by Alexander G. Markovsky at American Thinker:
For those who are not familiar with the terminology:
Social democracy is a political ideology that has as its goal the establishment of socialism through implementation of a policy regime that includes, but is not limited to, high taxation, government regulation of private enterprises, and establishment of a universal welfare state.
Had Obama been succeeded by Hillary Clinton, America would have continued the smooth transition into socialism as planned. But as it often happens with the best-laid plans, life arranged some unexpected detours. What was near-universally seen as foreordained was preempted by the election of Donald Trump.
The collapse of high expectations did not shatter the socialists’ capacity to shape posterity. As the aspirations of the Bolshevik Revolution were being reincarnated in Vermont and exported to New York and California, the country inured to the world of unsustainable populist demands. The barrier separating utopia and reason is crumbling; growing embrace of free education, free health care, and a guaranteed minimum income by young people is an obvious indication of the rise of the socialist movement.
Yet, despite socialism’s increasing appeal, the Democrats are aware that “socialism” is still a dirty word in the political vocabulary and the population at large. Indeed, using the term socialism would be too forward leaning. So, they mask Marxist ideology by not mentioning the word “socialism” without the prefix “democratic.”
The “democratic” cannot conceal a commonality of the ideological vocabulary of the Democratic Party’s leadership with Marxism. Visceral hatred of capitalism and seductive promises of miraculous fulfilment of egalitarian dreams leave little doubt about the Party becoming a plagiarizing scum of Lenin’s faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) or Bolsheviks. Coincidentally they also had “democratic” in the party name.
Therefore, we shall not be confused by the ideological taxonomy. Democratic socialism promulgated by Bernie Sanders and his disciples is a socialist trojan horse disguised as an alternative to Marxism. Unlike the Bolshevik’s strategy of taking power via violent revolution, this one emulates the strategy of the Russian Mensheviks Julius Martov and Pavel Axelrod designed to enact socialism gradually and make it more palatable by installing the Hugo Chavezes of this world through the democratic process.
This slow-roll strategy designed to do to the United States incrementally what Russian Bolshevism did to Russia in 1917 abruptly. The Democratic Party’s socialism is nothing less than its Marxist inheritance implemented by other means. Notwithstanding its heavy Russian accent, Democratic socialism is bringing under one roof all the true believers and intellectuals disheartened and disillusioned by the ugliness of Stalinism, Maoism, and other socialist “isms” but still yearning for equality, fairness, and righteousness. It is also intended to ascertain ideological cohesion among pseudo-patriot advocates of strong governmental authority and left-wing lunatics, to whom capitalism is a common enemy.
Regardless of how the socialists come to power and what variants between political flavors of Christian democratic socialism, Soviet-style revolutionary socialism, social democratic socialism or any other kind of socialism are, they all trace their origins to Karl Marx’s “scientific socialism” and share the common mantra — “fair and equitable” distribution of wealth. Hence, the differences are superficial. The ultimate goal of socialism is economic equality.
If the uneducated graduates of American universities and supporters of socialism absorb human history, they may realize that the only historical datum that points to economic equality goes back to the era of primitive communism. There were no property and no wealth, resulting in total economic equality — in poverty. Ironically, this is the only way economic equality can be achieved; there is no equality in wealth. The critics of socialism who point out that socialism fails to create wealth are missing the point. Socialism is not about wealth creation, it is about wealth distribution. In this context, socialism works, it works as it supposed to. Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, etc. are not socialism’s failures; they are actually a fulfillment.
Nevertheless, we have to be mindful that every ism — communism, socialism, fascism, etc. — has its supporters and benefactors. Those who imagine themselves on the receiving end, have every reason to think they will be better off with socialism. But those, whose naiveté never melts away, must understand that socialism is the philosophy of poverty.
Thanks to the fatuity of the American public, there has not been any effective comprehension of the totality of the assault nor its enervating effect upon national vigilance. We may surmise that the socialist dragon has come of age and poses the existential threat to our way of life.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/from_russian_bolsheviks_to_american_socialists_.html
(Note from Glenn. I once learned to speak Russian quite fluently. My Master Degree in Soviet Studies was taught in Russian by upper class Russian emigres. As it turned out, I learned the czar’s elegant Russian in tone and pronunciation but I had no clue to this reality until my first visit to the USSR in 1966. I had received a National Defense Education Act grant to buoy up the flagging Soviet economy of the day according to the Russian needs, and to become more acquainted with Soviet style and culture of the day according to Uncle Sam’s needs.
