John R. Houk
© October 27, 2018
Part ONE can be read HERE.
As a recap for the purpose of this post:
I recently received criticism on a MeWe group for sharing a Justin Smith post entitled “Liberty First and Foremost”. The beginning of Justin’s essay said this:
The Democratic Party has grown to be the enemy within our country, and the communist Democrats working in federal positions are the same as foreign agents infiltrated into federal agencies, seeking to do whatever is needed to end this republic.
Chris Worth at this MeWe group said something to the effect he read equating the Dems to a “Communist” and decided the post was worthless and hence encouraged readers there was no need to read further.
And now to continue to show that the Dems have an affinity for Communism from their 2016 Party Platform.
Resuming with the summary of the Party Platform:
Supports comprehensive federal nondiscrimination protections “for all LGBT Americans, to guarantee equal rights in areas such as housing, employment, public accommodations, credit, jury service, education, and federal funding.”
Opposes all state efforts to “discriminate against LGBT individuals, including legislation that restricts the right to access public spaces.”
Supports combatting [sic] LGBT youth homelessness and improving school climates.
Supports ensuring support LGBT elders have access to necessary health care, and “protect LGBT people from violence—including ending the crisis of violence against transgender Americans.”
Supports promotion of “LGBT human rights” around the world and ensuing “America’s foreign policy is inclusive of LGBT people.
As a Christian Conservative that supports Biblical Morality Dems and all people of the Left vilify me as –gasp– a homophobe. The Dem support for the normalization of all things homosexual (Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender and now days the adding of Queer) is a Marxist elite design to displace the Christian Values that have been the backbone of American culture for two centuries. ONLY in the mid-1900s with the infection of Leftist thinking in the media, entertainment, academia and the Courts has the homosexual lifestyle been normalized via the power of propaganda waged in those venues.
Today it is even difficult to use general terms on Internet search engines to locate data on how Americans rejected homosexuality as normal because the search engines are dominated by Left-think. In Part One I lost patience looking for the data on American attitudes about the LGBTQ lifestyle and ended up using homosexual activist thinking making it sound as if the homosexual-by-choice (I don’t buy into the Gay gene concept) people are struggling victims. To that end here the title I found and used in Part One when the Dems suggestively place LGBTQ discrimination under the section “Discrimination and Racial Issues”: Being Gay Used to Be Illegal. And here is a quote from that post about society’s concurrence with Biblical Morality by illegalizing the homosexual lifestyle:
“Being gay” (same-sex activity and partnership) used to be illegal in the U.S. and the U.K., and being gay is still illegal in many parts of the world. The details are complex.
Prior to 20th-century reforms, punishment for homosexuality in places like the United States and the Britain included incarceration, fines, castration, and even death. Even after aspects of same-sex relationships were decriminalized, discrimination and prejudice on behalf of the state continued in many respects. 
LGBT rights throughout world history is a complex subject. Some cultures had progressive stances on LGBT issues long before Britain and the US, yet other cultures still consider “being gay” a crime punishable by death and imprisonment today. Even today, state-sponsored LGBT discrimination still exists in the West. For instance, same sex marriage only recently became legal in the U.S. and still illegal in Northern Ireland.  (Being Gay Used to Be Illegal; Researched by Thomas DeMichele; FactMyth.com; Published – 3/22/16. Last Updated – 8/27/16)
You can tell the Leftist slant by the above website when the Christian attitude toward the LGBTQ lifestyle is described as “discrimination” or “still illegal” rather than shunned due moral agreement with the Creator of all that exists:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not [a]comprehend it. ( John 1: 1-5 NKJV)
1 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who [a]suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is [b]manifest [c]in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and [d]Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their [a]women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the [b]men, leaving the natural use of the [c]woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. (Romans 1: 18-21, 24-27 NKJV)
In Communism religion challenges the authority of the State and must be suppressed by any means necessary. As such here is an illuminating quote about the reason Communism disdains religion:
A communist government has to have the people looking at them as a god or as diety. After all, a communist government basically decides what people do in terms of career, in terms of where they live, what choices they have for food, clothing, medical care and how much money they “live on.” Allowing the people to have a “god” places the government at number two in terms of authority and prominence in a citizen’s life and might lead to a rebelion [sic].
Karl Marx, the father of communism, said, “Communism begins from the outset with atheism.” (He said this in Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right).
