Four years ago, Ron DeSantis was running for governor in Florida against a socialist drug addict under indictment for corruption, who happened to be black. Instead of asking their candidate to step aside so that they could run a more suitable individual to be the chief executive of one of America’s largest states, the Democrats stayed with their man and placed their hopes on smearing DeSantis as a “racist.” Their evidence? In a speech on the economy he said, “The last thing we need to do is to monkey this up by trying to embrace a socialist agenda with huge tax increases and bankrupting the state.” There was nothing remotely racist about this statement. However, the Florida NAACP responded by saying comparison of blacks to monkeys – a comparison DeSantis did not make – was “by far the best-known racist reference to African Americans in our national folklore.”
DeSantis was being hung for a perfectly innocent and apt statement that only a party as morally defective as the Florida Democrats could construe in the way they did. This was soon accompanied by a second charge involving me. DeSantis had spoken four times at an event I hosted annually which had featured mainstream conservatives, including three US Attorneys General, and senators John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Mitch McConnell, Huffington Post reported it under a screaming headline: “DeSantis Gave Four Paid Speeches for Infamous Racist.” That would be me.
Now, four years later, as a very successful Governor DeSantis positions himself for a presidential run, The New York Times’ columnist, Charles Blow has re-opened the charge, saying DeSantis has a significant race problem, holding me up as a case in point: “In a 2018 gubernatorial debate, the moderator asked DeSantis why he had spoken at several conferences hosted by David Horowitz, a conservative writer who the Southern Poverty Law Center says is a ‘driving force of the anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-Black movements.’” In the four years between these attacks, I have refuted these easily disproven lies of the SPLC, numerous times on the Internet, and in my recent book, aptly titled, The Enemy Within: How A Totalitarian Movement Is Destroying America.
The SPLC, is the chief engine of progressive efforts to blacklist conservatives. This $731 million tax-exempt hate machine, posing as a charity, came to national prominence in 1987 when it won a $7 million lawsuit against the United Klans of America, putting them out of business. As it happens the Ku Klux Klan was already on its last legs, down to 3,000 members nationally from its high in the 1920s of 4 million. The United Klans were already so crippled by lack of support that they were only able to pay $50,000 of the $7 million judgment. Having slain an already mortally wounded dragon, the SPLC won judgments against other marginal groups, the White Aryan Resistance and the Aryan Nations. SPLC’s leaders then hit upon a wildly successful but sinister political and fund-raising strategy – first, exaggerate the threat of marginal neo-Nazi hate groups and, second, conflate them with mainstream conservative groups whom SPLC leftists opposed ideologically. SPLC subsumed these libels under the inclusive term “hate groups,” and became the premier slander machine in American history, comparable to Der Sturmer in Nazi Germany.
In 1997 SPLC reported a national surge in “hate groups,” a claim it supported by counting as separate entities all the known branches and chapters of the “hate” organizations it had already listed. By 2009, a mere four organizations and their many branches accounted for 229 separate “hate groups” or one-fourth of the SPLC total. Four years later, using these inflated statistics, SPLC could claim that over the previous decade the number of hate groups had increased 67%, and argue that the increase was “fueled by anger and fear over the nation’s failing economy, an influx of non-white immigrants, and the diminishing white majority, as symbolized by the election of the nation’s first African-American president.”
SPLC’s real focus is its political attack on conservatives, Republicans, and patriotic Americans as revealed in its “Hate Watch” section, whose purpose it explains in these words: “Hate Watch monitors and exposes the activities of the American radical right.” The radical left, represented by such obvious hate groups as Antifa and Black Lives Matter, are notably absent from the SPLC radar. The SPLC site even features a report declaring “Black Lives Matter Is Not A Hate Group.” As for the “radical right,” according to the SPLC this category includes such staid, mainstream conservative organizations as the American Enterprise Institute, the Family Research Council, the Federation for American Immigration Reform, and 60 religious organizations whose beliefs on marriage and abortions it finds “hateful.” The conservative individuals listed as “hate mongers” and “extremists” include famed brain surgeon and Trump cabinet member Ben Carson, Somali-born, former Dutch Parliament member and human rights crusader, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell who, like Carson, is black.
The sin committed by these conservatives was to disagree with the leftwing radicals who run SPLC, and to do so on matters such as affirmative action race preferences, illegal immigration, Islamic terrorism, same-sex marriage and other policy matters. SPLC ascribes these policy differences to racism, homophobia, and other demonizing stigmas that leftists favor. Even the liberal magazine Politico has noted SPLC is “more of a partisan progressive hit operation than a civil rights watchdog.” But this is little consolation for those individuals and groups unfairly labeled racist hatemongers, a slander that the mainstream media is happy to spread. Even Fox reporters too lazy to look into the facts have been known to describe SPLC as a “civil rights organization.”
