it, that Democratic Socialists of America advocates for the same issues as Black Lives Matter yet uses different tactics? Five minutes of research would prove wrong. The Chicago chapter of DSA recommends people interested in leftism should visit a series of events known as Black August. The facebook page of Black August says they are:
A number of Chicago groups including Black and Pink Chicago, Black Lives Matter Chicago, BYP 100 Chicago, Chicago Taskforce on Violence against Girls and Young Women, Chicago Torture Justice Memorials, Chicago Wisdom Project, FURIE, Love and Protect, Project NIA, We Charge Genocide have come together in the wake of Dante Servin’s acquittal to organize a series of events during Black August that will highlight and lift up the stories and experiences of cis and trans Black women and girls who are/have been targets of state violence.
One of the specific Black August events listed on the events page of DSA Chicago is RadEd. From this event’s facebook page it says:
Come out for a free full day workshop for youth interested in learning about Black activism and organizing in the city of Chicago. Join us to learn the history, how to plan direct actions, arts as resistance, and more
Protestors in Chicago street-marching the night of Darren Wilson’s acquittal. Image originally found on 4chan.
Let us turn to Atlanta. From the Atlanta DSA chapter website we read the title of one story “Christmas Message: Black Lives Matter!”
Following on the heels of Moral Monday GA’s disruptive walk up Peachtree Road to the Fox Theatre…on Saturday, December 20th, a coalition headed by RiseUp Georgia halted Christmas-business-as-usual by shutting down Peachtree at Lenox Road.
A coalition of activist groups in Atlanta shut down a busy intersection during Christmas weekend in 2014.
…
DSA radicals being arrested in Atlanta for participating in protests against police brutality
Among the 13 arrested at the action, Daniel Hanley and Megan Morgan are active members of MA-DSA. [metro-Atlanta DSA]
On July 10, DSA’s blog Democratic Left posted:
Socialists must continue to march alongside social movement activists under the banner of campaigns such as #Black Lives Matter and #We Can’t Breathe and support groups like the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the ACLU, and Color of Change. White people must make these campaigns a priority. Majority white organizations such as DSA should partner with groups like Showing Up for Racial Justice (SURJ), “a national network of groups and individuals organizing white people for racial justice.”
Apparently, the DSA has similar views to Black Lives Matter on how Bernie has a race problem.
DSA honorary co-chairman Cornel West was arrested August 10 in St Louis for leading a mass of protestors over police barricades. When Cornel West was arrested a separate time in 2014 in a similar protest in Ferguson, he said: “I came here to go to jail.”
DSA Honorary co-Chairman Cornel West being arrested, August 10, 2015
So it is clear now that national organizers from #BlackLivesMatter and DSA are working together to the point that DSA has trained and supported many individual activists under the banner of Black Lives Matter. The number of organizers marching under that banner are not all members of DSA nor trained by them. There is other organizations involved in creating the Black Lives Matter demonstrations, such as Revolutionary Communists and George Soros, connections which dozens of other sites and blogs have discussed.
It is also clear that the incidents of Black Lives Matter activists heckling Sanders events were not isolated, as they happened in succession at speaking events throughout the country. What is going on?
The plan is simple. DSA and Bernie Sanders hold radical political views which are much further to the left than most people in America are willing to side with. In order to gain support for radical initiatives, the public depiction of what is “moderate” must change. As activists with Black Lives Matter disrupt Bernie Sanders events, Sanders goes from being viewed as a radical, to a moderate.
Historical Precedence
I have only proven that Black Lives Matter activists and DSA activists are nearly identical in every way, including political stances and activism techniques. My only evidence that the heckling at the Sanders events was created to help him is my suspicion, and the fact that this technique has been used before.
In The Strawberry Statement: Notes of a College Revolutionary, author James Simon Kunen writes:
In the evening I went up to the U to check out a strategy meeting. A kid was giving a report on the SDS [Students for a Democratic Society] convention. He said…that at the convention, men from Business International Roundtables…tried to buy up a few radicals…They offered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago…They want us to make a lot of radical commotion so they can look more in the center, as they move to the left.
