Understanding the Roots of the Democratic Democrat
U.S. History Education Series, written by Net Advisor™
EXCERPT. Modern U.S. political systems have gone through some major changes over the decades influencing both the political left and right. However, we have seen greater attacks on America, its values and laws with the rise of the Progressive movement.
Here we examine the old and new Democrat Party, their values, attitudes and beliefs. The movement has many stark similarities in history to political views of Communism, Socialism, and Marxism-Leninism. Over 130 references linked in this report.
 Old vs. New
The “Old” Democrat Party was more about labor issues such as working conditions, and general social welfare such as retirement. Many of these Democrats were still interested in American ideas, liberty, patriotism, and supported the U.S. Constitution. Yet, the party had its own radical faction.
At some point something happened. Call it the Obama Presidency. The Rise of the Progressives (Modern Liberalism) have taken over the old Democrat Party. Most of this new group does not share American values but rather their own idea what values should or should not be. Progressives don’t seem to even hold the American flag in high standard.
- UCI students vote to Ban the American flag (2015)
- PA Mayor apologizes for replacing official POW-MIA flag with the Syrian flag (2015)
The new deviants include Revolutionists, Anarchists, organized street gangs under the banner of “justice.” Their flag burning seems no different than other Anti-Americans who celebrated burning U.S. flag on 9/11.
The new Democrat’s idea of liberty is fighting for their causes, and everyone else is wrong and should be shamed or attacked into submission. ‘Patriotism’ – in their view, is a bad word, and some attempt to re-frame the meaning and call it repression, slavery, and or racism.
The new Democrat Party picks and chooses what they like in the Constitution, and many have this idea that this founding document needs to be updated (HTML/PDF). They generally support the First Amendment (Free Speech), so long as it is THEIR speech. Anyone who is not in support of their speech (Groupthink), or if anyone offers contrast-speech, should be stricken, banned, or otherwise shunned.
The new Democrat Party does not support First Amendment’s right to religious views. They believe they are the party of tolerance, but don’t tolerate anyone’s views, ideas or religion unless it is not Christian or Catholic.
- Democrats Debate God (2012)
- U.S. blocks Christian Governor from Nigeria peace talks (2014)
- U.S. State Dept bars Christians from testifying about persecution (2015)
- Obama Maligns Christians At Easter Prayer Breakfast (2015)
- Bible passages cut from ‘A Charlie Brown Christmas’ at Eastern Kentucky school (2015)
- Obama to Christians – Get Off Your High Horse (2015)
As a group, the new Democrat Party tends to be against the Second Amendment (Right to Bear Arms). They believe only the government, perhaps police should have weapons of self-defense (like the Tyrant King George III and others did throughout history). The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in upholding the Second Amendment (Case Laws, Report, Point ).
The new Democrat Party believe as the Nazi’s did, that their efforts are really for the “greater good” of society.
They generally believe that capitalism (money) is the root of our social problems, but expect college and all social services to be provided at a very low cost or for free. Their idea to pay for this is to seize (or tax) those who have more means than they do and just hand it over – much like how a robbery takes place.
They, (Biden, Clinton, Kerry, Obama, Sanders) are under the belief that “Climate Change” is the greatest threat to society, not the tens of thousands of growing Islamic terrorists world-wide. Yet, many of the new younger Democrats themselves seem to advocate violence including against police as their means for political change.
Other Progressives have gone so far off the deep-end, that schizophrenia seems to be the norm? In 2015, a ‘peanut butter and jelly sandwich’ was deemed “racist?” The Progressives even seek to micromanage the sale of toys, and how retailers should operate.
In total, this party has moved so far left that it has striking resemblance to the roots of Communism (Socialism, Marxism) whereby some don’t hide their true intent seeking a central power to make all decisions, and those who do not agree are attacked.
- Dem Congressman: ‘We’ve Proved That Communism Works’ (2014)
- FBI Files Show Valerie Jarrett’s Hardcore Communist Family (2015)
 Liberal Gene?
Researchers from University of California, San Diego, and Harvard University suggest liberal ideology may be influenced not only by social factors, but by genetics too.