Politico’s conclusion is confirmed by Mark Potok, the SPLC operative responsible for the “Hate Watch” lists. According to Potok, the Center’s blacklists “have nothing to do with criminality or violence, or any kind of guess we’re making about ‘this group could be dangerous.’ It’s strictly ideological.” In another unguarded moment, Potok explained to a City Journal reporter: “Our aim in life is to destroy these [conservative] groups. To completely destroy them.” It’s not too difficult to conclude that when media like the Washington Post and CNN collude with SPLC in smearing conservatives, it is for the same reason.
In 2016, SPLC published a Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists. “It is sad but telling,” commented Lee Smith, writing for the liberal magazine Tablet, “that the SPLC’s so-called field guide to Muslim-haters is not a list of violent extremists—who certainly do exist—but is instead a blacklist of prominent writers whose opinions on a range of cultural and political issues are offensive to the SPLC…. The SPLC blacklist list contains practicing Muslims like Maajid Nawaz, ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, foreign-policy think-tankers like Frank Gaffney and Daniel Pipes, and right-wing firebrands like David Horowitz—none of whom could be reasonably described as anti-Muslim bigots.” Maajid Nawaz, the UK resident blacklisted by SPLC’s “Hate Watch” as an “anti-Muslim extremist” happened to be a well-known devout Muslim and moderate, “working [in his own words] to push back against extremism.” Nawaz sued SPLC, which voluntarily offered him a $3.4 million settlement.
The swift settlement with Nawaz before the case even went to court could be attributed to stringent British libel laws. In America, there are no such laws. Following the landmark Supreme Court decision in NY Times vs. Sullivan, there are effectively no libel protections for public figures because the bar was set so high in that case. The law requires a victim to prove malice – i.e., knowledge in advance that the published statement was false – and to show material damages, which are normally not easy to establish. It further requires the offending libel to be a factual claim not an opinion. In other words, calling innocent people “racists” and “hate-mongers” is protected constitutional speech because these are regarded as mere opinions not factual claims. But a willing national media repeats them as facts, without characterizing them as opinions from a biased source.
Weak libel laws might be a good thing for democracy, except that they require a level of public integrity that does not exist in America today. If articles appearing in powerful media venues like the New York Times or the Washington Post, refer to a public figure as a “racist” or white nationalist,” or “anti-Muslim extremist,” citing the SPLC, even if there is not a shred of evidence to substantiate the claim, the courts will regard it as “opinion,” therefore protected by the Constitution. This has relieved media institutions of legal liability for the slanders they publish and promote. Not surprisingly, as law professor Glenn Reynolds observes, “trust in the press has fallen steadily since the Sullivan ruling freed media organizations from previously existing legal accountability.”
Despite a rash of critical articles appearing in magazines as far left as The Nation and as mainstream as the Washington Post, exposing the SPLC’s dishonest standards and questionable agendas, its “Hate Watch” lies are regularly reported in the nation’s press, and repeated by TV pundits and news anchors. These risk-free slanders are a potent and dangerous force, promoting the stigmatizing – and suppression – of conservative views.
Indicating just how dangerous is the fact that among the recent mega donors to SPLC, facilitating its defamation crusade, are such titans of the business world as Apple CEO Tim Cook ($1 million) and J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon ($500,000). SPLC continues to be cited as a reputable source by mainstream media and virtually every college newspaper on whose campuses conservative speakers attempt to introduce their otherwise excluded voices. Because SPLC itself operates as a hate group, its impact can be deadly. In 2012, Floyd Corkins walked into the Washington D.C. headquarters of the Family Research Council with a hand gun and 100 rounds of ammunition intending to kill as many people as he could. Fortunately, he was subdued by the building manager before he could carry out his mission. When asked why he had targeted the Family Research Council, he replied, “It was a, uh, Southern Poverty Law lists, uh, anti-gay groups.”
This poison in the nation’s political discourse has affected more individuals than you can imagine. It has obviously affected me personally, despite the fact that I have been a public figure for nearly 60 years, and my views are well known. For more than a decade, I have been at the top of the Southern Poverty Law Center’s hate lists, where I am described as an “extremist” a “hatemonger,” and “a driving force of the anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-Black movements.” I am further described as an “anti-Muslim fanatic” and “the godfather of the anti-Muslim movement in America,” a slander that has put a veritable target on my back.
These are all easily demonstrable lies. In the last 18 years, I have written and spoken more than half a million words, including the 2004 book Unholy Alliance, about Islam and the Islamic jihad. These are readily available in print and on the Internet. Yet the SPLC researchers could not turn up a single sentence that a reasonable person would describe as “anti-Muslim.” In fact, in speeches and writings available on the Internet I have made it clear that I am not anti-Muslim at all.
In 2009, for example, I gave a speech at USC, which is recorded on YouTube and is online at Frontpagemag.com, and is available in my book, Islamo-Fascism and the War Against the Jews (2014). In the speech I say: “Here are my views concerning Muslims: There are good Muslims and bad Muslims, just as there are good Christians and bad ones, good Jews and bad Jews. Most Muslims are like everybody else; they want peace, and are law-abiding. Probably their religion is very personal to them, and doesn’t involve efforts to convert and subordinate or kill others. There is a difference between religious institutions and the religion of individuals. Many Catholics do not follow church doctrine on birth control and abortion, for example. The Ku Klux Klan is a Protestant Christian organization, but virtually all Protestants and their churches condemn the Ku Klux Klan.”
