(American Thinker) — We are in a dark place as a country. This is a direct result of the extreme shift to the Left by the Democrat Party. Prior to 2020, President Barack Obama was our most far-Left President. But even Obama was still on the cusp between being an extreme liberal and being a communist. In a recent book, John Drew wrote about his occasional meetings with Obama in the early 1980s and that Drew—a leftist at that time—had persuaded Obama to accept a more moderate position than that of the hardcore Marxists. In another article in the same book, Trevor Loudoun reveals that Obamacare was a dilution of the healthcare plans desired by the Marxists in that it did not replace all private healthcare with a national, government-run healthcare system. However, in July 2020, the camp pushing Joe Biden towards the Presidency and the camp promoting the communist Bernie Sanders’ candidacy reached a landmark agreement—a 110-page pact regarding goals for the government. In so doing, Joe Biden broke the policy of the Democrats going back to 1948 of not embracing the far-Left, communist element of the Democrat Party.
The language of the Biden-Sanders pact is dry and opaque, and most citizens would not have the patience to plow through it. Convoluted and turgid prose is, to this writer, a clear sign of an attempt to obscure the purposes and direction that the writers intend to take. In this case, it is clear that the intent of the Democrats is to implement communistic revisionism into government policies, to overthrow the values that inhere and undergird our legal system, and to overthrow the principle of private property either through nationalization or through infiltration of and control of the private sector.
In 1948, Henry Wallace, former vice president and secretary of Commerce and Agriculture, ran for President as the candidate of the Progressive Party. He identified himself with defending the Soviet Union from the attacks and hostility of the Truman administration. Thus, despite his impressive résumé, there was an invisible but real line between the “progressive” or Left-leaning Democrats and the hard Left or pro-communist elements. When the pact between Biden and Sanders was signed, that invisible line was erased. A couple of months later, the Democrat 90-page Platform was published and most of the positions found in the Biden-Sanders pact were contained therein.
The new system is wholly based on atheism and its replacement of Judeo-Christian morality with what the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche called a “transvaluation of values” where that which has for centuries been deemed good based on Judeo-Christian values is now replaced by DEI, ESG, and identity redefinitions regarding men, women, children, right, wrong, work, and life. Marx’s economic dialectic is now conjoined with cultural Marxist themes that assume a country with soulless identities. Those identities are no longer fit to control and manage the government through representative government but are to be managed by that government for the good of all. This follows the philosophical principles first enunciated by the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
READ: Leftist nihilism is eroding the fabric of American civilization
Further, in order to fully grasp the extent of our “dark place,” we also need to be alert to the significance of the United Nations’ Agenda 2030. This document with 91 sections is the vision of the new world government which the UN hopes to fully establish by 2030. Before considering this document, we need to consider where the UN has been while all the conflict is going on in the world. The UN, with its traditional peacekeeping functions and powers, seems nowhere to be found in stories about the fighting in Ukraine, in bringing peace in the Middle East, in Yemen, in Syria, or in Gaza for that matter. UN troops fought in Korea and the UN has had troops in other war-torn areas. Yet, Agenda 2030, the UN’s vision for world governance, has no discussion of police or military power. Further, unlike the original United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1946, there is no discussion of “rights.” The word “rights” only appears once in Section 19 of this latest major document, although in 1946 rights appeared in every other sentence. In this latest “vision,” the key terms that keep reappearing are “needs” and “sustainability.”
The emphasis on needs is lifted directly from the Marxist playbook, which stresses “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.” Sustainability is a more modern economic goal intended to call our attention to the fact that we all—whether or not we live in a developed country, a less-developed country (LDC), or a less-developed developing country (LDDC) —need planet Earth. We all need the air, the sunlight, the rain, the oceans, the oxygen, and yes, some CO2. We all need our energy resources, and presumably by speaking about needs and the sustainability of the world as a whole, we are thereby going to take our minds off ourselves and our present advantages over others who have the same basic needs as we.
READ: African politician warns the UN that separating ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ undermines the family
Under Agenda 2030, it is assumed that need and sustainability will be properly handled—i.e., unselfishly—by a world government. That government will be the United Nations, which, as we know, is filled with hundreds of unselfish individuals. Nevertheless, in our present world crises, the UN seems strangely not to be in play. At the same time, for the one-world government types, driving electric cars is going to help us find common cause with—to identify with—people who need to walk two miles through the jungle to find clean water to bring back to their villages in pots carried on their heads. Through a leap of faith, we are asked to believe that doing without gasoline is caring about those distant people in straitened circumstances. Thus, by buying into the sustainability narrative, one can have a pretense toward Mother Theresa-style self-sacrifice and a relieved conscience without ever having to leave one’s own home to personally help the underserved of this world.
The UN’s lack of peacekeeping in our present world with its many conflicts is by design. The UN is now operating under a Marxist-themed agenda to which we are a signatory. The Biden administration has made a pact with Sanders thereby displaying its radical shift away from individual rights and Judeo-Christian morality and merging into a collectivist, non-Judeo-Christian mindset. The eerie silence about the role of the UN in the midst of our many conflicts is troubling because it suggests hidden, dark manipulations. Incredible, unprecedented events will continue to unfold.
Jeffrey Ludwig has taught philosophy, history, and writing at various colleges and universities including Harvard, Penn State, Juniata, Lesley, and CUNY. His latest book is available here. He is also a pastor and preaches regularly as a guest in various pulpits.
This article was originally published in American Thinker. Republished with permission.