The New Marxist-Leninist Democratic Party

 

For all practical purposes, there is no longer a Democratic Party,
at least as we’ve known it for 50 to 100 years. What we’re witnessing
in Washington as the opposition under Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries
is something that we haven’t really seen before. It is a full-blown
Socialist Revolutionary Party

.

The players of that party that are running things are not even Chuck
Schumer or Hakeem Jeffries. They’re people like [outgoing] Congresswoman
Jasmine Crockett.
They’re people like Mr. [James] Talarico in Texas, Mr. [Zohran]
Mamdani. Elizabeth Warren. The socialist Bernie Sanders, etc., etc.

They’re radical leftists. And they believe in a mandated equality of
result, perpetuated or completed by radically high taxes from people who
have been successful and to transfer that money to people who have been
unsuccessful. Not because of any fault of their own or any gift or
success of the wealthy, but because of oppression.

And they’ve created a Marxist Leninist binary in the world. There’s 70%, the
so-called white population, because they’ve confused and conflated race
with class. That is the oppressor class. And the 30% that is the
oppressed class.

And the victimized class feels that they have legitimate grievances
against the other 70% for not having what they do. And therefore, the
Democratic Party steps in and says that we will mandate an equality of
result. That is the agenda. And you can see it on all fronts.

If people are poor, they want to come to the United States, then open
the border. They should have a right to do that. And when they come to
the United States, they can become better off than they were in Mexico
or El Salvador or the Caribbean because they’re going to get
entitlements. And those entitlements will be costly and expensive,
fraud-ridden, as we’ve seen in California and Minnesota.

 

Statue of Lenin
The Statue of Lenin in Seattle, Washington in 2012

 

And that will require people to pay their, quote, fair share and
higher taxes. Which is a good in itself. Not just because the money is
transferred to the people who don’t have it through entitlements, but
more importantly, you’re emasculating people who “didn’t earn that.”
“You didn’t build that,” as Elizabeth Warren said.

So that’s what the party is. You can see it on the border. You can
see it with crime. They believe that crime is committed not by
individuals who break existing laws, but by society, which created the
conditions for crime.

And so, therefore, we see no-cash bail, or we see somebody who
commits a heinous crime, and they’re let out. They’re either not jailed.
They’re not indicted. They’re not convicted, and they’re not
incarcerated, because of, I guess we would call it, critical legal
theory.

Behind all of it, though, is diversity, equity, and inclusion. And
this is what they’ve had a problem with because when the American public
sees this, and they said, you’ve created a victim class that you
represent, and then you’ve demonized the other 70% that ar so-called
white, and people are saying, well, you’re on the wrong side of
percentages.

Unless you can convince, as happened with Barack Obama’s candidacy,
to get more white people to vote for him than maybe voted for Romney or
John McCain. Or maybe more white people voted for Obama than they did
for John Kerry, four years earlier. But the point is that it has nothing
to do with class.

So, one of the problems that democratic socialists, or whatever these
people call themselves, have is Mamdani’s a multimillionaire. His
parents are multimillionaires. When he says he wants to go after white
neighborhoods for equity, the wealthiest minority in the United States,
today, ethnic minority, is Mamdani. It’s Indian Americans. Americans of
Indian heritage.

And the next six or seven or eight ethnic groups are not white. And
there is no direct relationship anymore between your skin color and your
class status or your income. And so, if that’s not true, when you go
after these people, then you are basically an out-and-out racist because
they haven’t done anything to you. And the greatest number of people
who are poor in the United States remain white.

Let’s just ask ourselves what happened to the Democratic Party. If we
were to look at the ’92 and ’96 agendas at the Democratic Convention,
and those were written by Doug Schoen and Mark Penn. It’s pretty much a
Republican agenda now.

It was closed borders. Legal-only immigration. Strong support for
unions. Trying juveniles who commit violent crimes as adults. Strong
national defense. Balanced budget, achieved for four years under Bill
Clinton, and with the help of Newt Gingrich. That’s all out the window.
Anybody in the Democratic Party who espouses those views today would be
considered a heretic or worse.

So between the Clinton phenomenon of ’92 to 2000, what happened? It’d
be easy to say Barack Obama happened. That he ginned up latent racial
tensions and grievances and used them for political purposes to get
himself elected and reelected. That’s true

But there were larger cosmic forces that created a Barack Obama.
And the first, of course, was open borders. We have now 53 million
people. It’s the largest in the history of the United States. In
numbers, 16.2% of the United States resident population was not born in
the United States.