In 2012, I spoke at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. There was a demonstration inside my talk by Muslim Students who walked out in protest soon after I began. My comment was this: “It is too bad that all our Muslim friends have left the room and did not stay to hear this; but notwithstanding the evil intentions of Muslim leaders in the Middle East, there are good Muslims and there are bad Muslims, and most are probably good Muslims – decent, law-abiding, desirous of peace.”
On virtually every campus I have spoken at in the last ten years, I have repeated these words. Nonetheless, I have also been preceded by flyers and handouts filled with the SPLC slanders against me, including the slander that I am “the godfather of the anti-Muslim movement in America.” These slanders are featured in college newspaper accounts of my visits, reaching tens of thousands of members of the academic community. This is an experience shared generally by conservatives like Heather MacDonald, Milo Yiannopoulos and many, many others.
The charge that I am “anti-immigrant” is also without merit, and merely reflects the left’s refusal to distinguish between legal immigration, which conservatives like myself support, and illegal entry into the United States, which we oppose. The SPLC “Hate Watch” also describes me as “anti-black.” This is equally specious but even more personally unpleasant, since I have immediate family who are black. For over sixty years my public life has been dedicated to fighting for the civil rights of black Americans. I have written scores of articles, and four books on race – Uncivil Wars: The Controversy Over Reparations for Slavery (2001), Hating Whitey and Other Progressive Causes (1999), Progressive Racism (2016), and I Can’t Breathe. Each of them is guided by the vision of Martin Luther King that people should be judged on their merits and not on their skin color.
The potency of a discredited blacklist like SPLC’s “Hate Watch” can be attributed first of all to the way the racial politics of the left label every policy dissent – over abortion, affirmative action, immigration, anti-police vigilantism, and due process – “racist,” “sexist” and related derogatory terms. The vast networks of the left share SPLC’s political agendas and believe in their own righteousness so passionately that they could hardly be less concerned with the facts, let alone the rights of those who disagree with them. These networks include ancillary smear sites and blacklists such as Right Wing Watch, Source Watch, Media Matters, Think Progress, Bloodmoney.org, Color of Change and innumerable others that draw extensively on the slanders provided by SPLC, and add some of their own. But the slanders are also abetted by journalists too lazy or uninterested in ascertaining the facts, and by corporate organizations apprehensive of attacks from the left should they fail to respect and repeat its prejudices.
On March 14, 2019, Morris Dees, the founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center was fired. His removal was quickly followed by the resignation of the Center’s president Richard Cohen. According to press reports, “Dee’s ouster had come amid a staff revolt over the mistreatment of non-white and female staffers, which was sparked by the resignation of the senior attorney Meredith Horton, the highest-ranking African-American woman at the center. A number of staffers subsequently signed onto two letters of protest to the center’s leadership, alleging that multiple reports of sexual harassment had been ignored or covered up, and sometimes resulted in retaliation against the women making the claims.”
For weeks the press had a field day reporting the hypocrisy of the SPLC leaders who had proposed themselves as the arbiters of who was, and was not, a racist, sexist, hate monger, and should be shunned. But in the end the SPLC was allowed to continue its vigilante crusades and smear campaigns against conservatives, because the demonization of political opponents was so much the chosen strategy of the political left. The Obamas’ lawyer was entrusted with rescuing the institution, an indication of how central it is to the Democrat Party and the mainstream left.
By 2019, the SPLC’s slanders were reaffirmed by its new leaders, who resumed its function as the supplier of ideological poison to a vast network of so-called “progressive” organizations seeking to shut down the platforms and financial resources of conservatives generally. One of these organizations, the violent group Antifa is dedicated to the idea that anyone who disagrees with its Marxist ideas is either a racist or a fascist and must be “de-platformed” by any means necessary, including violence.
People who work for organizations or in institutions that they themselves do not run are subject to “cancelling” – i.e., being fired for stepping out of line. The platform that enables me to participate in the national debate is one that I created in 1988 – the David Horowitz Freedom Center. But even that doesn’t protect me from the political censors. In the fall of 2018, one of our donors received the following letter when she tried to get matching funds directed to the Center through a charity set up for that purpose.
Thank you for reaching out to us about David Horowitz Freedom Center. At this time, the organization that you are interested in supporting is not included in the program because they are on the SPLC watch list. The SPLC is, “Dedicated to reducing prejudice, improving intergroup relations and supporting equitable school experiences for our nation’s children.” Because David Horowitz Freedom Center is on the SPLC watch list, they have been marked as an ineligible organization. More information on the SPLC can be found on their website (www.splcenter.org/) and if you have any questions for us, please let us know.
The letter was signed by the “Goodness Engagement Specialist” of the charity. Orwell could not have named it more appropriately.
