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


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

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

Phyllis in Indiana said:

Pro Deo et Constitutione — Libertas aut Mors
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis -- amen

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Wally Lind in Lakeville, MN said:

I'd follow Christy anywhere! But seriously, I like the "NeoCom" label for Obama and his followers. I haven't bought this European Socialism stuff, for a moment. With the things that Pelosi has said about getting into "every aspect of our lives" and the way that EPA behaves, I think they are all about totalitarian communism. Maybe not as extreme as the Soviets, but they are just the first generation in power. The GOP (the only realistic alternative) had better get cracking on setting up professional full time organization on the ground. Not the idea people, but the people that continually register, then get out the vote. I've read that Evangelicals typically don't register. A good first target. Before you wring your hands about the brown vote, get the white vote registered and to the polls.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:12 PM

Wally Lind in Lakeville, MN replied:

And I don't mean the Governor. LOL

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:15 PM

jksisco in irvine, ca said:

Imagine the number of like-minded NEO-COM's that have been appointed in the Obama-com's administration. Freedom and Liberty are at great risk, these are perilous times indeed.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:16 PM

Ed Yannul in Manvel, TX said:

A good idea to resolve the government spending/fiscal cliff issues is to take the contentious items that are being debated at the Federal level and move them to the state level. This is more consistent with the design and intent of the Constitution, and it will allow people to more locally control what gets enacted. For example, if people in California want higher levels of services from the government, they can vote for that without interference of people like me who live in Texas. Vice-versa, people in Texas can vote for lower levels of services and get the lower taxes/lower deficits (and greater growth) that goes along with that, regardless of what people in California think. This will also make it less likely that people will "vote themselves other people's money" since they will only be taking it from people in their own state. This will also provide a great comparison to the different choices made in the different states, which will help the people see which tends to work better and yield the best results.

I think conservatives will support this as it gives more and better choices, is more consistent with the role of the Federal government as specified in the Constitution, and will (over time) show that the conservative principles work best. Liberals may be convinced to support it as it would allow them to do whatever that can get approved in their state without the limitations that the Republicans/conservatives place on this on the Federal level.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:21 PM

MNIce in Minnesota replied:

The problem is the state governments are right in the federal handout line along with everyone else. I'm very embarrassed to admit my governor went to Washington to chirp with wide-open beak for continued funding of programs that have no business being fed from Washington (or even from the state). Grow up and find your own food at home, Governor Dayton!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 10:50 PM

TheHarp in Oregon said:

‘It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few and for the few ‘and to replace it with shared prosperity'. Karl Marx 1875.

‘I have a new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared by all'. Obama, August 2012.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:23 PM

David Thompson in Bellville, TX said:

There's no reason now to go off with a Neo-Com accusation against the Democrats. Has there been a President from the Democratic Party in the last hundred years that did NOT borrow parts of his policy from Karl Marx? No, and there have been lots of Republican Presidents who did some of the same borrowing. There's nearly always been a difference in degree, that's all, and the current Comrade President has taken it all to a new high degree. But there's nothing new here.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:27 PM

James R. Cooke in Fort Worth, TX said:

Dear Mr. Alexander: Thank you for your well-written article on our recent political history - sad as it is. Your work is always a good read.
Two quick observations related to your editorial: 1) One has to admit that the NeoCom-In-Chief, BHO, has been quite clever in the way he has set up his "solution" to the current Fiscal Cliff. Either way that the event turns out, he wins and furthers his communist agenda. He gets to crow that the conservatives "saw the light" if the Republican Party chooses a compromise. Or he gets to paint them even further as evil if the Fiscal Cliff occurs.
2) More in line with your present piece, an article in another journal led me to the conclusion that with the Obama administration (the past four years as well as the coming four) vividly demonstrates the results of the Entitlement Generation. Our political history has seldom seen the level of ineptitude, craven cowardice and grievous lack of a moral compass as has been inflicted by this first generation of Entitlement Receivers. I am in no way saying that all members of minority groups are so shockingly bereft of capabilities and ability. But the result of pushing upward into leadership positions those who have received unearned preferential treatment after preferential treatment, and many times have been paid in the process, is too obvious to be argued. While all the departments of government are likely afflicted, the stinking results are most obvious in the Executive Department and the Department of Justice.
P. S. My contribution and support of the Post is on the way!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:28 PM

