By Alexander G. Markovsky
The resurgence of Joe Biden and the inevitable defeat of Bernie Sanders led the pundits to declare that the Democratic Party is rejecting socialism — a development all decent men would celebrate if it were true. Yet, in a supreme irony, the Land of the Free dangerously underestimates or underappreciates the ideological nature of the contemporary Democratic Party. Neither education nor life experience has prepared Americans for grasping the Party’s epochal ideological shift toward the ideology that signifies the total inversion of the Nation’s historical traditions and values.
Every time the Democratic presidential contenders took the stage, whether it was a radical Bernie Sanders or any of the so-called moderates such as Michael Bloomberg, Elizabeth Warren, Pete Buttigieg, Amy Klobuchar, or Joe Biden, a frightening sense of déjà vu set in as those downsized American replicas of Leon Trotsky, Nikolai Bukharin, Clara Zetkin, and Rosa Luxemburg clearly professed their socialist-egalitarian vision and prophetic absolutism.
None of them has talked of freedom or offered a single program for wealth creation, which epitomizes capitalism; all of their proposals have been aimed at economic equality, suppression of freedom and destruction of wealth, which embodies socialism.
The Party has embraced a slow-roll strategy of taxation and regulations, designed to impose socialism on the United States subtly and incrementally under the guise of democracy. But militant Bernie is not in sync with the Party. While the moderates have camouflaged their aspirations behind the veil of liberalism or progressivism, Bernie dropped all liberal and progressive pretenses and openly declared the imposition of socialism as his ultimate objective.
The difference between the Party’s moderates and radicals hinges on this distinction.
By pushing the envelope in order to propel the new dispensation, Bernie has been exposing the Party’s sinister agenda. The Democratic establishment has been desperately looking for the alternative. However, all other aspirants were hardly thinkers or mavericks and sounded like pedestrian opportunists.
As a practical accommodation to reality, the Party put their bets on Joe Biden, a tired man lacking an intellectual basis and incapable of developing an independent philosophical identity, but the one who possesses an impressive resume and enjoys name recognition. The Party cleared the field from the weeds to ensure his victory during the primaries.
After victories in the Florida and Illinois primaries, the presumptive presidential nominee moved to unite the Party. Biden insisted that while he and Sanders may “disagree on tactic” they “share a common vision for the country.” This is an unprecedented admission that Bernie’s conflict with the Democratic Party is not about ideology but rather a strategy.
So, if socialist Bernie and moderate Joe share a common vision for the country, Bernie and his followers should support the nominee and actively campaign for him. But this optimistic logic encounters an irreconcilable ideological dilemma — revolutionary Marxism has not been known for its spirit of cooperation or compromise. Sanders and his followers’ emphasis is not on conflict resolution but on ideological conquest. They are passionately convinced of their rightness and would only accept total victory or total defeat. Therefore, the effort to foster unity will inevitably force Biden to move further to the left until his platform mirrors that of Sanders but short of calling it socialist.
The unmasking the Party agenda would raise the issue of the ideological nature of the Party candidates for the state and federal offices. Whether they are proudly touting their socialist credentials or unable or unwilling to define their political ambitions, either way, they would be exposed as the adherence of socialism and be treated as such regardless of their pronouncements and promises.
As stated earlier, most contemporaries, unfortunately, do not see the challenges to the established moral order in an ideological light and believe that this shift is the inexorable product of changing times. The rise of Bernie Sanders, who has explicitly articulated his pro-Marxist ideology, reveals the fatal flaw of this thinking. His influence on the Democratic Party should serve as proof that Obama has completed the job of transforming the Democratic Party into the Social Democratic Party. Without Obama, Sanders would have remained a socialist quack from Vermont never taken seriously.
The silver lining is that the American people will reject socialism in November and force the Democrats to reexamine their internal doctrine and hopefully redefine themselves from Obama’s “what your country can do for you” back to JFK’s “what you can do for your country.”
Alexander G. Markovsky is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a conservative think hosted at King’s College, New York City, which examines national security, energy, risk-analysis, and other public policy issues. He is the author of Anatomy of a Bolshevik and Liberal Bolshevism: America Did Not Defeat Communism, She Adopted It. Mr. Markovsky is the owner and CEO of Litwin Management Services, LLC. He can be reached at [email protected]