Some of them are naturalized citizens, but as we’ve seen this last
two weeks, whether it was the Old Dominion shooting or the attack on the
synagogue or the IEDs that were thrown out in front of the New York
governor’s mansion or the shooting in Austin, we have a problem with
naturalized citizens

They do not assimilate, acculturate or integrate in the way that they
used to under the melting pot. And they formed constituencies for the
Democratic Party. And they are told that you came here—and it doesn’t
really matter under what auspices—if you’re part of the 53 million, and
there’s probably 30 million, with the Biden additions that came
illegally, you still had a right.

We don’t believe in borders, and therefore, you come here. We will
provide the entitlements. And we will water down voting laws. No voter
ID, even though 70% of the American people want them. And you will be
either a present or a future constituency.

So that was a big change. Demography is destiny, they told us. The
new Democrat majority, they told us and that came true. That was a big
factor in their rise.

The second thing was globalization.
Globalization created two societies in the United States. The East
Coast, from Massachusetts down to the Carolinas, looked out at the EU,
and the West Coast, from Seattle to San Diego, looked out at Asia, the
Tigers, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and, of course, mainland China.

And people who had particular skills that were globalized, and here
they were in tech, insurance, investment, law, media, academia. They
found that their audience, their constituency, was expanded from 300
million, let’s say, 10 years ago, maybe 340 million now, to seven
billion. But for those who mined or farmed or assembled or manufactured,
they were outsourced offshore, or they couldn’t keep up with cheap
imports

This is what got Donald Trump elected, but it also explains the new
Democratic Party. They used to rail about the importance of the middle class.
They dropped that. That was the meme of Donald Trump. They found that
by supporting the 30% DEI agenda and the globalized elite, they had a
new constituency. And that was vast amounts of money. All of Silicon
Valley and its $9 trillion in market capitalization, until recently, was
put at the service of the Democratic Party.

So this party radicalized in two fashions. You brought in a lot of
poor people, and you re-energized people of color to say that your
problems were not your own, but they were committed by the deplorables,
the irredeemables, the clingers, the chumps, the dregs, the garbage. And
then you had the money to outspend your Republican candidates in vast
numbers.

And more importantly, with the rise of left-wing big tech and the
left-wing corporate boardroom and the left-wing academics, you could
control institutions. The medium is the message.

So ABC, NBC, NPR, social media, Facebook, the old Twitter, you name
it. There was a popular culture, professional sports. There was a
monopoly on left-wing knowledge, and that was very, very valuable.

And finally, the old idea of integration, intermarriage,
assimilation, the melting pot, that was not conducive to this new
Socialist Democratic Party. They said, why would we bring in people who
wanted to be American and wanted to identify essentially as American and
only incidentally, in their former country?

We saw what happened, the Democrats said, in 1956 when we let in the
Hungarians, anti-communist, they came over here. They assimilated as
Americans. They became very, very conservative voters. We saw what
happened in 1959 to 1980 when we let in all of these Cubans, who had
been driven out by communism. They were very patriotic Americans. They
assimilated, and they were a constituency that we didn’t like.

So, what we want to do is refabricate the immigration. Let in a lot
of people, but not from particular countries that would mean they were
successful, they had skills. We don’t want anybody from Europe. We don’t
want anybody from Australia or the former British Commonwealth, such as
New Zealand. We don’t want anybody coming in here who is anti-communist
as a refugee.

We want people who are poor and are accustomed to socialist countries
and will come here and want more socialist benefits. That’s South
America, Latin America, Africa, large parts of Asia. And they will be
the constituency that allows us to have an unpopular message that
existing Americans have never liked and do not like at all.

And the result was the Democrats can’t win elections with open,
transparent balloting, one-day balloting, and they know it. But if you
take over the institutions and you use this globalized financial power
and you appeal to very, very wealthy people’s sense of noblesse oblige
or guilt or whatever strategy you use, and you combine that with a mass
of very poor people who came in very recently, many under illegal
circumstances, you have a constituency that required one thing.

You had to give up the white middle working class. The union class
that you used to champion. The Hubert Humphrey, John F. Kennedy, Harry
Truman class. You despise those people. And we know that because you
didn’t just give up on them and accept a globalized agenda and an
expanded welfare state, but you created a vocabulary of disparagement.

As I said earlier, these were the clingers. These were the people who
had no teeth in their head. These were the people who Peter Strzok,
Lisa Page texted about smelling up Walmart. All this disparagement for a
class of people you despised, and I don’t think you’re going to win
them back.

But just to finish, there is no Democratic Party. There’s a Socialist
Party. But it’s a very weird Socialist Party. It’s a pyramiddle party
with a lot of very wealthy, globalized elites that run things at the
top. Nothing in the middle of the pyramid. And then an expansive big
base of poor people, of immigrants, and of people who claim that they
identify mostly in their diversity, equity, inclusion person, and not
necessarily as a full-fledged American.