Vladimir Lenin similarly wrote: “A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could”(He said this in his book, Private Property and Communism). (Communism Persecutes Religion; NoCommunism.com)
Dem support for an LGBTQ agenda smacks entirely of Communist remolding of cultural thinking.
Dem Platform Summary Continued:
Support strengthening AmeriCorps with the “goal that every American who wants to participate in full-time national service will have the opportunity to do so.”
AmeriCorps according to its website:
AmeriCorps is a network of national service programs, made up of three primary programs that each take a different approach to improving lives and fostering civic engagement. Members commit their time to address critical community needs like increasing academic achievement, mentoring youth, fighting poverty, sustaining national parks, preparing for disasters, and more.
AmeriCorps is a good idea. You can hearken back to President Kennedy’s words:
My fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
Service for Country is difficult to criticize. However, a CBS report (of all places) shows the current scope of AmeriCorps has problems:
WASHINGTON — A CBS News Radio investigation of years of complaints about AmeriCorps programs has found multiple allegations of sexual harassment, abusive behavior and mismanagement since 2013. The allegations are detailed in complaints to the agency’s Inspector General, obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.
AmeriCorps, a network of national service programs, is the largest issuer of grants for service and volunteering.
It is overseen by the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS), which was established as a federal agency in 1993 – and has been dogged for years by claims that it is poorly managed.
Conservative critics say AmeriCorps is a waste of money and promotes liberal causes. The Government Accountability Office found last year that CNCS has fallen short in monitoring whether the organizations it grants money to meet federal standards and requirements. (AmeriCorps programs accused of sexual misconduct and breakdowns in oversight; By STEVE DORSEY; CBS News; 10/22/18 8:15 AM – Updated 10/22/18 7:15 PM EDT)
In essence the AmeriCorps problem is Big Government, mismanagement and propagating Left-Wing causes in its current state. Here’s a Michelle Malkin criticism from 2011:
… With bipartisan support, the program has morphed into an all-purpose progressive slush fund. Instead of reining in the national-service boondoggle, Washington has turned taxpayer-subsidized helping hands into a legion of Nanny State handout helpers. Goodbye, AmeriCorps. Hello, FoodStampCorps.
#ad#Yes, across the Internet, the feds are recruiting AmeriCorps VISTA (“Volunteers in Service to America”) workers to apply for jobs as publicists for the welfare state. Their mission: to sign up as many people to federal food-stamp rolls as possible. Because, you know, the record-breaking 12 million that have been added since Obama took office is apparently not good enough. (America the Dependent; By MICHELLE MALKIN; National Review; 4/15/11 4:00 AM)
Can you say, “Teaching government dependence”?
The Libertarian-oriented Hoover Institute observed in 1996, three years after AmeriCorps’ creation:
… Clinton has used the rhetoric of citizenship to justify his efforts to expand the welfare state. He has contradicted his emphasis on personal responsibility by working to preserve bureaucratic federal control of social programs. The revival of citizenship requires a transfer of power from government to families, voluntary associations, and communities. The president has instead sought to reinvigorate civic life by trying to relegitimize government.
AmeriCorps reveals the administration’s fundamental misreading of the components of healthy citizenship. The program provides government subsidies for voluntary activity at the federal, state, and local levels. By so doing, it conflates volunteering — which nearly 90 million Americans regularly do — with a federal-government jobs program run by a centralized bureaucracy. It is, in essence, a Great Society-style program trying to pass as a plan to reinvigorate citizenship and heal communities. But its very premise — using federal resources to promote voluntarism — contradicts the principle of self-government that lies at the heart of citizenship. AmeriCorps blurs the line between the problems and needs best addressed by individuals, voluntary association and localities and those best addressed by the federal government. Instead, it seems to suggest that social problems are the responsibility of the central government, and the federal bureaucracy must direct and improve local solutions. (Clinton’s AmeriCorps Values; By John Walters; January/February Policy Review – Hoover Institute; 3/1/1996)
Government dependence is one of the ways a Communist government manages the thoughts and actions of its citizens.