MNIce in Minnesota replied:

Those are not the only alternatives the Republicans have. They can use the Representatives' appropriations origination authority to take entire government agencies prisoner and threaten them with execution (no more appropriations this year for the Dept. of Education or any equivalent function) if Mr. Obama refuses to sign a tax rate increase cancellation bill. They can argue that if the tax rate goes up, the federal government will face a greater shortfall in revenue as people move their business out of country, so we have to close some agencies to make up the difference.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 11:00 PM

margaret in harrisonburg said:

Those who voted for Obama - please share bed time stories with you children or grandchildren how there was once prosperious and ambitious and productive and generous people in the United States who had a civil and moral society and how you helped with the destruction of that nation and our Constitution because of your greed - wanting to be taking care of by those who worked hard - but now do not work so hard - so that the poverty has been spread around.....making the wish of the president you voted for to be more true - that we are not the exceptional nation.....(because of his and his communistic gang control freaks' obsession of taking instead of giving back. Yes, be sure to tell them about your contribution - how you so wanted to save the world byobsessively controlling others and not yourself - other than maybe being a faux peasant while talking on your cell phone with your suv parked in your upscale flat. Watch the news? Of course, too busy for that....only the commentaries of the Obamamedia for you......

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:30 PM

Sean Valdrow in Wasilla, Alaska said:

It's about damned time people started calling them Communists. I've seen their march through our country all my life. They're finally winning and ONLY NOW do people catch on that we're being enslaved by the communists. They couldn't beat our war machine in battle, so now they subvert our children with communist skooling and Hollywood propaganda.

I know two things about communists: one, they always operate from the principle that what is THEIRS is THEIRS, and what is YOURS is negotiable; and two, you cannot live with these people. You are either enslaved by them or you kill them.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:30 PM

exlogger in Alaska replied:

"I know two things about communists: one, they always operate from the principle that what is THEIRS is THEIRS, and what is YOURS is negotiable; and two, you cannot live with these people. You are either enslaved by them or you kill them."
You speak the truth!! When will people wake up this is not going to end well.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 2:54 PM

JIMBO in Fairfield, CT said:

America became great because it was created by a free people working under the rule of law (Constitution) in a system based upon economic liberty (capitalism). The USA has become the land of the Fee (licenses, permits, etc.) and the Home of the Slave (taxation).

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Tyrone in Cleveland said:

Do not fret about the polls, pundits, fiscal cliffs and talking points that will accomplish nothing but manipulation by the political system and socialist media.
Simply prepare and stay prepared for the place, incident and individuals who will signal the time has arrived. Socialists and Communists can not even feed or defend themselves. They must always confiscate from others and force someone else to do the difficult jobs for them. They are an inherently weak and flacid group who talk loud when they think they are in control. Talk will not suffice forever.
I have every confidence that those in farms, factories, law enforcement and military service will be prepared to support and defend the Constitution, as they swore, when the time comes and it is drawing near.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:41 PM

George Ruth in Reading, Pa. said:

I have to say, NO, Shout that Chris Matthews is the Biggest S---A-- I have ever heard!
He is a Sickening Puke in making the statements he has and is making about the Main Street Media, which he is 1 of the biggest, suggesting that the media did not report the political truths about the Republican Party and that the media attempted to be to even and fair to both parties!
Well I have to tell you from what I did not hear, the lying and outrageos insults from the Administration, the Media non-reporting of the political Democratic news to a fault and harnessed the Republicans with shameful documentary!
As I said, Matthews and Company had more influence on this election than any other component of either parties policies!
So, hurray to you Chris Matthews, maybe the President will invite you and you Cronies to the White House for an personal interview after he returns from Hawaii with Family, spending approximately 4 Million more of our money.
Then you can kiss his A-- some more!
What a Waste!

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:47 PM

Robert in Alabama said:

This is American Politics today.
Same as it's always been only worse.

Thursday, December 13, 2012 at 1:50 PM