Which Flavor of Commie Is Joe Biden?

AP Photo/Chris Carlson

Our lickspittle media – completely in the tank for Joe Biden – asked him a hard-hitting question on 17 October outside an ice cream shop in Durham, NC: “Mr. Biden! Mr. Biden! What flavor did you get?” RedState colleague Sister Toldjah properly lambasted the media about that ridiculous incident here. The correct “flavor question” should have been, “What flavor of Communist are you, Mr. Biden?” Let’s explore.

Here are the “flavors” of Communists, ordered from softest to most hardcore:

The Useful Idiot. “[T]he term ‘useful idiot’ has referred to a naive or unwitting ally of a ruthless political movement especially a communist movement.” The euphemism has been liberally applied to people in the West who have naively supported Communist movements around the world without regard to the inevitable consequences (death, economic destruction, and loss of freedom). Examples are those who claim that, while communism failed in the Soviet Union (and everywhere else it has been tried), it will certainly succeed “next time.”

The Fellow Traveler. This is a variation of the useful idiot. Here is a definition from Wikipedia that is actually pretty good:

The term fellow traveller identifies a person who is intellectually sympathetic to the ideology of a political organization, and who co-operates in the organization’s politics, without being a formal member of that organization. In the early history of the Soviet Union, the Bolshevik revolutionary Trotsky coined the term poputchik to identify the vacillating intellectual supporters of the Bolshevik government. It was the political characterisation of the Russian intelligentsiya who were philosophically sympathetic to the political, social, and economic goals of the Russian Revolution of 1917, but who chose to not join the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

Fellow travelers aren’t all-in on communism, per se, but they are more ideologically rigorous in their defense of communist objectives than useful idiots are.

The Agent of Influence. This was originally a Soviet term meaning, “An agent of some stature who uses his or her position to influence public opinion or decision making to produce results beneficial to the country whose intelligence service operates the agent.” Journalists and members of Academia have been co-opted by foreign Communists for decades. One key example lauded by leftist journalists everywhere was I.F. Stone, who was recruited by the KGB in the 1930s. He was a shameless apologist for Stalin and the Soviet Union and was once referred to as the “front man” for the KGB in Western media.

The Paid Pawn. Pretty much self-explanatory, the paid pawn receives money from foreign Communist governments directly in order to do their bidding, whether spying, influence-peddling, or policy-making. The Soviets and Chinese featured prominently over the years in buying selected politicians and members of American cultural institutions in order to directly influence American foreign policy decisions, as well as to spread propaganda favorable to their governments and cultures among unsuspecting Americans. The ChiComs bought the Clintons in the 1990s (remember Chinagate). The husbands of Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, and Barbara Boxer made millions from “Chinese deals” over the years – and none of them could be remotely considered to be “tough on China” as a result.

The Avowed Communist. This category includes those who publicly declare themselves to be Communists. While doing so used to result in a person being ostracized from polite/normal society, these days declaring oneself to be a Commie seems to be chic – at least in certain circles. Certainly, the Antifa and especially the Black Lives Matter crowd and their legion of supporters don’t seem to be too concerned about Marxist Communism, which is the root ideology of both movements! We’ve had open communists of various persuasions in America since the 1920s, including the Revolutionary Communist Party of the USA (RCPUSA), Communist Party of the USA (CPUSA), Communist Workers Party (Maoist), and others that have come and gone over the years. Interestingly, the only US politicians sympathetic to Communists and their long-term goals for the United States have resided in the Democrat Party. They prefer to refer to themselves as “socialists” these days because “Communist” rightfully has a bad connotation in the minds of many older Americans who haven’t been politically corrupted by the US public education system since the 1970s or so.

Where does Joe Biden fall on the “flavor spectrum”? Perhaps his foreign policy positions over the years can give us some idea. Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy issue for nearly 50 years, siding with Communist policy objectives of the Soviet Union, China, and others at every turn.

  • During the late 1960s and early ‘70s, when he first entered politics (!), he wanted to divide Vietnam into small pieces.
  • During the Reagan era, he opposed the Reagan Doctrine, the Strategic Defense Initiative, deployment of the MX missile, deployment of nuclear Tomahawks to Europe to counter Soviet medium-range SS-20s, and support to the Nicaraguan contras (who opposed the Sandinistas who were the Soviets’ proxies in Central America). He also supported a “nuclear freeze” during the height of the Cold War (which would have locked in the Soviets’ numerical advantage in land-based multi-warhead nuclear missiles).
  • He opposed President Bush 41 on the Persian Gulf War, he opposed President Bush 43 on the surge that finally won the war in Iraq, and he even opposed Obama’s decision to kill Osama Bin Laden. He voted for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2001 and 2002. He claimed that Turkey would prove that Islam and democracy could peacefully co-exist. (“Erdogan has outpaced all other countries in the world in arrests of citizens, bankers, generals, unionists, journalists, and anyone else who opposes him.”)
  • He claimed that Benghazi was the intelligence community’s fault for not having forewarned the Obama regime that the attack was due to a protest over a previously unheard-of movie trailer (a complete lie, as we now know). He helped Obama enable the rise of ISIS in Syria. He denounced President Trump’s decision to kill Qassem Suleimani, the commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
  • He supported Obama’s deal with Iran (the JCPOA) which has since been exposed as a gift to the mullahs, but the Iranians received their “pallets of cash.” What do you suppose the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism did with that money?