Read this article on Marxist/Leninist agenda to control citizens and look for similarities to the stealth actions of the Democratic Party. Here is a bit of an intro:
As the Bolshevik party took control of Russia after the October Revolution in 1917, they initiated large scale reforms in numerous sectors of society, while ultimately instituting changes in the political, economic, and cultural realms; that would all work together to clearly define their newly founded United Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) for the next seventy years. These reforms were predominantly focused on the wide-spread cultivation and propagation of Marxist/Leninist ideology throughout every portion of the USSR’s social spectrum. One of the most important initiatives taken was the promulgation of a new philosophical idealism that strove to mold the masses, specifically the proletariat working class, to form a “New Man.” Though this philosophical concept, coupled with the aims and ideology of the Soviet regime, has been historically designated as “The New Soviet Man,” the two terms are referred to synonymously in this historical investigation. The New Soviet Man was a medium through which the new party leaders attempted to extirpate old societal norms, which were lingering from the former regime, and replace them with a holistically Communistic society ruled by a national consensus and devoid of any individualism that may cause dissention. The party utilized several different means and operated through multifarious mediums to achieve this unification of social consciousness; some of these methods of transformation like propaganda or education guided under Communist values were directly implemented in social sectors to achieve immediate results, and … READ ENTIRETY (Re-creating Mankind: The Philosophy and Actualization of the “New Soviet Man”; By Jon Savage – James Duban, Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief; The Eagle Feather – A Publication for Undergraduate Scholars (University of North Texas); 2011 Edition)
The Marxist/Leninist approach to rule was sow seeds of discontent then implement violent rebellion to overthrow a non-Communist regime.
The Eurocommunist approach was (or is) a quiet revolution by gaining dominance in societal institutions such as Media, Entertainment, Academia and Government Institutions (We can call this the Shadow/Deep State). You need to bone up on the information you can find. In America, Eurocommunism may not be appropriate, so here let’s call it the Gramsci/Alinsky approach. Here’s an excerpt from a 2008 article written on the cusp of the beginning of Obama’s Fundamental Transformation:
Gramsci, as you may (or may not) know was the Italian Marxist theorist who evolved what we in America knew as the “Popular Front” approach to Marxist revolution–burrowing within organizations rather than attacking capitalism head on–and evolving it into a fine art of infiltration and cultural destruction. The end result: to completely alter the political message to one defending capitalism, religion, the middle class, family, and Western cultural traditions–including government, academia, media, and jurisprudence–to a new message that dwelt upon the evils of tradition, the oppressiveness of the West, etc. Gramsci believed that by changing the cultural message–for current usage, substitute the word “narrative”–to one espousing socialism and class struggle, you could eviscerate Western culture from within.
The seditious role of the community organiser was developed by an extreme left intellectual called Saul Alinsky. He was a radical Chicago activist who, by the time he died in 1972, had had a profound influence on the highest levels of the Democratic party. Alinsky was a ‘transformational Marxist’ in the mould of Antonio Gramsci, who promoted the strategy of a ‘long march through the institutions’ by capturing the culture and turning it inside out as the most effective means of overturning western society. …
His creed was set out in his book ‘Rules for Radicals’ – a book he dedicated to Lucifer, whom he called the ‘first radical’. It was Alinsky for whom ‘change’ was his mantra. And by ‘change’, he meant a Marxist revolution achieved by slow, incremental, Machiavellian means which turned society inside out. This had to be done through systematic deception, winning the trust of the naively idealistic middle class by using the language of morality to conceal an agenda designed to destroy it. And the way to do this, he said, was through ‘people’s organisations’.
“March through the institutions.” That pretty well describes what’s been going on and I couldn’t agree more. –READ ENTIRETY (Obama = Alinsky = Gramsci = Marx; Posted by Wonker; HazZzMat; 9/15/08 8:32 PM)
Due to an American divide politically, I’m not sure if one can point to a subversive path against the U.S. Constitution. My guess the is the current status of subversion is a combination of Marxist/Leninist (the Bill Ayers dream) and Gramsci/Alinsky.
Dem Platform Summary Continued:
Supports directing more federal resources to “lifting up communities that have been left out and left behind, such as the 10-20-30 model, which directs 10 percent of program funds to communities where at least 20 percent of the population has been living below the poverty line for 30 years or more.”
Supports protecting programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
Supports helping people “grow their skills through jobs and skills training opportunities.”
Supports expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) program for low-wage workers not raising children, including extending the credit to young workers starting at age 21.
Supports expanding the Child Tax Credit (CTC) and making more of it refundable, or indexed to inflation to stem the erosion of the credit.
EVERYTHING I wrote on the Dem Platform on National Service is applicable to the platform on Poverty.
End of Part 2
In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.