Breitbart editor Allum Bokhari has called this “financial blacklisting… the most totalitarian form of blacklisting,” and a “terrifying new threat to freedom:”
Financial blacklisting doesn’t just rob you of a chance to spread your message: it robs you of your ability to do business, your livelihood, your very means of functioning in a capitalist society. Thanks to the encroachment of progressive ideology into the financial industry — including major credit card companies like Visa, Discover, and Mastercard — it has now become a reality.
In the fall of 2018, as the congressional mid-terms approached, I was dragged into the most dramatic and critical of the races – the gubernatorial contest in Florida. My SPLC caricature was used to tar the Republican candidate, Congressman Ron DeSantis, as a hatemonger too. The outcome of the race in Florida, a critical swing state, was particularly important because of its implications for the 2020 presidential election, since Florida was a battleground state. In September the Democrat Party and its loyal media were using me – or rather the SPLC lies about me – as a weapon with which to destroy the character and candidacy of DeSantis simply because he had spoken at events I hosted.
DeSantis was a West Point graduate and Iraq veteran with a stellar legislative record. He was running against the black mayor of Tallahasee, Andrew Gillum, a political leftist who was under federal investigation for corruption – and as was revealed when he collapsed in a motel room not long after the election, a drug addict. Gillum regularly fended off his critics by calling them racists, or accusing them of repeating racist tropes. As the campaign began in earnest, the Democrats and the media were already attacking DeSantis as an alleged “racist” for the innocuous remark he had made about Gillum’s socialist beliefs.
Just after Labor Day, as the mid-terms began in earnest, the following headline appeared in the Washington Post: “GOP Candidate for Fla. Governor Spoke at Racially Charged Events.” The events The Post was referring to were ones I had been hosting annually for more than twenty years in Palm Beach as the “Restoration Weekend.” There was nothing “racially charged” about these events whose speakers were from the conservative and Republican Party mainstream. Among the featured speakers we had hosted were three former Speakers of the House Newt Gingrich, Denny Hastert and John Boehner and congressmen Roy Blount, Mike Pence, Bob Goodlatte, and Devin Nunes,. Far from being racist, as the Post insinuated – without bothering to offer evidence – the Weekends also featured prominent black conservatives such as J.C. Watts, Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Jason Riley, Larry Elder, Allen West, Candace Owens and Fox Business anchor Charles Payne. Among the awards we gave, one went to Carson and another to Adrian Fenty, former African-American Mayor of Washington D.C. – and a Democrat – for his advocacy for inner city black children.
Ignoring these facts, the Post’s article began: “Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), a gubernatorial nominee who recently was accused of using racially tinged language, spoke four times at conferences organized by a conservative activist who has said that African Americans owe their freedom to white people and that the country’s ‘only serious race war’ is against whites.” Both statements – which the Post culled from the Southern Poverty Law Center “Hate Watch” feature -were true. What group in America other than whites could be openly attacked on the basis of their skin color? But in the prevailing political climate these quotes were just dog whistles to progressives geared up for wars against “whiteness” and America, a majority white nation that was indeed responsible for abolishing slavery as immoral after 3,000 years in which it had been a socially acceptable institution among black Africans, brown Hispanics, and red-skinned Indians as well as whites.
The Post’s prestige caused the article about my DeSantis connection to ignite a firestorm of attacks on him for his association with me. The Miami Herald, which simply reprinted the Post article verbatim, was the first of half a dozen major Florida newspapers to run with the slander. Once a slander is launched, an alarmingly broad cohort of media reporters can be counted on to repeat it without bothering to check its claims. In another typical headline, the website news organization Common Dreams, proclaimed, “Newly Revealed Paid Speeches Leave ‘No Question Whatsoever’ That Republican Ron DeSantis Is a Racist,” and then repeated the slanders about me from SPLC’s “Hate Watch.” Other media outlets joining the attacks included Esquire, New York Magazine, Politico, Newsweek, the Orlando Sentinel, the Tampa Bay Post, Naples News and the Sunshine State News. In blaring headlines, I was called “a hatemonger,” “a white supremacist” and a “race war theorist” because of my off-the-cuff comment about whites currently being the only serious targets of a race war.
The entire aim of the malicious distortions of statements and facts, indeed the whole tenor of the Democrat attacks was that Republicans were racists, unfit to be taken seriously, and that the country would be better off if there were only one party – a party dedicated to the “socially just” future as seen through the eyes of leftwing zealots. Just before the gubernatorial election, which DeSantis won by a hair, Axios published the results of a poll showing that a majority of Democrats – 61% – regarded Republicans as “racists,” “sexists” and “bigots.”
This was entirely predictable for a party which has come to rely on name-calling and hate rather than reason and persuasion, and whose leaders characterize their opponents en masse as “deplorables” and “irredeemables” and “white supremacists.” A party that relies on moral indictments to advance its political agendas, and which elevates tribal groups over the individuals who compose them is a totalitarian party in the making. A party that proposes to “save the planet” or establish a society where “social justice” reigns, is a party that demands intolerance from its adherents, and will regard democratic compromise with an imperfect world as a betrayal of its high-minded cause.