The Union of the Soviet Socialist “Republic” was still a first rate Stalinist fascist state at that time. The unwanteds…almost all males were sent to labor and die in Siberia. Females usually behaved within their police state, obeying the Communist world of spydom and thought control and so, avoided the Siberian brutal cold and death.
I visited Leningrad, Moscow, Rostov, and Sochi…..traveling mostly by train.
My Tsarist teachers of Russian were proud of my Russian enunciation. I simply obeyed exactly pronouncing that which they told me to say. When in Sochi toward the end of my Soviet time, about an hour after arriving to our ‘cottage’ near the sands of the Black Sea, I raced out to the beach to explore and mix with the Soviet souls around me. It was not a comfortable seaside, but the locals didn’t seem to care.
I came across a Chevrolet-like vehicle positioned strangely on the coarse sand with unSoviet type license plates. About fifteen guys of all ages were examining the car as if it were from Mars. Some were standing on the bumpers as to test their mechanical virility. Others were pounding on the fenders by hand or foot apparently for the same test. But the chatter centered on what country the sedan had come from! It’s German….no, French. Sweden came in third….there’d be debate about something mechanical (using words I didn’t learn) ….until Britain entered the scene.
I joined the chorus. Why do you think this might be a British automobile? A twentyish he gave several answers and followed curiously asking what country I thought it came from.
I did know make of cars fairly well back then. It was an American make, but made in Britain for Brits not Yanks….and so, told him so. My answer apparently was received as if by state authority, but I hadn’t meant it that way. A pause followed….and then more pause….He walked to the other side of the Chevrolet make, talked to some guys on that side, and then returned slightly authoritatively asked why I thought it was a British automobile.
I answered, “I’m an American. This car is an automobile made in Britain very similar to the one we make in Detroit, in America.”
All of the guys had been listening. They were stunned. I was quite experienced with this approach. I had used a similar approach at a beach riverside in Kiev on two occasions when young couples were playing card games on the sand.
I’d ask a question. They would balk at my rudeness. I’d continue with a question…about weather, what game was being played, were they from Kiev, as introductions.
They get more peeved the more I asked. It was considered rude, but it never turned out that way. I’d eventually apologize and then follow up with “I am a foreigner here…I didn’t mean to bother”. Then I’d turn from the stun of their silence slowly taking a small step or two away and I’d hear…..”Excuse me…Where are you from?”
I knew I had ’em. “Ya inostranyetz …..eez Amyeriki” I’d reply on these occasions. At the first Kiev beach scene, well over one hundred Soviet beach folks gathered in no time for once the two Russian couples stood up to persuade me to stay and talk we remained standing.
Standing in crowds talking in groups whether on beach or city in summer 1966 Soviet Union was NOT condoned by the police whether the secret kind or not. Yet this time it took the local Soviets more than an hour to send in their uniformed police, guns and all, eight in number, sweating as if they had been swimming.
They were also unhappy. I had been answering question after question from the swelling group. I loved that question so often asked in the good part of the then USSR….”Where did you learn such beautiful Russian?” I couldn’t tell them from offspring of tough Tsarist class Whites who had escaped Manchuria in the 1950s.
“He’s from America. Don’t embarrass us!” one male shouted loudly at a cop nearest to me. The group of one hundred and more quickly dispersed. I had been away from my blanket and very expensive Swiss camera and 1,000 rubles in a small leather bag left lying on it so lonely. Nothing had been stolen!
A similar scene occurred at the Sochi beach where that made-in-Britain car sat studied by Soviets I mentioned earlier. The armed police arrived in about an hour and rather rudely dispersed all very authoritatively and so quite quickly.
Yet, two couples in their thirties approached me to go with them to a nearby beach bar setting…a rather winsome place, as it turned out. None of the four were Russian. I believe they were Georgian and had a bit of an accent, but not of Stalinist blood.
Our chatter was like I was with folks from home. And then suddenly talk stopped. One of the gals asked me to talk…..keep on talking…talk about anything……”I’ve never heard Russian spoken so beautifully!”
“My teachers wee Russian”, was my answer. “They were very demanding that I should speak as they spoke!”
Speaking tsarist Russian had disappeared decades ago in the USSR….mostly by Soviet slaughter.
(I’ll edit this another day. ghr)
MN Prager Discussion Group 
You must be logged in to post a comment.