On January 7, 1965, Malcolm X said before the Militant Labor Forum in his Prospects for Freedom speech:
For the first time in four hundred years, we started getting loud for the first time in four hundred years…They [the black muslims] got more militant than they intended to be. It actually spiraled out of control.
These nationalist elements actually served their purposes in that sense. They gave respectability to the civil rights groups and gave acceptability to the civil rights groups. Ten years ago, the NAACP was looked upon as a radical, leftist, almost subversive movement. Then when the black muslim movement came along, the power structure said “Thank the heavens for Roy Wilkins and the NAACP.”
Those quotes from Malcolm X can be found within the first 10 minutes in the video linked to above.
Violent black nationalists and nonviolent civil rights activists have a long history of working together while condemning each other at the same time. This short article on CNN is very good. However, that article states Malcolm and MLK met only once and for a minute. In Prospects for Freedom, Malcolm refers to MLK as his “very good friend,” which suggests they may had met more times than just once. DSA’s labor union news blog Talking Union writes that King and Malcolm had already started working together as early as 1959 when they, together, organized a labor strike. So when Malcolm X famously refers to MLK as “chicken” a few years later, it is arguably no more than an act.
To know more about the relationship of radicals and nonviolents, read the 1965 book It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights by Alan Stang. A book which every household in the country should own. I have also written on the topic before.
The Agenda of DSA
Let us look further into the positions offered by democratic-socialists and review exactly how radical they are and why they need much of the nation to rethink what moderate is. I outline just a handful of the issues DSA has positions on.
Campaign Finance Reform Laws
This is perhaps the one issue DSA wants the most. Their fronts and allies advocate it strongly too. No matter what the differences in opinion between Bernie and DSA are, this is one thing DSA would not allow Bernie to dissent over.
Did you know that the full name of the “Citizens United case” is Citizens United v the Federal Election Commission? Citizens United is not the name of the Supreme Court case but the name of one of the parties to the debate. So who is Citizens United? A nonprofit corporation and independent documentary filmmaking group. You know that the “Citizens United case” probably involved Citizens United attempting to invest money in a campaign. Do you know whose campaign they attempted investing in? No one’s actually. Citizens United was guilty of breaking the McCain-Feingold law, which was the campaign finance law overturned by the Supreme Court in this case. Under this law, the FEC did more than just regulate spending on political campaigns. They considered any money spent by a group to promote a political message over TV or radio in any way as “campaigning” if the message mentioned a candidate by name.
How did the FEC regulate these messages? By banning any airing of any message that mentioned a candidate’s name, 60 days before a primary election and 90 days before a general election.
Citizens United did not donate money to anyone’s campaign in the 2008 primary. What they did was invest money in a documentary named “Hillary: The Movie” which was critical of Hillary’s bid for the Democratic nomination. This film was slated to run on a local public TV channel before the FEC intervened and banned its showing until after the primary election.
At the time of the case, Deputy Solicitor General Malcolm Stewart said the government would even have the power to ban books that advocated the election or defeat of a candidate if the books were published or distributed by a corporation or union. Of course, the mainstream news can weigh in on the politics of an election as much as they want. Repealing the “Citizens United case” would help to wipe out the influence of much of the corporate media’s competition–like Disinfo.
As a conservative, I can wholeheartedly say it pisses me off when I see that even Fox News has jumped on the “campaign finance reform now” bandwagon.
One of the Ten Planks of Communism is “centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the state.” Why is it surprising that there is now a widespread leftist campaign to scrap the First Amendment by overturning the Citizens United case?
It is nothing short of brutally honest for me to say that if the Citizens United case was overturned, it would make politics horribly more corrupt and the voice of the people ever more restrained. I also have to be brutally honest that I charge Bernie Sanders with being in full intention of nullifying the First Amendment and many other parts of the Bill of Rights. None dare call it treason.
Shortly after the passage of the McCain-Feingold act, the ACLU posted this letter on its website marked “For Immediate Release”:
I have been, therefore, delighted to see groups like the AFL-CIO, the Alliance for Justice and the OMB Watch begin to express significant concerns about some elements of the newly introduced McCain-Feingold legislation. This is a welcome development and one that I hope will grow in intensity as the Senate floor debate approaches.