Such a party’s ideological roots and dispositions are the opposite of the liberal principles and values – equality, tolerance, and compromise – enshrined in the American founding. Instead, they are tribal and bellicose. Their origins lie in the 19th Century revolts against liberal democracy, which form the historical antecedents of the modern left, finding their clearest and most influential formulations in the doctrines of Marx and Lenin.
In Lenin’s view, a true revolutionary does not establish the correctness of his beliefs by appealing to evidence or logic, as if there were some standards of truthfulness above social classes. Rather, one engaged in “blackening an opponent’s mug so well it takes him ages to get it clean again.” Nikolay Valentinov, a Bolshevik who knew Lenin well before becoming disillusioned, reports him saying: “There is only one answer to revisionism: smash its face in!” “ In 1907, [Lenin] characterized his attacks on other Socialists as follows: “That tone, that formulation, is not designed to convince but to break ranks, not to correct a mistake of the opponent but to annihilate him, to wipe him off the face of the earth.”
This characterization pretty accurately sums up the goal of the left’s billion-dollar blacklist industry, and its general political discourse. It is reflected in the most popular leftist text of the last fifty years, Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals: “One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other side.”
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/216494/southern-poverty-law-center-blacklist;The present author is one of those listed:
 Glenn Harlan Reynolds, The Judiciary’s Class War, 2018, Kindle Edition, loc 234
 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/magazine/wp/2018/11/08/feature/is-the-southern-poverty-law-center-judging-hate-fairly/?utm_term=.8244b79917b0; https://www.thenation.com/article/king-hate-business/
 David Horowitz, The Black Book of the American Left, Vol IV: Islamo-Fascism and the War Against the Jews, 2014, Part 1, Ch. 16 “Jew Hatred at USC,” p. 143
 David Horowitz, The Black Book, op. cit., Part III, Ch. 10, “A Malignant Cause,” p. 312
 For a sample, see https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271895/dartmouth-nightmare-david-horowitz
 Gary Saul Morson, “Leninthink,” https://newcriterion.com/issues/2019/10/leninthink
 Harold Rosenberg, “Black and Pistachio,” https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1963/06/15/black-and-pistachio
Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore
Not all Leftists are like that,there is MAGA communism by Haz and Jackson Hinkle. Though in my case I am Libertarian.
Mo de Profit says
When did communism make anything great?
There’s an old management saying “what gets measured gets managed”
This quote from the article:
“By 2009, a mere four organizations and their many branches accounted for 229 separate “hate groups” or one-fourth of the SPLC total.”
Is a perfect example of how the management saying should read, “What gets measured gets manipulated” the leftist elites are liars.
MAGA communism appeared in August 2022,a slogan created by Haz Al-Din, of Infrared.Haz is an American youtuber who is Marxist,but Libertarian Marxist. His youtube channel is “Infrared”.
It was spread by his friend Jackson Hinkle,Marxist, in his youtube channel “The Dive with Jackson Hinkle” which now has 172,000 subscribers.
HAZ is American but also of Lebanese-Arab descent.Wow,maybe he is also an ex-Muslim,who knows?
Jackson Hinkle is 23 years old and lives in Los Angeles. He has appeared in Tucker Carlson,AON and often in Jimmy Dore. He is friends with non-Marxists,centrists Alexander Mercouris and Alex Christoforou of “The Duran”,in youtube.
MAGA IS A WORKER’S MOVEMENT(all these are the ideas of Haz Al-Din)
Haz Al-Din says communists should SUPPORT the MAGA movement.
The premise of Al-Din’s argument is that TRUMP
fundamentally and irreversibly changed American politics
—for the BETTER, if one believes in class struggle.
Before 2016, the political landscape in the United States was confined to TWO choices—Democrat or Republican—that were situated along different points of a narrow establishment continuum. Anyone who didn’t pledge allegiance to the status quo (including communists) was relegated to the margins of the political system—if not regarded as an enemy of the state.
MAGA IS OUTSIDE THE STATUS QUO
Haz says that with Trump ALL THIS CHANGED. For the first time in a long time, a mass movement emerged that situated itself OUTSDE of the status quo—AGAINST the status quo, in fact.
“This means that radical political distinctions, rather than simple differences of opinion, are now possible, even in the realm of our democratic state. This is the beauty of the MAGA movement,” says Al-Din in one video.
“It isn’t always clear what the movement aims to do.”
In this sense, he notes, the specific political orientation that has hitherto characterized the MAGA movement—which is clearly anything but communist and is, in fact, vehemently ANTI-COMMUNIST—is of SECONDARY importance.
What matters is that MAGA reintroduces CLASS STRUGGLE to American politics—not only because the MAGA movement draws its support base
MAINLY from the WORKING class, but “because class struggle in politics, as Lenin pointed out, means the introduction of Clausewitzian enmity in politics.”
