The Iowa caucuses will get underway Monday as rank and file Republicans and Democrats come together face to face with their fellow citizens to cast the first votes in the 2016 presidential nomination process. Caucus watchers may observe a dark omen for the entire country, a noticeable shift in values that could change America forever.
Political experts who are watching Iowa very closely have already noted that more and more Americans view socialism favorably and are ready to embrace it. The Democratic Party as a whole has shifted its values toward one that fully embraces socialism as an acceptable alternative to capitalism. The shift has so disturbed a former Carter administration official that he declared that there are no real Democrats left.
Pat Caddell, a former official in the administration of Jimmy Carter, stated that the Democratic Party as a whole has so thoroughly embraced socialism that it is difficult to imagine that Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey, or even President Carter himself would be accepted by those who currently run the Party. Democrats have already accepted and embraced socialists such as Bernie Sanders, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, and even Barack Obama who first ran on the socialist ticket when he entered politics in Illinois.
Hillary Clinton has taken a position on the issues that is so close to that of Bernie Sanders that even she has come to embrace socialism. Many citizens, including a tiny minority of traditional Democrats, are appalled by these developments. Walter Williams, retired professor of economics at George Mason University, stated that he is convinced that nearly 50 percent of Americans now view socialism favorably and that such a thing is a dark omen for America.
Williams views socialism as an entirely immoral system of economics, one that requires theft to survive. When an individual decides by his own free will, says Williams, to reach down into his pockets and give to help the poor and needy, then he has engaged in a virtuous act of voluntary benevolence. But for government to reach into his pockets and take money from the people to give to others, then it has engaged in a terribly immoral act called theft. Government sanctioned theft is every bit as evil and immoral as thugs who steal that which is not theirs. Thus, socialism itself is immoral and has no place in a free society.
It is bad enough that government sanctioned theft of private funds that are earned by the hard work and sacrifices of ordinary American citizens is considered acceptable. Government confiscation of the citizens’ personal funds and private property is a wonderful thing, the socialists say, as long as it is done to help those who are not as fortunate as others. This redistribution of wealth that relies on government theft of the hard earned money of citizens is only the tip of the wicked iceberg, however. Those who refuse to comply with this immoral system pay a heavy price, most often with their very lives. The 20th century itself is a lesson in the deadly consequences of socialism.
In order for socialism to be even moderately effective, citizens must be forced into compliance by a centralized government authority. Those who refuse to comply due to their objections must be severely punished — or worse. After the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia ushered in a form of socialism under Lenin and Stalin in the early 20th century, Stalin found widespread resistance to Russian or Soviet styled socialism in certain sectors of the USSR. He decided that the only way he would be able to squelch this resistance was to systematically murder at least 27 million Russians. Some say that the real number of those murdered by their government is well over 30 million.
Similarly, when the socialist/communist revolution in China brought Chairman Mao Zedong to power, he too was met with widespread resistance among Chinese citizens. Chairman Mao took care of the problem by systematically murdering upwards of 70 million Chinese citizens. Adolf Hitler, who ushered in another form of socialism in Germany, systematically slaughtered over 6 million Jews and another 5 million political dissidents. Contrary to the notion that the Nazi party was at the opposite end of the spectrum from socialism, the truth is that Nazism was simply another form of socialism. The very name itself, Nazi, designated what Hitler and his friends called national socialism. The term may refer to several different variations of socialism, but the one common thread that links them all together is an authoritarian central government with either a dictator or a ruling Party in control, forced redistribution of wealth, the seizure and confiscation of private property, the confiscation of firearms owned and used by the citizens, strict limits on free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and the right to assemble peacefully.
Curiously, all of these are increasingly under attack in the United States. This is why the Iowa caucuses are worth watching closely. As U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., stated, this may be our very last chance to elect those who wish to maximize individual liberty and wrest control away from dangerous socialists who wish to destroy this nation from within. A key sign differentiating the good from the bad lies here. Those who would destroy this Republic have much more in common with Joseph Stalin than Thomas Jefferson.