Alexander's Column

The 'NeoComs'

The New Democrat Party

By Mark Alexander · Dec. 13, 2012
“We must make our election between economy and Liberty, or profusion and servitude.” –Thomas Jefferson (1816)

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of miseries. … Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy.” –Winston Churchill

There is a new and unfortunate entry for the political lexicon, a fitting label for the latest ideological iteration of Marxists in America: “Neo-Communists” or the abbreviated version, “NeoComs.”

You’re no doubt familiar with the label “Neo-Conservatives,” and its shortened version, “NeoCons,” to describe conservatives who have adapted to more interventionist foreign policies promoting democracy, and who support open trade policies. “Neo” differentiates these conservatives from the isolationist and non-interventionist conservatism of the 1930s – until the attack on Pearl Harbor drew us into war with Japan and Germany.

At the other end of the political spectrum from the Ronald Reagan NeoCons are the NeoComs – modern-day socialists, “useful idiots” – who have risen, in the last two decades, to dominate the once-noble Democrat Party. They have modified old Marxist doctrines and adapted them to current political platforms and policies using leftist propaganda more compatible with contemporary culture. Chief among these is the Democrat Party’s tried and true “divide and conquer” disparity rhetoric, which foments discontent and division based on income, race, ethnicity, gender, education, occupation, etc.

However, bull pucky by any other name is still bull pucky. Democrat Socialism, like Nationalist Socialism, is nothing more than Marxist Socialism repackaged.

The objective of today’s NeoComs is, as you by now know, “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” in order to “peacefully transition” from our constitutional republic and its free-enterprise economy to a socialist republic with a state-organized and regulated economy.

Ideological adherents of the American Communist Party made few political gains under that banner in the last century because the label “communist” was and remains “distasteful” to most Americans. Thus, NeoComs have infested the Democrat Party and are using it as cover for socialist policy implementation.

The political genes of the current cadres of NeoComs establish them as the direct descendants of the statist policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the programs he implemented under cover of the Great Depression.

Roosevelt, like most of today’s wealthy liberal protagonists, was an “inheritance-welfare liberal” – raised in a dysfunctional home and dependent on his financial inheritance rather than that essential spirit of self-reliance, which forms the core of American Liberty. Consequently, the “dependence ethos” irrevocably shaped by FDR’s privileged upbringing is virtually indistinguishable from the dependence ethos of those who have been raised or inculcated with belief that they are reliant upon welfare handouts from the state.

Though markedly dissimilar in terms of their political power, the underlying difference between inheritance liberals and welfare liberals is, the former depend on investment and trust distributions while the latter depend on government redistributions. But they both support socialist political and economic agendas based on Marxist collectivism.

Endeavoring to transform our Republic into a socialist state, FDR set about to replace our authentic Constitution with the so-called “living constitution” by way of judicial diktat, thereby subordinating the Rule of Law to the will of his administration. Anticipating Supreme Court rulings against many of his patently unconstitutional policies, which he later arrogantly outlined in his “New Bill of Rights,” FDR attempted to expand the number of justices on the High Court, thereby allowing him to flood the bench with his nominees in order to win majority rulings.

Despite his failed attempt to pack the High Court, over the course of FDR’s three full terms, he infested American politics with socialist programs and policies, and brought the nation perilously close to being ruled by an avowed Marxist, his vice president, Henry Wallace.

Prior to 2008, the closest the U.S. had gotten to an openly socialist president was after FDR’s then-vice president, John Garner, broke with Roosevelt over FDR’s effort to pack the court. In 1940, Roosevelt tapped his secretary of agriculture, Henry Wallace, to replace Garner as his new running mate. Wallace’s allegiance to Marxist doctrine was well established. However, near the end of World War II, Roosevelt feared that he could not get re-elected to a fourth term with an open Communist on the ticket, so he tapped the more moderate Harry Truman and demoted Wallace to Secretary of Commerce – where he could further his Marxist agenda.

FDR, of course, died in office just a month into his fourth term. But had he retained Wallace instead of opting for Truman, America would have had its first communist president by succession.

Shortly after becoming president, Truman fired Wallace because of his affinity for the USSR. Wallace would later unsuccessfully challenge Truman in 1948 under the thinly veiled socialist Progressive Party front, with the endorsement of the American Communist Party.

The end of World War II largely capped FDR’s “New Deal” socialist expansion of the state until Lyndon Johnson’s progressive “Great Society” platform heralded a plethora of new statist programs and policies. Ironically, another war, Vietnam, capped Johnson’s socialist expansionism, but not the enormous price tag of the welfare and entitlement programs established by FDR and Johnson.