First off, it contains an unprecedented attack on issue advocacy by nonpartisan groups and organizations. It would basically prohibit unions, corporations and issue organizations from effectively informing the public about the conduct of public officials who are candidates for election by imposing a total blackout on broadcasting any information about an incumbent candidate during the 60 days before a general election and 30 days before a primary. Had this bill been the law during the 2000 elections, for example, it would have effectively silenced issue organizations across the entire political spectrum. The NAACP, for one, would have been effectively prohibited from running its powerful ads criticizing the hate-crimes record of then-Gov. George Bush. The NRA could not have run broadcast ads attacking the gun control positions of members of Congress.
Secondly, the McCain-Feingold legislation would also make it virtually impossible for political parties to engage in all forms of grassroots political activities, such as get-out-the-vote efforts, voter registration drives, voter education, candidate recruitment and development and issue development by totally depriving them of the funding which has sustained such activities.
Even individual citizens who want to join together to engage in such advocacy would be subjected to new and burdensome registration and reporting requirements under McCain-Feingold.
The same ACLU letter advises that public financing of elections is a better way to create campaign financing reform but the truth is that when government is in charge of who receives the money to run a political campaign, government tends to pick and choose unfairly—a topic which will be touched upon more toward the end of the article.
The McCain-Feingold Act was applied only to political messages exercised through telecommunications. What it is not applied to is the large sums of money the stems from Foundations, Trust Funds and billionaires directed to the street demonstrations and grassroots groups used to help implement DSA’s agenda of moving society to the left.
Rewriting the Constitution
A June 22 article appeared on DSA’s blog entitled Socialists and the U.S. Political System. It states:
If we are to be effective, we have to understand and grapple with the structural biases built into our system. These involve our famous system of checks and balances and separation of powers, plus states’ rights and electoral procedures that are biased in favor of a two-party system.
This article does not outright state that the constitution needs to be rewritten. But that is what it implies.
In 2013, DSA posted a story titled There is No Second Amendment Right to own a Gun:
There is no individual right to own a gun. The Second Amendment guaranteed the right to have state militias. The gun ownership clause was there to make the militia possible. There have been no state militias since 1903, and there is no longer a constitutional right to gun ownership. It doesn’t exist!
Proportional Representation
Then in 2014, DSA posted Want a Democratic United States? Abolish the Senate!
If 51 Senators representing the 26 least-populous states in the Union were to agree on a bill, they would be able to pass it against the will of the other 49 Senators representing 83% of the American population! Even with the filibuster in place, 60 Senators representing 24% of the country’s population could legislate against the will of the rest.
I, like DSA, do not agree with the way the Senate is currently set up. Unlike DSA, I believe the 17th Amendment should be revoked. The 17th Amendment, ratified in 1913, allows citizens to vote their Senators in through direct election. Before citizens were allowed to vote for their Senators directly, Senators were chosen by state governments. The senators acted as ambassadors of their state to Washington DC. The point was one chamber of congress was represented by the people, the other represented by the state governments. Set up this way, the senate was meant to ward off federal encroachment in the political affairs of the several states.
The same article from DSA states:
The House of Representatives is made up of districts that are proportioned roughly equally in terms of population. The method of districting used to determine these districts leaves much to be desired, and most on the democratic Left would favor a radical overhaul of the method of election in the House, swapping single-member districts for a proportional representation system that would allot seats to political parties according to their percentage of the national vote.
What is proportional representation? If 60% of the nation votes for Democrats, 60% of congressional seats are awarded to Democrats. This is not how our system is currently set up. Under our current system, in the House of Representatives, members are voted in by districts of people. This is good. The residents of one town can vote for a representative. The next town over votes for a completely different representative. The way this is set up, representatives are held accountable to the people. Of course, the makeup of the House of Representatives is not proportional to how the people vote collectively. In the 2012 elections, more people nationwide voted for Democratic candidates but a majority of those seated in the House were Republicans. This resulted in accusations of “gerrymandering” from the progressive left.
