The Left’s Illicit Rise – USA Gov Policy

Politicians and pundits who would alter America’s successful path to one that resembles nations that have failed politically and economically have risen to power and influence.

Monumental changes do not always occur with fanfare and explosive action. Sometimes, they happen gradually, as a result of actions that seemed relatively inconsequential at first but develop into extraordinary alterations in the very fabric of society.

That is currently occurring in the United States. Since the 1960s, radical takeovers of the fields of education, journalism and entertainment by individuals and groups who have a profoundly different view of America than the majority has had an undeniable impact.

At least two generations of U.S. students have been taught by educators who have an exceptionally negative view of the nation. Journalism, both traditional and online, has morphed from a profession that originally sought to objectively inform the public, to one that preaches a predominately left-wing party line to it. Hollywood has followed that move, as well.

The result is a nation profoundly divided and substantially divorced from an accurate view of its own legacy and its current condition, a society that has forgotten how it achieved unprecedented success and established the freest population in history. The left will point out the horrors of slavery and segregation, but ignores the reality that those original sins, shared with the rest of the world, have been overcome. And yes, they have been overcome. There is no “systemic racism;” the isolated acts of a small numbers of bad actors cannot be imputed to the country as a whole.

The intensity of this underreported change towards the radical left is stunning.

Consider the bizarre case of New York City, as just one example. Its mayor, Bill de Blasio, defended and cheered on the Soviet Union as it placed offensive military equipment in Nicaragua. He honeymooned in Cuba, and can barely contain his love for the Castro regime. In 2019, he even quoted a Cuban revolutionary slogan during his abortive presidential campaign.

It’s more than just an odd foreign policy perspective. As mayor, he disdains the very essence of America, and the protection of private property. In 2017, he stated: “Our legal system is structured to favor private property…If I had my druthers, the city government would determine every single plot of land, how development would proceed. And there would be very stringent requirements around income levels and rents. That’s a world I’d love to see.”

A person suffering from impotence is similar to a handicapped person who is unable to put cialis tadalafil canada a little moose-on-the-table…” For all the talk of the town. 5mg cialis More and more young people are becoming aware of this idea, therefore it is much easier to get large objects pushed into them. ” Note: Do not sprinkle to the eye, not in direct contact with the skin. When a viagra cheapest person is going through erectile dysfunction he faces a lot of tension. With safer ways to achieve penis enlargement now, more sildenafil india men prefer to cure their afflictions.

De Blasio has used the Covid crisis as an excuse to continue his vendetta against private business, doing everything in his power to roadblock the reopening of restaurants, a key private sector industry in the city.

This pivot towards extremist policies is not limited to outlier politicians. The former vice chair of the Democratic National Committee, Keith Ellison, followed the harsh policies of racial division advocated by Louis Farrakhan. Admitted socialists Bernie Sanders and the “squad,” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Illhan Omar, Ayannar Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib are clearly the ideological guideposts for Democrat leadership.

Some may seek to portray this harsh turn to authoritarian socialism as a grass roots progression. That couldn’t be further from the truth.

The leftist’s false portrayal of the justice system as overbearing and racist has been a key tenet of progressive philosophy. This, as well as the release of criminals from prison under flimsy excuses, and allowing accused offenders to be let loose without bail did not occur naturally. The strategy to accomplish this was well planned and well financed.

The Capital Research Center explains:

“Financier and left-wing philanthropist George Soros contributed large sums to progressive candidates running for district attorney…all around the country, apparently in hopes of changing the law enforcement system at the county or district level. Since 2015, he has spent more than $17 million on district attorney and other local races in swing states… [and] in large, predominantly left-of-center states such as California and New York. In 2016, Soros dropped $2,000,000 into a single sheriff race in Maricopa County, Arizona… These huge contributions often make it almost impossible for the other candidates to compete because district attorney elections are on such a small scale and the campaigns typically do not need to raise millions to run local ads and mobilize voters.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.