It was not until the sharp economic downturn of the Great Recession in September 2008 that the next socialist surge of statist intervention would be implemented. That severe recession, the result of Democrat-sponsored statist intervention policies which led to the collapse of real estate values, and cascaded into the near collapse of the U.S. banking system, also led to the election of Barack Hussein Obama, much as the Great Depression had led to the election of FDR.

In fact, Obama’s progressive re-election mantra, “Forward,” was inspired either by the concluding words of FDR’s “Bill of Rights”: “[W]e must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights….”, or by Mao Zedong’s collectivist “Great Leap Forward.” Either case would constitute a political distinction without a difference. And a prophetic footnote: FDR also wrote in his Bill of Rights, “People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.”

Like Roosevelt, Obama was raised in a dysfunctional family, but unlike FDR, Obama inherited a socialist political legacy rather than wealth. However, neither Roosevelt nor Obama “let a serious crisis go to waste.”

Obama, the NeoCom-in-Chief and our first openly socialist president, was elected and re-elected on his progressive “fair share” rhetoric, which he often frames as “spreading the wealth around.” That, of course, is merely a new riff on an old FDR proclamation: “Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.” However, that “American principle” is merely a paraphrase of Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto, in which he declared, “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”

Obama’s political storm troopers are led by the largest subgroup of congressional Democrats, the 76 declared members of his Congressional Progressive Caucus, who have made “progressive taxation” the top priority of their “redistributive justice” agenda.

Rep. Paul Ryan properly summed up Obama’s progressive agenda as “a dull journey from one entitlement to the next, a government-planned life, a country where everything is free but us.”

Obama and his American Communist Party-endorsed NeoComs are crafting their progressive economic policies using the subtle Cloward-Piven model, a socialist strategy that outlines how to overload the national entitlement delivery system, what we call the ObamaNation Plantation, in order to generate a severe economic crisis and ultimately break the back of free enterprise. Obama is using so-called “stimulus and bailout” plans (including his most recent “Fiscal Bluff”), ObamaCare, cap-n-trade, international climate change treaties, and the like, to take our country to the edge of that precipice.

Sometimes, however, the NeoCom agenda is not so subtle, as was the case this week when Jeffrey Immelt, an ardent Obama supporter who also chairs Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, said of Red China’s economy, “The one thing that actually works, state-run communism, may not be your cup of tea, but their government works.”

NeoComs outside the U.S. are even less subtle.

In a recent newspaper column in “Pravda,” the old Soviet propaganda rag (“The Truth”) now published by post-Soviet era conscripts of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, a popular writer, Xavier Lerma, had this observation on our most recent presidential election: “The Communists have won in America with Obama. … Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society.”

Lerma criticized his fellow Russians for electing Vladimir Putin who, Lerma laments, “sounded like Ronald Reagan” in a recent speech Putin gave on the Russian economy.

Putin said: “We are reducing taxes on production. We are optimizing state expenses. We must avoid excessive interference into the economic life of the country and the absolute faith into the all-mightiness of the state. Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit and accumulation of the national debt are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game. During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself. We must seek support in the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilization. Honesty and hard work, responsibility and faith in our strength are bound to bring us success.”

Lerma concluded, “Who could ever [have] imagined anyone so willing to destroy [capitalism] like Obama, much less seeing millions vote for someone like Obama. They read history in America don’t they? Alas, the schools in the U.S. were conquered by the Communists long ago and history was revised thus paving the way for their Communist president.”

Indeed, who could have imagined?

Our great nation has retreated a long way from the American Revolution, rooted in a three-pence tax on a pound of tea, to the populist Sixteenth Amendment and its 1913 provision “to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived,” to the current debt crisis. The consequence of unmitigated taxing and spending is the rise of the Socialist Democratic Party fueled by the redistribution of wealth, and Barack Hussein Obama’s NeoCom regime, which poses the greatest threat to Liberty since our Founding.

View all comments

127 Comments

Dioneikes in Colorado said:

"The Communists have won in America with Obama. ... Obama has been re-elected for a 2nd term by an illiterate society." - Xavier Lerma

So true, especially the second part of that statement about "illiterate society". It is a very sad statement about the state of Americans today. So many don't give a damn about their freedoms anymore, they are content with the government handouts and being told what to say, and what to believe, and what to accept as normal.

Do you believe its time for a change?