This, says Al-Din, means recognizing that “the primary contradiction in American politics is between MAGA and the status quo. … Partisanship has made its definite return in the United States solely in the MAGA movement, which has again reintroduced real political enmity and distinction to the belly of the globalist beast itself.” The point is not what Trump says, but what he means to people. And when people fly the Trump flag, what they’re saying is:
“F-k the World Economic Forum, f-k Big Tech, f-k Big Pharma, f-k the status quo.”
American communists, Al-Din argues, are therefore faced with a stark choice: They can either remain within the safe space of ideologically consistent but politically irrelevant echo chambers, or they can choose to engage with the real political contradictions of contemporary America. They can join leftists in demonizing MAGA supporters as inherently racist, xenophobic, and so on, which effectively means siding with the status quo,
or they can sacrifice ideological purity and side with the only mass working-class and anti-establishment movement that currently exists in America. There is no middle path.
This, of course, doesn’t mean that communists should passively accept whatever ideological orientation MAGA happens to have at the moment. On the contrary, a crucial point of Al-Din’s argument is that MAGA shouldn’t be viewed as a coherent ideology, but as a symbol of anti-elite struggle that remains open to the construction of a wide range of political identities.
In this sense, MAGA should be seen as something that began with Trump and is still associated with him—but that has the potential of taking on a life of its own, having become the host of every actual counter-hegemonic ideological tendency within the United States.
MAGA, in this account, is not a monolith but a terrain of contestation. Indeed, #MAGACommunism arises out of an awareness that the MAGA movement is at a crossroads.
It represents “an alternate timeline for America. Which alternate timeline is an open question.” The populist energies that have gathered under its banner may merely become another instrument of elite-driven imperialism, as hawks weaponize anti-communism to promote war against China and Russia.
The #MAGACommunism meme should therefore be understood as an attempt to salvage—and, indeed, strengthen—the working-class, anti-establishment, and anti-imperialist elements of the movement.
It’s safe to say the prospect of socialist ideas spreading among American workers is not one the country’s ruling classes look upon favorably.
But the advocates of #MAGACommunism hope to make communism appealing to ordinary working-class people by decoupling it from the toxic ideology of leftism. Whereas the latter has turned into a fanatical and anti-popular ideology that looks down upon the masses, and despises everything most people hold dear—nation, family, tradition—#MAGACommunists claim to be reclaiming a revolutionary legacy rooted in a deep patriotic respect for the national, familial, and cultural premises that define a people.
“Socialism with American characteristics,” as they call it, does not aim to change all private-property relations, let alone abolish all private property.
On the contrary, it is one that aims to overthrow the monopolists, the bankers, Big Pharma, Big Agriculture, Big Tech and others, in order to allow people have more things, not less.
Beyond the playful memes, however, it isn’t always clear what the movement aims to do. Does it seek to unite people from the far left and far right under the same anti-elite umbrella, without challenging the ideologies of the various factions, as Hinkle would appear to be suggesting? Or does it aim to transcend existing ideologies and the left-right political spectrum altogether to create a new “populist” working class-elites spectrum, as Al-Din seems to imply?
If the goal is a hard-left-hard-right union, the problem is that there are clearly lines that have to be drawn in terms of who you ally yourself with. Moreover, the risk is that the movement ends up being perceived as a “sum of extremes” that alienates moderate voters both on the left and on the right, thus resulting in a whole that is less than the sum of the parts.
And if the goal is to transcend the left-right spectrum altogether, #MAGACommunists are bound to discover that the dichotomy is harder to kill than they think, especially by resorting to a term (communism) that is arguably impossible to extricate from that dichotomy. Moreover, so-called culture-war issues—from abortion to race—have become part and parcel of contemporary politics, and can’t be wished away in the name of working-class unity.
Ultimately, one can’t help but feel that we are still stuck in a situation in which the old political spectrum has become zombified, but a new one is yet to be born. #MAGACommunism may prove to be nothing more than a meme, but it shows the hunger that exists for a less stultifying politics.
MagaCommunism? Really? Do you just make stuff up to justify this novel?
Looks like a new troll. If he hangs around, he will be a perfect match for Thx. …
Subjectivist Derangement Religion v. Nationalist Communist Oxymoronism …
I would like to join the fun, but I don’t have time.
… you and yours have a wonderful weekend, Intrepid!
It exists,and I am not a Communist,but a Libertarian,but one has to have an open mind,not be narrow-minded. Hear out all points of view. By the way,we Libertarians are NON-Interventionists,
anti-imperialists. Do to others as you would have them do to you.
The founder of MODERN Conservatism was Edmund Burke,he was also anti-imperialist.33% of his writings were AGAINST British rule in INDIA.
He was for getting out of India. He was also a devout Chritsian,Anglican and he believed in
Locke’s affirmation that all are born equal and thus have 3 inalienable rights:to Life,Liberty and Property.
Thus by logic,imperialism is evil,according to Burke.
Mo de Profit says
There’s only one answer to maga communism, liberals need to form their own party and get out of the Democrats, show them that you are not good to stand for the nonsense.