And he has been soft on China for decades, enabling the ChiCom rise to military and economic prominence at the expense of the United States and our allies. The ChiComs have been targeting US policy-makers for decades, as reported here. The Bidens have been directly in their cross-hairs since at least 2013. The summary of a detailed report on Biden activities with China cited by a Bloomberg contributor here is breathtaking in its scope and implications for US national security, especially if Biden makes it to the Oval Office:

  1. Joe Biden’s compromising partnership with the Communist Party of China runs via Yang Jiechi (CPC’s Central Foreign Affairs Commission). YANG met frequently with BIDEN during his tenure at the Chinese embassy in Washington.

  2. Hunter Biden’s 2013 Bohai Harvest Rosemont investment partnership was set-up by Ministry of Foreign Affairs institutions who are tasked with garnering influence with foreign leaders during YANG’s tenure as Foreign Minister.

  3. HUNTER has a direct line to the Politburo, according to SOURCE A, a senior finance professional in China.

  4. Michael Lin, a Taiwanese national now detained in China, brokered the BHR partnership and partners with MOFA foreign influence organizations.

  5. LIN is a POI for his work on behalf of China, as confirmed by SOURCE B and SOURCE C (at two separate national intelligence agencies).

  6. BHR is a state managed operation. Leading shareholder in BHR is a Bank of China which lists BHR as a subsidiary and BHR’s partners are SOEs that funnel revenue/assets to BHR.

  7. HUNTER continues to hold 10% in BHR. He visited China in 2010 and met with major Chinese government financial companies that would later back BHR.

  8. HUNTER’s BHR stake (purchased for $400,000) is now likely be worth approx. $50 million (fees and capital appreciation based on BHR’s $6.5 billion AUM as stated by Michael Lin).

  9. HUNTER also did business with Chinese tycoons linked with the Chinese military and against the interests of US national security.

  10. BIDEN’s foreign policy stance towards China (formerly hawkish), turned positive despite China’s country’s rising geopolitical assertiveness.

(RedState has also been reporting on these tangled connections  — see our coverage here, here, here, here, and here.)

No wonder foreign policy was never a topic in either of the two presidential debates this year! Biden has been acting against US national security interests and supporting Soviet and ChiCom foreign policy objectives for decades, and it is now finally becoming clear that he was paid to do so by both the Russians and ChiComs. He has even publicly ridiculed the idea that Communist China is a strategic threat to the US despite congressional, DoD, and intelligence community reports to the contrary. And the ChiComs will get more for their money during a Biden presidency!

Do Communists know their own? First, there was the public endorsement of Biden’s candidacy by the Revolutionary Community Party USA (RCPUSA) back in August. Secondly, here is what former KGB officer and Democrat bugbear Vladimir Putin had to say recently, as reported here:

Putin stated during an interview with Pavel Zarubin of Rossiya 1 TV that the American Democratic party is “traditionally closer” to the liberalism and socialism exhibited by European countries.

Putin went on to say he had been a member of the Soviet Communist Party for 18 years and shared his affinity with the party’s “left-wing values” which he believes would be the foundation for a relationship between Russia and a Biden White House.

“Yes, they are difficult to implement, but they are very attractive, nevertheless. In other words, this can be seen as an ideological basis for developing contacts with the Democratic representative,” Putin said, again referring to Biden.

Who could possibly argue with Vlad after taking a gander at all the socialist (Communist) claptrap rolled into the Democrat Party platform? Biden warmly embraced all of Bernie’s and AOC’s nonsense. Karl Marx would be proud – and anyone who still thinks that Putin wants President Trump to be reelected is demented.

Yes, Communists and “former Communists” know their own!

So which flavor of Communist fits Joe Biden? There is ample evidence that, over his career and for self-serving political careerist reasons, he has evolved through each of the first four categories to “Paid Pawn.” I wish he’d just openly declare himself a Communist once and for all and get it over with.

The end.