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:26 PM

PK in SC said:

Today's Republicans are not conservative. They try to talk the talk but look at their record: They ran up the debt by $4T+ under Bush - two tax cuts while fighting two wars, drug program without paying a dime toward the cost all this on our children's and grand children's credit. We stick our nose in other countries business like the busybody next door. If you don't like the policies of country x and they're exporting terrorism, we have systems to deal with that if you have the spine to employ them; otherwise, stay on the porch.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:33 PM

RedLeg in M'boro replied:

I agree with you on repbus not being conservative. That wee willie was spineless in not taking out OBL. I disagree with you on 2-wars. It is one war: Global War on Terrorism (GWOT). If you follow WW2, you will see there was fighting in North Africa, Italy, Southern France, Europe, China-Burma, India, South Pacific, Southwest Pacific, Central Pacific and a few others. All these were either campaigns or Theaters of Operations. GWOT is at least 2 campaign areas Iraq and Afghanistan. I have a GWOT Medal, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal and an Afghanistan Campaign Medal. I do not use the small minded liberal inflationary words, by calling it 2-wars. It is not. Most American do not even have an idea of what a war is. I love it when the news talks about a 3 hour "Battle" that is really nothing more than a fire fight or skirmish. Unfortunately or fortunately no country in their right mind saves up to go to war. Money is always borrowed for the excution of war.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:57 PM

Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA replied:

Finally someone with a brain that is used for critical thought. I agree one war!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 2:48 PM

MNIce in Minnesota replied:

You say that G. W. Bush was "spineless" on taking out OBL. According to an account by a CIA agent who was working with special forces and Afghan units in the mid-2000's, we had OBL trapped several times, but each time, a few bribes to selected Afghan units cause the traps to collapse. It wasn't for lack of will or effort on our part; we were working with unreliable allies.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 6:53 PM

RedLeg in M'boro replied:

MNice: I can tell by your post you have not been to Aghanistan. The culture there has a code called Pashtun Walli. As long as a traveler has not commited any "sin" against the village, then he is afforded, protection, shelter, food and water when requested. If a "sin" is committed then there is bedal (sp?). So yes, because of the Afghan culture OBL could exploit Pashtun Walli to get away or bribe his way. This culutre has nothing to do with GWB. GWB gave the leadership to go after OBL. BHO made a "decision" already made by GWB so BHO does not get a "gold star" for something GWB started the correct direction. WJC was spineless to kill OBL. If you do not know the story behind the ALAM strikes during WJC administration, then research it. The Aghan are corrupt, I know from first hand. It is what you deal with in a 3rd world country. If you see any 3rd world country from the POV of American, then you are not seeing it correctly. I was in Afghanistan in the mid-2000's. So calling GWB spineless because of the Afghan culture is like blaming the pig for the cow not giving enough milk.

Friday, December 14, 2012 at 8:16 AM

Harry Riley in Crestview, FL said:

December 13, 2012

TO: United States Congressional Republicans

SUBJECT: “WHERE IS THE REPUBLICAN CLIFF ”RED CAN” LINE?

America viewed the “fiscal cliff” comments on Wednesday by Rep Boehner, Cantor, et al. Suffice to say, we saw little heart, less enthusiasm, in short more of the same dialogue and weak rhetoric.

America is looking for a concrete RED CAN LINE statement by House and Senate Republicans that leaves no doubt as to the principle conservatives will not cross. Pin Obama to the wall, require him to “fish or cut bait”

It can be said that republicans share the fiscal mistakes made in the past that put America at the cliff. However, republicans refuse, based on the United States Constitution, moral obligations to “we the people” to advance taxes and allow continued out-of-control debt spending threatening national security. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH, FISCAL INSANITY MUST END. America will accept the pain for right reasons.

Obama will comment, snicker, reflect arrogance, pass gas, talk down to Congress, and make weak threats as to republican accountability. Boehner must not wilt, weep, or get weak kneed…respond in courage that America deserves truth, a Congress that will make a sacrificial move toward fiscal sanity. If there is blow-back, it won’t be for taking the wrong action for America.

The RED CAN LINE will be held now and also during “debt ceiling” decisions. TAKE US OVER THE CLIFF IF YOU MUST BUT DO NOT SURRENDER PRINCIPLE.

Harry Riley, 111 Overview Drive, Crestview, Florida 32539 hmriley@cox.net

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:34 PM

Lisa in MD replied:

I like the "pass gas" part on you comment. BHO is full of it too!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Henry in madiganistan (formerly Illinois) replied:

Very WELL said Mr.Riley, but the unfortunate truth is that the CURRENT republican "leadership" Boehner in particular, has NO courage to do that as evidenced by the current purging of conservatives that do not go along with their liberal agenda from numerous commities and their only reason for that is to ensure their own re-election and to hell with the country about which they care not.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 6:41 PM

JWH in "The Republic of Texas" replied:

STOP THE SPENDING!
STARVE THE BEAST!