“Liberals may owe their political outlook partly to their genetic make-up, according to new research. Ideology is affected not just by social factors, but also by a dopamine receptor gene called DRD4. The study’s authors say this is the first research to identify a specific gene that predisposes people to certain political views.”
 Has the Political Right Moved Left?
On the other side of the political spectrum, there are other elitists who have sacrificed their political party’s traditional and Constitutional values. They have moved to join the Left when it comes to voting for the sole purpose of keeping their political power. Anyone who threatens the power of the elitists are attacked, even if there are in the same political party.
In other words, the elitists believe that their political power is more important than doing what’s best for the People of America. We have two reports (here and here) discussing the failure of the political right. Today, we further examine the movement of the modern Democrat Party and its attempt to impact policy.
 Democrat vs. Democratic
Let’s review the terms Democrat and Democratic. First the term, Democrat, refers to the Democrat political party, including its political ideology. Democratic on the other hand is an adjective that describes something. For some reason, there is this growing new deception that Democrats are now “Democratic” and have falsely attempted to make people believe that its roots were linked to Thomas Jefferson‘s 1790s Democratic-Republican Party.
— Wikipedia (under History 1828-60)
The Democrat Party’s views on the U.S. Constitution is anything but “strict adherence” (10 examples):
- Top 10 violations of the Constitution by Obama and the 111th Congress (2010)
- President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations (2011)
- Journalists Win Lawsuit v Obama Admin, Would “Chill Free Speech” (2012)
- President Obama’s Top 10 Constitutional Violations (2013)
- Obama threatens to veto bill that would require administration to enforce laws (2014)
- Democrats Threaten Internet Free Speech (2014)
- Harry Reid – Vote to Amend U.S. Constitution to Limit Political Speech (2014)
- State Department Ejects Free Beacon Reporter from Briefing (2015)
- President Obama’s Top Ten Constitutional Violations (2015)
- Obama pushes gun control law that could take right to bear arms from 4.2 million Social Security recipients (2015)
Does this sound like a political party who believes, practices and follows the “strict adherence” of the U.S. Constitution?
By their own actions, we have attempts to limit or ban free speech, limit or control the Constitution for certain groups (discrimination), with flagrant and repeated violations of Constitutional law. So what really is the true nature of this new Democrat(ic) party?
 The TRUE Nature of the New Democrat(ic) Party
The Democrat party is all about centralized government, centralized control, centralized power, much like Marxism–Leninism. Marxism was developed by Joseph Stalin. In 1901 Stalin joined the Social Democratic Labour Party. Note the key words, Social and Democratic.
By 1922, Stalin became the General Secretary under Russian Dictator, Vladimir Illich Ulyanov (later known as Lenin). Joseph Stalin placed Lenin in so high regard, Stalin published the Foundations of Leninism. In part, the ideology is rooted in central government control, attacks capitalism, and uses the poor and uneducated (referred to as the peasantry) to pin against those who were large landholders (capitalists).
“…First, with the ‘whole’ of the peasantry against the monarchy, against the landlords, against the medieval regime (and to that extent the revolution remains bourgeois, bourgeois-democratic.) Then, with the poor peasants, with the semi-proletarians, with all the exploited, against capitalism, including the rural rich, the kulaks, the profiteers, and to that extent the revolution becomes a socialist one. To attempt to raise an artificial Chinese Wall between the first and second, to separate them by anything else than the degree of preparedness of the proletariat and the degree of its unity with the poor peasants, means monstrously to distort Marxism, to vulgarise it, to replace it by liberalism” (see Vol. XXIII, p. 391).”
— Lenin’s pamphlet The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky (1918). (Bold emphases added to note similarities of communism to ‘Democratic’ ideology). Source: Marxism.org, Foundations of Leninism, Chapter 3.
So we have the communists trying create class-warfare (“artificial Chinese Wall”) in effort to separate class against each other, move against capitalism by way of revolution, and such revolution becomes a socialist one, called liberalism. As we will see here the striking similarity and fundamentalism ideology of communism and today’s Democratic strategy.
“…through a governmental crisis…draws even the most backward masses into politics…weakens the government and makes it possible for the revolutionaries to overthrow it rapidly” (see Vol. XXV, p, 222).
— “Left-Wing” Communism from — Lenin’s pamphlet The Proletarian Revolution and the Renegade Kautsky (1918). Source: Marxism.org, Foundations of Leninism, Chapter 3.