The party to join is the LIBERTARIAN party,which is NON-interventionist, therefore
The best Libertarian representative in the US is in the Republican party,but he is a true Libertarian, antiwar, against going to war with Russia and China. He is RON PAUL,father of RAND Paul.
Rand Paul is fighting FAUCI,trying to put that criminal in jail. The youtube channel of RON Paul is ”RonPaulLibertyReport” with 313,000 subscribers.
However,REASON magazine and QUILLETTE and the CATO INSTITUTE have dishonnerd themselves. They are PRO-intervenists, betraying their claim to be Libertarian. Personally I think they have been infiltrated by the globalists.
Elizabeth Crouse says
I live in Alabama and SPLC is. Disgrace and I hate they have offices here. I don’t hear much about them anymore.
Arnab Chatterjee says
To hell with the Leftists , they are try to bite off more than they can chew !……
geoff nizel says
I have contended for MANY years that the Left, better named :”Fascistic Socialists”/;AMERICAN Marxism and their Gaggle/Party of INSANITY, ANTI-AMERICANISM,, FRAUD THE BIG LIES & TOTALITARIANISM are run by “true believers:” who have invested themselves in THE myopic, delusional, corrupt, fraudulent, the big lies, very destructive IDEOLOGY coupled with the “fundamental transformation of mAmerica.” At ITS very Core resides EVIL and a pure unfiltered HATRED of America, We, the People, the Founders and Framers, our Founding Documents, FREEDOM, the Individual replaced by the Collective, FAMILY, a Nuclear family with Mom Dad & children, GOD being erased by THE IDEOLOGY.
This is NOW the Left. They are at WAR with America and its citizens. Principlas have no meaning or even a rudimentary understanding for the Left. They are the Barbarians at the Gate who through LIES, Misinformation, Deceit and Omission strike at ANYTHING & EVERYTHING that does not fit their perspective, THE IDEOLOGY. THE IDEOLOGY is their full-time Religion.
Chris Thomas says
“Remember – “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”. The rulers of darkness are the DemoCraps
New Irene says
Thankfully, nobody takes charges of racism seriously anymore. The political left is like the Boy Who Cried Wolf. As for the Southern Poverty Law Center, there’s nothing that a couple of pi pe b o mb s couldn’t fix.
Algorithmic Analyst says
Thanks David, excellent piece.
Thanks also for tracing the history back to Lenin, which many people are unaware of.
The smear is one of their main weapons, maybe the main one. And they almost never stop even when caught, they just double down on lies.
Horowitz is a wealth of information. … That’s why the Left has to censor him and smear him. They cannot answer any of his claims or questions.
… you and yours have a wonderful weekend, AA!
Algorithmic Analyst says
One has to always read all the arguments and wait.Two months ago there were protests in CHINA regarding funds frozen in banks. I have noticed the Conservative websites that covered it later never said it has been solved.
The Henan banks in the news were several rural agricultural branches where management was infiltrated by a gang of criminals who took deposits for their own use.
So far roughly 200 have been arrested.
The limiting of withdrawals was because they had little cash on hand. In recent days all the small depositors have been given the entire balance of the their deposits under an FDIC type coverage. The bigger depositors will need to wait a bit for the government to deal with them.
Initially the payback start with people with less than 50k RMB, about 7K US$. Now they all get their money back and the payback reached people with 500K RMB in deposit. I’d say that it’s already covered most of working class families.
The FDic announced that depositors with 400k to 500k Yuan will be paid in full. To date more than Us $2.4 billion have been refunded to these depositors in Henan and Anhui.
Angel Jacob says
The low IQ leftist-islamic evil alliance is not capable of thinking, nor planning, nor managing anything.
They are very good at hating and destroying everything.
They should be all treated accordingly. It’s a waste of time to try and reason with any of them. Their small brains will never, ever grasp any logic or reasoning.
“You are racist.”
“No, I’m not.”
Wash, rinse, repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat…
William in Ajax says
You’re a Racist.
Just answer with..
Ok lets play your grade four game..
I know you are, but what am I ?
Repeat, repeat, repeat as needed.
In my opinion, David Horowitz is NOT a racist (no capitalization). None of that matters to his enemies. Do you follow? I don’t think so.
