Is Progressivism the New Communism?


Copyright 2012 Susan Stamper Brown

In politics, truth-telling can get you into trouble, even if you stumble upon it by accident. Just ask Rep. Allen West (R-FL).

West is feeling the heat for a pregnant pause he took during a town hall meeting after he was asked “What percentage of the American legislature do you think are card-carrying Marxists or International Socialists.”

“It’s a good question,” West responded, “I believe there’s [sic] about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party.  (Long pause)  “They don’t actually hide. It’s called the Congressional Progressive Caucus.” The left became unhinged.

Obviously West touched a nerve; before long, members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) drafted their response: “Calling fellow Members of Congress ‘Communists’ is reminiscent of the days when Joe McCarthy divided Americans with name-calling and modern-day witch hunts that don’t advance policies to benefit people’s lives…”

The CPC’s response is just another sign of the political times we live in. But something about their argument doesn’t pass the “smell test.”

While there may not be large numbers of card-carrying communists lining the halls of Congress, there is a clear tie between the Democratic Party’s Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

It really boils down to marketing. In marketing, many times the same product is given a different name or label in order to increase its appeal to certain groups. Names are sometimes changed due to the product’s connection to other products, or the public’s association to a prior name.

Although Progressive share much in common with CPUSA and DSA, they are shrewd enough to understand the terms “communist” or “socialist” are unpalatable for most Americans. Hence, the word “Progressive” was injected into American political verbiage. While the words are not interchangeable, one thing is for sure: The CPC is doing its part to further the goals of modern Communists and Socialists who have found a voice in the Democratic Party.

In 2002, Communist Party USA PAC leader Joelle Fishman reported CPUSA uses the Congressional Progressive Caucus as “an important lever” to “move the debate to the left.”   A February 2, 2010 Communist Party USA article “Convention Discussion: A Time to Grow” explained they plan to meet their goals by running for office “within the auspices of the Democratic Party” because “conditions rarely if ever allow us to run open Communists for office.”

The same article praised Obama’s election asserting, “We have the opportunity to build something big, a large, influential and effective Communist Party USA. After the incredible movement to elect Barack Obama, more far-reaching solutions and socialism in particular are back at the dinner table for discussion.”

It seems they are moving toward attaining their goals. Obama’s election, in conjunction with Progressives cannibalizing the Democratic Party by ousting common sense Blue Dogs, aided in a severe shift to the left.  Americans have witnessed the deterioration of this nation by way of the same type of race-baiting and class warfare Communism cannot exist without.

 Unbecoming to an American president, Obama has led the charge in attacks against job-creators, extended the olive branch to “99 Percent” anarchists, and publicly castigated the third (and his equal) branch of government.  Americans have had zero control over the appointments of unsavory anti-capitalist cabinet members like former “Green Czar” and avowed Communist Van Jones.

All things considered, “Washington’s newest breath of fresh air,” West, is dead-on in his assessment of Democratic Party Progressives.  West once said Progressive’s should take their message “and get the hell out of America.” I think most of us would be happy if they would just get the hell out of the Democratic Party and run on their own ticket.

4 Responses to Is Progressivism the New Communism?

  • Love this article, and want to say you are a very brave lady to report the truth! I was glad to find this article I read in the Courier today, and plan to copy and send to everyone on my email list. I am pleased to see you are a military advocate, and you bring a breath of fresh air to all the stale stuff that is out there these days. Keep up the good work because there are alot of good people that feel just the way you do, that are just waiting for the chance to show it come November!
    Thank you,

  • Wow.

    Absurdity reaches new heights. In politics, truth-telling can get you into trouble, but lying will get you media coverage. Allen West made a statement that he believes “about 78 to 81 members of the Democrat Party who are members of the Communist Party.”
    Ms. Brown, do you understand what the word “membership” means? Or how about “card-carrying?” Apparently neither you nor Mr. West do. I suggest you go back to 3rd grade and learn the meaning of basic English words.

    Mr. West has no evidence that anyone in Congress is a “card-carrying member” of the Communist Party. Nor do you.
    You spend paragraph after paragraph trying to explain why the lies he told are somehow justified. This is inflammatory and unethical. I’m sure that you and your defenders will do the same after reading my post. Instead of providing definitive evidence, you provide dogmatic conjecture and tabloid speculation.

    Simply agreeing with a few of the principles of a philosophy or system does not make you an advocate of that system or philosophy.

    Do you agree with capital punishment? Well so does Communism. Does that make you a “card carrying member” of the Communist Party? Of course not. Do you believe in freedom of religion? Well so does the modern Satanist. Does that make you a “member” of the Satanic Church? Of course not.

    This type of oversimplification of ideas and willful support of lying are 2 of the reasons why one of the most successful countries in the history of the world is slowly destroying itself.

    Stick to VERIFIABLE FACTS Ms. Brown. Stop being an apologist for liars. You might actually get those who are able to think logically to agree with you.


  • “WOW” is right, Ratnok. “Simply agreeing with a few of the principles of a philosophy or system does not make you an advocate of that system or philosophy.” So, after splicing and dicing some semantic obfuscations, you admit that a significant number of liberal members of Congress agree with a few principles of communism. Which few principles would those be?

    Because as I understand it, once you go with one or two of the main principles, such as ‘the state’ (government) controlling everything and not open or free markets, and/or that the state should be your god because religion is a corruption of the mind, I think you pretty well have the gist of being a communist. Which other principles of communism do these liberals not agree with, so that they can claim they are not really communists?

    When it comes to a comprehensive system or philosophy, its hard to pick ‘a few principles’ you like and dis the others. You are either on the commie bus; or, you are on the tradional free marker capitalism with consumer controls, environmental constraints, and full disclosure bus. Since most people know which bus works best for the benefit all, then most should vote against Obama and his band of communist bigots.

  • Onegood1 obviously isn’t one good one.