Repubs have become the party of dem lite. Sorry but your time has run out!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Mr. John in Colorado said:

Excellent commentary but unfortunately it shows that this country is already lost which I have believed since that day in November 2008 when Obama was elected. A new term should be used to describe those who support and or depend on Obama, governmentalists, those who either through their work or through handouts depend on the government for their lifestyles and will support it no matter what picture of the future is presented. Thank God I do not have childred or grandchildren who will have to suffer because of the greed and corruption of our current government.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:41 PM

256 Not Out in Washington said:

The reading, and understanding of "Animal Farm" should be mandatory before voting.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:46 PM

Mark in San Antonio replied:

Maybe people will go see the movie...

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 2:17 PM

JWH in "The Republic of Texas" replied:

If only more of the population knew how to read.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Bob in Brunswick Georgia said:

Saw this comment in a other post and thought it was appropriate to the discussion.
History! That is a perspective that Americans lack in schools. The answer to the confusing behavior of your President Obama is easily explained. You even hear it in your language in political conversation but I don't think you know the origins. And strangely it is missing here in Russia and Ukraine, but it got its origins in Germany. It is called "Moral Relativism" or moral equivocation.

Emile Durkheim was a friend and influence of Karl Marx. He wrote that a poor person (perhaps society) should be punished less than a rich person (society) who has committed the same crime, because society has already punished them. I did 15 minutes of research and found Obama is a fan of this Communist theory. "A Kind and Just Parent: The Children of Juvenile Court" was written by Bill Ayers. Obama wrote the praised review of this book in the Chicago Tribune. The book is nothing but a treatise on Emile Durkheim's paper. Poor Blacks and Latino's should be punished less because society has abused them. Do you not think his "Anti-Colonialist" views also incorporate this perspective? America you are bad because you have freedoms and riches. The barbarians are good, because you hurt them, and exploit from them, so they are poor! It is your fault that they are poor and medieval. This is how he thinks. It is funny to me that your communists, the Progressives, adapt some of Marx basic principles more intensely than the Soviet Union. Your nation is being poisoned slowly by arsenic!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:50 PM

MNIce in Minnesota replied:

This is in stark contrast to the laws of justice given by Moses: "You shall not circulate a false report. Do not put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness. You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after many to pervert justice. You shall not show partiality to a poor man in his dispute. ... You shall not pervert the judgment of your poor in his dispute. Keep yourself far from a false matter; do not kill the innocent and righteous. For I will not justify the wicked. And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the discerning and perverts the words of the righteous." Exodus 23: 1-3,6-8

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Capt. Call in New Mexico replied:

Yes! It seems that the things we are instructed by God NOT to do are taken as priorities to accomplish by the Dems and the RINOs. The teaching of that old lie from the Devil, evolution, has brainwashed many of the people into believing that since there is no God (in their minds) "anything goes." Of course, if there is no transcendent lawgiver, there can be no law but what whomever is in charge decides. And the Dems are in charge; they celebrate immorality.

Thursday, June 13, 2013 at 4:07 PM

Rod in USA said:

It should scare people, these words published in a Russian paper about our country.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Tad MacKie in Sarasota, FL said:

As to who/what "Neocons" are/came from: The term was first used in the 1920's to describe a faction of the Demcorat Party that was speaking out against the Communist ("progressive") influence. By the late 1950's the "Neocons", having lost their battle within the Democrat party, had, mostly, all left the Democrats and had joined the Republican party. The Neocons now have a firm grip on the GOP.
In other words, the GOP is being run by Democrats and the Democrat Party is being run by Communists.
Is it really any wonder that the USA is moving toward socialism at such break-neck speeds?
Is it really any wonder that the GOP is purging what's left of the true Republicans?
Is it realy any wonder that Ron Paul was so marginalized and demonized by both "sides"?... They are one and the same.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:56 PM

jlsparke in Baraboo, WI said:

Way back in 1964, after graduation from a University, with a degree in Forest, I took a job with the US Fish & Wildlife Service. It was shortly after taking that job, we were required to spend our lunch period watch a move were President LBJ was stating to the nation that he was eliminating all sorts of government jobs and saving billions of dollars. A few days later, a janitor came around with a razor blade and scraped off the names of some divisions off the doors and changed that name to another existing division.
On paper, it look as though hundreds of people were gone, but not one person was eliminate. Yes, that division was eliminate, but the employees from that division were just incorporated into another division. That is when I learned about the "Government Fast Shuffle." I subsequently left the service over a 'Hatch Act" incident. That is another story.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:58 PM