I must take issue with Horowitz’s assertion that he’s anti-Muslim. He avers that Islam *qua* Islam is separable from jihad, and, although he does not say it explicitly, from Sharia and its attendant incompatibility with our Constitutional law. He asserts there are “good” Muslims versus bad ones, but does not explain how they differ. Presumably, perhaps, “good” Muslims are philosemitic, sympathetic to Zionism and oppose the war of attrition waged by Muslims against Israel; supportive of legal equality of all religions, patriotic, and eager to uphold the Establishment clause. In his own experience, Horowitz has been exposed to unremitting hostility by Muslims on university campuses because of his pro-Israel position. There is a video from several years ago attesting to this, where a hijabbed Muslima stated publicly at one of his presentations that she wanted Israel and Jews destroyed. Horowitz fails to provide even a scintilla of evidence that significant numbers of “good” Muslims exist in America; M. Zuhdi Jasser’s American Muslim organization – anti-Sharia, anti-jihad, and pro-Constitution, has a pathetically small membership. Here on frontpagemag com, numerous articles by Joe Kaufman repeatedly reveal the malevolence of major Muslim organizations such as CAIR, AMANA, ICNA, and their subsidiaries, which are well-funded and have large memberships in the state of Florida alone. Undeniably, there are peaceful Muslims, but most of them are, for all intents and purposes, nonobservant. And many of these nominal Muslims nevertheless harbor animosity toward Israel, Jews, and religions deemed not “of the Book,” i.e. lacking a scripture acknowledged by Islam to have a germ of legitimacy. Hinduism and Buddhism immediately come to mind. These prevailing attitudes exist because of Islam itself, which these nominal Muslims were exposed to from early childhood, as they grew up in Muslim households. Islam is a thoroughly malevolent religion which menaces all of us. It has no place in the West, nor in any society or nation which aspires to live in peaceful coexistence with neighboring societies, either on a regional or national level. What Muslims have lent their support to Horowitz, either on a personal or political basis? While admirably brave and articulate, energetic despite his battle with cancer, I fear that Horowitz, like so many others, have gone wobbly on Islam. A pity
I meant I take issue with Horowitz’s claim that he’s NOT anti-Muslim. (Please bring back the Edit function in the Comments section.) Why wouldn’t he – or any other infidel – be anti-Muslim? Over 35,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9-11, uncountable deaths, incalculable destruction of property, the transformation of European countries into dystopian hellholes where Muslim immigration has been encouraged or tolerated – what sane non-Muslim could ignore any of this?
The pernicious influence of Muslims elected to Congress – largely by other Muslims in Michigan and Minnesota – cannot be ignored. The same may be said of many of the Muslims employed by CNN and MSNBC – Ali Velshi and Mehdi Hasan, in particular, who have been given a platform to spew their animus toward Israel. Mehmet Oz, while nominally a Muslim, has embraced syncretic religious beliefs, thanks to his non-Muslim wife, which are utterly incompatible with Islam itself, this being quite a good thing.
Stephen Triesch says
The left always plays yesterday’s conservative against today’s conservative. Yesterday’s conservative is always portrayed as a model of moderation and intelligence, whereas today’s conservative is always Hitler, a Nazi, a racist, and a moron. But when today’s conservative becomes yesterday’s conservative – Dubya, McCain, Romney, even Reagan -he is magically transformed into the opposite of what he was once called. Yep, BusHitler is now one of the good guys, as is “Folders of Women” Romney.
Once Trump’s day is over and De Santis or someone else is the new Republican standard bearer, Trump will suddenly become a good guy compared to the new Hitler. We are already seeing the beginning of this with De Santis, who the left is now saying is “worse than Trump.” In fact, a couple of weeks ago the NYT wrote an article favorably comparing Trump to De Santis, praising Trump’s humor and showmanship and sympathizing with his struggles with the DC establishment.
Una Salus says
We’ll see how DeSantis survives his hurricane disaster since modern humans so seldom come into contact with the reality that nature could flatten them as if they don’t exist.
Una Salus says
Hurricanes are traditionally the way in for Dems recognising Republicans as the pale shadow of themselves Republicans are.
Say No To Teabaggers says
Is David Horowitz vaccinated?
Steven Brizel says
The NYT is s as n expensive woke Twitter page
Nicolas Carras says
The SPLC has become a leftist sect to be destroyed. These people are dangerous and participate in sowing discord in American society, with the aim of imposing their political agenda which can only lead to total decadence. The word racist has become a political weapon to disqualify political opponents with a desire for social destruction, and has ended up completely losing its original meaning, which in my opinion is very serious, because as the other said: when words end by losing their meaning, the world becomes ungovernable. This sect of petty inquisitors with their shitty politically correct “meta-morale” must be fought openly and vigorously. Empower these people, and you have the return of the gulags. They have already started to establish the intellectual gulag. A total plague.
Nicolas Carras says
— The letter was signed by the “Goodness Engagement Specialist”
HA HA HA ! The “Goodness Engagement Specialist”…
Ron DeSantis is a Navy veteran, not a graduate of the USMA. He served as a legal advisor with a SEAL team (Team 5, IIRC) in Fallujah, Iraq during the Surge (again, IIRC). The gist being, Mr. Horowitz, you need to nail down your facts to demonstrate credibility.
Nicolas Carras says
“The gist being, Mr. Horowitz, you need to nail down your facts to demonstrate credibility.”
Is all of what is said in this article called into question by your assertion?
Shin Senecal says
This Shoulder-Length haired Bright eyed latina is very shocking 📲 http://jtayl.me/4or6q
Mr. Alessandro Jacob personally observes your case from the second you turn into our law firm istanbul türkiye’s shopper.