Say one town votes in a representative with a 55% or 60% majority of the vote? This is the case for most representatives in the House. What happens is that if a few hundred people threaten to vote for the other candidate based on their representative’s policies, the representative changes his policies. Another good thing about how our representation currently is is that the vote of one man in one town does not affect the type of candidate the next town over has to be represented by. In a proportional representation system, like DSA wants, this type of people power does not exist.
Under proportional representation, what if instead of getting 60% of the vote, the Democratic party gets only 40% of the vote? Who gets to choose who has to give up their seat in congress? Obviously, the party heads. Any congressman who dares to cross party lines for any reason, faces losing his job. Politics would be very corrupt.
Remember when I said I would give an example of when popular conservative website The Federalist expressed the same opinion as DSA? If TheFederalist.com posted their article after DSA posted theirs, someone might notice some of the writers at The Federalist have a leftist bias. So ten days before DSA’s blog posted an article calling for the abolition of the Senate, TheFederalist.com posted a pro-Article V article titled: A Swift Solution to Washington Gridlock: Abolish the Senate.
On the left, an article posted to notoriously conservative website TheFederalist.com. On the right, an article from Democratic Socialists of America posted ten days later with a similar title.
Left vs Right
Today’s political scale places republicans on the right, democrats on the left, nazis and fascist on the far right and communists on the far left. For the purpose of this article, that scale is inefficient. A more accurate scale puts a state of anarchy–no government, on the far right. A totalitarianship–total government, is on the far left, and moderates are in the middle. With this scale, nazis, fascists, socialists, communists and monarchies are all on the far-left.
DSA and Bernie Sanders advocate a lot of leftist provisions. If government funds higher education and universities, making it “free,” then obviously government will play a major role in what is taught and isn’t taught at these universities–a move to The Left. Under the types of “police reform” which DSA wants, local control of police accountable to city governments would be transferred to the federal government–a leap in the direction of tyranny. Last but not least, “a constitutionally guaranteed right to vote” means the federal government taking control of elections and subsequently federal government choosing who appears on the ballot for every city in America and whether paper or computerized voting is how it is done.
The New World Order
DSA is the American affiliate to the London based Socialist International. From the SI website: “The Socialist International is the worldwide organisation of social democratic, socialist and labour parties. It currently brings together 152 political parties and organisations from all continents.”
The Socialist international Declaration of Principals page calls for a New Democratic Order. Their words, not mine.
97 The international challenge is nothing less than the beginning of a new, democratic world society. We cannot allow blocs, nations and private corporations to shape the political structure of the planet as a mere by-product of their own self-interest.
98 Strengthening the United Nations is an important step in the creation of this new, democratic world society. Where there is a consensus among the major nations, significant peace-making and peace-keeping initiatives are possible. The UN specialised agencies, like the WHO, and UN organs like UNDP and UNICEF, have demonstrated that the governments and citizens of various nations can work effectively together in pursuit of common international goals.
Too bad their Declaration of Principals fails to mention that NATO, the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, International Security Assistance Force, World Trade Organization, and Interpol are among specialized agencies of the UN as well. This is why the banner of “give peace a chance” is a lie. Those who cry for the budget and size of the U.S. military to be reduced loudest also cry for an increase in size in the United Nations. Patrick Henry, if alive today, would refer to the bulk of “peace activists” as those who charge “peace, peace, when there is no peace.”
Let us look at Bernard Sanders’ voting record in congress. On October 31, 2003, Sanders voted against allocating $87.5 billion to military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is good. On July 18, 2001, he voted against cutting US aid to United Nations peacekeeping missions. This is bad. Coupled in with what is a good vote related to the military in 2003, this is extra bad. Trevor Loudon believes that the agenda of The Left is to build up the armies of other nations through the United Nations and foreign aid, and cut the size and spending of our own military. Eventually, the United States will be forced into a corner where she is unable to defend herself and must succumb to being part of a global United Nations super-state.
Most affiliates to the Socialist International are overt political parties. However, DSA is not a political party. It is a 501c3 fund with tax-exempt status. This is in America, where priests who speak up about politics run the risk of their church losing tax-exempt status. A socialist organization which practically runs the campaign of a presidential candidate; organizes protests blocking off major roads; calls for a removal of the checks and balances system; opposes the notion of sovereignty; and outright attacks the foundation of the Constitution of the United States of America, does not get taxed.