Patriot in Wisconsin replied:

Do tell, I'm interested, especially because you're a Badger.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:04 PM

JayMan in Maryland said:

["Forward," was inspired either by the concluding words of FDR's "Bill of Rights": "[W]e must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights....", or by Mao Zedong's collectivist "Great Leap Forward."]
Don't forget Lenin's newspaper while he was exiled in Switzerland. It was named "Vperod," which is translated to "Forward."
Our government educated populace remains dumb and ignorant.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 12:58 PM

jeff@longliveliberty@yahoo.com in texas said:

mark,
i like the term "neo-com"; however, you will notice the striking similarity to the word that you coined it from, ie "neo-coN".
the similarity is not just in the word; but in the REALITY that both produce.
that reality being slavery under tyranny; one more fascist, the other more communist; both absolutest and totalitarian... BOTH enemies of a free people.
let us not forget that it was gw2 that launched the ill-named "patriot act", basically reducing the constitution to toilet paper, that it was abe lincoln who authorized the scorched earth 'slaughter,butcher, and starve the white women and children of the south" killing spree of general sherman, and that obama is fond of all of the policies of both lincoln and bush; and impeccably promostes BOTH tyrannical styles.
the only meaningful difference between neo-con and neo-com is that the first wants all welfare payments to go to israel and its other friends, and the latter wants all welfare to go to "poor people" everywhere, including here in the usa.
BOTH systems REQUIRE totalitarian control to enslave and rob the working class to support their global expansionism and welfare; whether corporate welfare or the more traditionally thought of, "bleeding heart" welfare.
so in the final analysis, the difference between neo-com and neo-con is about the same as the difference between and "n" and an "m" that is the only thing that differentiates the words, and the distance between them as regards the american people, is about the same as the distance between the "n" and the "m" on your keyboard... take a look.
as for REAL AUTHENTIC AMERICAN PATRIOTISM, well that is on the other side of the coin altogther.
come on mark, you post great founder quotes every day; dont you read them ??
or do you only read them through the lens of a zionist/walstreet/central bank approved magnifying(distortion) glass ??
jeff

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:00 PM

David in Birmingham, AL said:

I have come to call Obama's economic theory "Trickle Up Poverty". This falls in quite well with the Churchill quote.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:01 PM

Tom Mayo in Waialua, Hi said:

Our country is divided.........RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE......

I am quite sure that the last election was won by fraud and manipulation, but that does not discount the fact that the left has as many voters as the right at this point in time.........They remain in power at the highest levels of government, and the people of this great Republic are going to suffer the fate of the millions before us who have fallen under socialist rule.........Unless we act now. Conservative America needs to wake up and reestablish the rule of law and COMMON SENSE to our leadership.........I have no idea how it will be accomplished, but I know it must be done.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Craig Engel in Hillsboro replied:

It's no surprise our country is divided. So evenly. Our government is divided evenly. The Democratic party and the Republican party are far more alike than they are dissimilar. Neither party wants to control spending, they just want to control the other party's spending. Neither party wants to truly reform taxation. Tax codes are tools for politicians to curry favor, power and money. The two parties are like cars: the Ford Mustangs and the Chevy Camaros. Fundamentally the same, just different badges. Voters have brand loyalty. Which car do you drive?

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Robert Stewart in Texarkana, Texas replied:

Thank-you!

Saturday, December 15, 2012 at 9:36 AM

Pete G. in MS said:

Why can we not find a single soul in the Republican party who will point out that Comrade Obama is not negotiating in good faith for a soultion to the debt problem. He is in fact, like the petulant adolescent who, having spent his entire allowance on junk food and video games, finds himself lacking lunch money. Consequently he blames his parents for not giving him enough money to start with. Our current crop of complacent Repulbicans seem to be acting like the indulgent parent who says "OK, I'll cover you this time, but don't do it again."
Is there any doubt in any thinking person's mind what will happen next ?

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Ron Campbell in Phoenix, Arizona. said:

Great precis of our modern history. And the Russian is right, it all started with our schools and colleges a long time ago. Is it too late now?

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:04 PM

Patriot in Wisconsin replied:

It's probably is too late. I teach at the University of Wisconsin system and the quality of student has been steadily declining such that it is incredibly depressing. If they are our future, we're doomed.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:06 PM