After the death of Lenin, Stalin became head of the Communist Party and was responsible for the deaths of some 20 million people. We also saw this kind of socialist mindset in Italy in 1912 under Benito Mussolini.
As the 27th Prime Minister of Italy, “Mussolini was the leading member of the National Directorate of the Italian Socialist Party.” Notice the term again Socialist – the ideology of the modern Democrat(ic) party. Mussolini was originally a journalist in the media, and led the National Fascist Party.
 How a Constitutional Government Moved to a Dictatorship
Mussolini started out ruling Italy under the idea of a constitutional government. In 1925, Mussolini completely ignored all ideas of a constitutional democracy, created a police state as his path to a national dictatorship. He and his Fascist followers created laws unilaterally (executive orders) to fundamentally transform Italy into a “one-party dictatorship.”
Today, as discussed earlier (above: Constitutional violations), we have President Obama repeatedly violating the U.S. Constitution, bypassing Congress’s legal authority using Executive Orders as his means for unilateral (totalitarian) law (rule).
President Obama has repeatedly said (2008) that he intended to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America.
Few people ever questioned this motive, let alone had any clue what Obama really meant. Now we have some seven years of evidence of what Obama meant by this speech.
Results: “Fundamentally transform” the United States of America.
In brief: Failure to lead, decline U.S. military power, embarrassing our military, record dependence on welfare, record number of people out of the labor force, higher healthcare cost spending, record deficits, handing over US industry to foreign control, granting money, weapons, more weapons and power to a terrorist state (Iran); failure to secure the homeland, more crime, failure to secure our embassies, and multiple attacks on the Second Amendment to name a few. The majority of Americans have noticed this and agree.
There are only a few things missing or are there? In similarity, Mussolini took over industries such as public works (similar? NDAA), including corporations (Obama nationalizes student lending) and the media (below).
- Obama’s Press List – Pre Screen Questions (2009)
- WH Hires Negative Story Squasher (2011)
- NY Times admits mainstream media stories scripted by the White House (2012)
- White House holds Obamacare background briefing with liberal reporters (2013)
- Rick Stengel is at least the 24th journalist to work for the Obama Administration (2013)
- Kennedy’s power lives on through former staff members (2014)
- Study of 130,213 stories shows Obama bias in 2012 election (2015)
Mussolini outlawed all other political parties including electoral law. That might be a hard one to do publicly in the USA, however today’s establishment Republicans and Democrats now generally vote the same.
Political Progressives (which some argue is really regressive by its result), is similar to the Workers World Party the latter, founded by Sam Marcy, where both part of Communist ideology. Democrat Vice President Henry Wallace (Iowa) was the nominee of the Progressive Party in 1948.
Today’s political Progressives are no different than communist dictatorships so long as they fulfill the socialist ideology.
“It would be wonderful if we are able to give this man (Obama) all the power he needs to accomplish the things he needs to…”
Today’s Democrat/ Democratic Party seems no different than the goals of Communists, Socialists, Marxists-Leninist, or of Fascist Mussolini. The actions over this type of leadership over the last 7 years have led to across-the-board decline in U.S. society.
We can continue to look back at history where other “leaders” such Julius Caesar, King George III, Adolph Hitler, Mao Zedong also acted as if they were for the people, but in reality, ruled under unilateral tyranny. We will discuss more on this in our next report: Understanding the Differences Between a Democracy and a Republic.
About the Democracy Cartoon:
Political cartoonists and others have described variations of Gary Strand’s 1990 post on Usenet: “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.” The modern version of this cartoon added an armed sheep, suggesting holding up Second Amendment rights to defend from “Tyranny of the Masses.” In 1787 the Federalist Papers (10) discussed the risk of “the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” (Image Credit: Original owner not known. Please advise if known.)
Original images/ graphics/ video by may be copyright by their respective owner.
Original article content, Copyright © 2016 NetAdvisor.org® All Rights Reserved.
NetAdvisor.org® is a non-profit organization providing public education and analysis primarily on the U.S. financial markets, personal finance and analysis with a transparent look into U.S. public policy. We also perform and report on financial investigations to help protect the public interest. Read More.