Government tends to pick and choose unfairly. An organization which calls for the creation of more government departments, more government power and more money to go to the government to fund these things, does not get taxed. A nonprofit corporation that is opposed to a buildup in government power, like Citizens United, is taxed as a corporation.
The Big Picture
So let us review what the article says so far. Black Lives Matter radicals attacked Sanders to prove they’re more radical than him, thus making him look like the moderate. Bernie Sanders owes much of his popularity to an organization called the Democratic Socialists of America. Democratic Socialists of America holds a lot of influence in politics and the media, much of it behind the scenes. They advocate the overhauling of the constitution. They are the American affiliate to the Socialist International, which wants a “new democratic world society.” In this “new democratic world society,” sovereign and independent nations cannot “shape the political structure of the planet” but by “strengthening the United Nations” we will get to this “new, democratic world society.” Not only does your government not think this is a bad thing, but your government allows DSA to be tax-exempt.
By now, you should be asking yourself: how does a bunch of radical leftists create a new world order? Yes, they have considerable influence in politics and the press. Yes, they can whip up a mighty big protest. But radical leftist protestors are not “The Establishment.” When most people think of “The Establishment,” they think of multinational corporations, martial law, the Federal Reserve and the military-industrial-complex. How can the DSA, a bunch of grassroots activists, be related to what most people think of when they hear the word “establishment”?
How is DSA related to the establishment? Through a political display that has been termed “Pressure from above, and below.” Activists go out into the street and cause demonstrations that inconvenience the public. They block off roads at rush hour in demonstrations where the intention is to get as many activists as possible thrown into jail. The media dramatizes the chaos. As a result of the media campaign, Americans of good conscious pressure their government to pass a law to bring order to the chaos. And the government uses this as the excuse needed to consolidate power.
With that strategy, America will go from republic to democracy–and from democracy to socialism.
DSA, a conspiratorial organization, is by no means the center of the conspiracy to create a global government nor the architects of it. It is merely an arm of the larger conspiracy. And this arm flexes some big muscles.
The Administration of George H W Bush produced the National Security Strategy of 1991. The very opening lines of it reads:
A new world order is not a fact; it is an aspiration — and an opportunity. We have within our grasp an extraordinary possibility that few generations have enjoyed—to build a new international system in accordance with our own values and ideals, as old patterns and certainties crumble around us. [italics added]
In 1931, a British Historian named Arnold J Toynbee said in a presentation before the Royal Institute of International Affairs:
I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands…
And then in 1998 the DSA organized a conference in Illinois with a peculiar name: Globalization From Below. When protests were staged in over 100 cities internationally on May 15, 2014 which called for an increase in the minimum wage to $15 in the US, simultaneous protests in other countries were calling for a “global minimum wage”–something which would need an international currency, and international bank to carry out. The protests were organized by International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations. In 1995, Kurt Stand was the North American Regional Director for this international organization as he was working on the DSA National Political Committee–that is, until he went to prison for espionage against the US government.
The Solution
Bernie Sanders is only one presidential candidate. Unfortunately, no presidential candidate at this time seems to be a “breath of fresh air” for those concerned with sovereignty. At least none of the candidates who stand a chance. The solution lies not in who sits in the oval office. The solution is the checks and balances system. By electing good members to congress, the people can halt the gradual growth of total government and world government. Also, by keeping some political issues within the realm of state and local governments, not the national government, the road to world government can be stopped.
What I am talking about is conservatism. By that I do not mean the deceptively named neoconservatism. Nor the conservatism of the Republican Party. I mean, Constitutionalism. Conservatism does not mean an anti-education, anti-healthcare, anti-welfare creed. It means being against the national government being in control of those things, for education, healthcare and welfare are best dealt with close to home. This only works with great individual effort, patience and willingness to help others learn to help themselves.
To learn more about Democratic Socialists of America, watch this video of Trevor Loudon. I recommend it.
The views expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Disinformation as a company.
The post Bernie Sanders, Democratic Socialism, and the New World Order appeared first on disinformation.