How Has the Democrat Party Changed

Background

I became a US citizen in 1963, although eligible in 1960. I remember that day well. About 50 applicants appeared in front of the federal judge in San Jose, California. I was one of them. Some applicants had been in the US for decades but lacked the literacy required for citizenship. The judge asked me about my service in the US Armed Forces and my recent graduation from San Jose State University.

Upon leaving the hall, the Daughters of the American Revolution gave each new citizen a small American flag. There were also two tables in the hall where new citizens could register to vote. My father-in-law, who had encouraged me to seek the American citizenship, walked me to the Democratic table where I obediently registered as a Democrat.

I remember joining in 1956 the American Paperworker and Papermaker Union. It was my introduction to unions, their philosophy, and their role in American society. I benefitted from my membership in the union and rose rapidly in the job rankings, thanks to my membership.  As a result, I grew up thinking that the Democratic Party was the party of the worker, and the Republican Party the party of business.

Fast forward to 1992 presidential elections. I had a tough time agreeing with and supporting some positions espoused by Bill Clinton and in the Democratic platform. As a result, I decided to change my party affiliation to Republican. 

It was not an easy decision …

I recently (thanks to retirement) began to put the pieces together. 

The Democratic Party started to morph right after the 1968 elections. The Democratic convention, held in Chicago, deteriorated into armed conflict and civil disobedience. The party would rapidly change during the next 20 years, albeit I was too busy working and building my career to pay attention to the metamorphosis.  

It was during the Obama years that I became convinced that I had made the right decision in 1992.

The Democrat Party’s Evolution

Control of the party and its hierarchy began to change after 1968 as intellectuals and students became more involved in the direction and platform of the party. The abuses by the Chicago Mayor's machine and by Tammany Hall in New York served as the tipping point.

Labor unions were experiencing a decline in membership and economic power. As a result, they were consumed by the fear of losing hard won gains. Their preservation strategy was to oppose any changes and resist perceived attempts to take away union prerogatives.

Intellectuals and students, on the other hand, wanted to change what they perceived inequities.  During this period a new role in society emerged … community organizer, although unions had much experience with organizing efforts.

A union organizer from Chicago provided this new group a framework and manual for bringing about radical change.  His name was Saul Alinsky (1909-1973). He wrote two seminal books on the subject: Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals.  These two books would soon become the roadmap for young radicals on how to effect social change. Hilary Clinton wrote her senior thesis on Alinsky’s work, and Barack Obama has written extensively about in his published works.

Alinsky’s Legacy

Alinsky articulated a number of principles and steps to change society, as we knew it then, to a more equitable one. A parody of his eight levers for control and their definition applies to the Democrat agenda:

·      Healthcare – control healthcare and you control the people.

·      Poverty – increase poverty levels as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live on.

·      Debt – increase debt to unsustainable level. That way, you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

·      Gun Control – Remove the ability for people to defend themselves from the government. That way you are able to create a police state.

·      Welfare – take control of every aspect of people’s life (food, housing, income, etc.).

·      Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.

·      Religion – remove the belief in God from the government and schools.

·      Class warfare – divide people into wealthy and poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (tax) from the wealthy with the support of the poor.

Some scholars accuse Alinsky to have operationalized and simplified Vladimir Lenin’s strategy for world control under communism and under Russian aegis. 

Joseph Stalin referred to his converts as useful idiots saying that it is tough to free people from the chains they love. Others acknowledge that Alinsky borrowed from Machiavelli The Prince when discussing the Have and Have-Nots.

Fast Forward

Since Alinsky’s time many social issues have been added to the parody of the rulebook. These are the ones I isolated:

·      Climate change – scare people off that they surely will die unless we did away with certain practices.

·      Immigration – flood the country with illegal immigrants so that you can create an  easier to control underclass.

·      Gender – divide people along gender issues and pit one against the other to generate discord and social conflict.

·      Race – although not a recent issue, generate anger and frustration based on skin color so that minorities will look to government for relief.

·      Voting – Split folks into two camps; those against vote fraud and those against vote suppression, so that you create a stalemate.

My Take Away

This analysis, although not in-depth, has put some things in perspective for me.  

The political discourse has changed during the past 35 years. What at one time was a hidden agenda is now in the open. The Democrat platform pretty much mirrors the 8 levers advocated plus the five I added.

Critical Incidents Summary 

President Obama, in his attempt to “transform” America, pretty much worked through the parody of principles. As a community organizer he was quite familiar with the rulebook. He did take control over the healthcare system. During his tenure, the poverty level grew substantially. The national debt doubled. He extended welfare payments to millions claiming some form of disability. He belittled and ridiculed  less educated and religious people.  His party enacted the death tax (inheritance) law as a way to expropriate 45% from a single estate in excess of $ 5 million, as a way to redistribute wealth. And he used identity politics to pit people against one another, often ridiculing people based on wealth.

Today, much unfinished business remains for the Democrat machine.  The Second Amendment folks so far have managed to resist all attempts to take away their rights. 

The new agenda includes:

·      Separating people based on illegal immigration by depicting Republicans as lacking  compassion. Democrats see the influx of poorly educated immigrants as their ace in the hole when it comes to future voters.

·     Separating people into pejorative groups such as misogynist, xenophobe, homophobe, and racist so that voters become loath to vote for anyone Republican. 

·    Accusing Republicans of wanting to destroy our planet because they question not that the climate is changing, but why.

   Lacking from this list are bread and butter issues. History teaches us that when push comes to shove folks favor the party that brings the old bacon home, e.g., more jobs, better wages, better working conditions, and a more comfortable life style.

*******

   Post Script

     Since publishing this post two dear friends unfriended me. One because she said that I was offending Canadians with my parody, and the other because she could not support Trump. I regret the loss of these two long time friends for two reasons: (1) I did not intend to offend anyone, and more specifically a country I don't know, and (2) I was not asking to support Trump with whom I also have my issues. So much for freedom of expression! Disappointed to say the least ...