Open Letters to Freethinking Never Trumpers (Part 3)

Josh Klein
Oct 11, 2024
13 min read

Updated: Nov 11

In our previous two installments (See Part 1 & Part 2) we considered the charges against Trump and levied our own heavily sourced charges against the Harris administration and campaign, but we are not finished. Much more could be said about the moral and political deficiencies of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. For instance, Harris was recently endorsed by the pornography industry, something you won’t read about from the “Evangelicals for Harris” community while they, at the same time, condemn Trump for the sexual escapades of his past. The moral character of both presidential candidates is deeply flawed. However, our more pressing concern is in policy considerations for the future. While character certainly matters, policy affects our neighbor and whether we like it or not one of these two low character nominees will be president in 2025. Even if the aforementioned policies (see Part 2) somehow do not convince one of Kamala Harris’s more communistic leanings perhaps dissecting her family history and current campaign slogans will tip the scales. Kamala Harris’s father, Donald J. Harris worked as a professor at Stanford University and wrote a book in the 1970s called Capital Accumulation and Income Distribution. In the book he argued for a synthesized economy based on the Monetarism theories of David Ricardo, Michal Kalecki and Karl Marx himself. Interestingly, it was Ricardo’s theory on labor that Marx embraced and Marx’s theory of uprising of the common folk that Kalecki broadened. In other words, Harris’s father was, indeed, influenced greatly by Marxian thought and his economic theories reflected this. Thus, Kamala Harris has been around these theories her whole life. Keep that in mind as we quickly dissect two of Kamala Harris’s favorite slogans.

“We’re not going back, we’re going forward together”.

Some might think this is just a cheap recreation of President Obama’s 2008 “Change” slogan, but it is so much more than that. The question could be, and should be, asked, what exactly does Kamala Harris mean by “not going back”? Also what kind of “forward” is she talking about? What goals does she want to make progress towards? Given her policy prescriptions one can make an informed guess, but one need not make a guess when the truth is there right before our eyes. In 2021 the Communist Party USA’s slogan was “we’re not going back.” In fact, since 2018 the party has written numerous articles that reflect the tone of Harris’s campaign when she shouts the words from a podium. Marxists and communists have used this refrain for decades to point to the need for revolution and a remaking of our society to shed the shackles of the bourgeoisie. Note Rosanna Cambron’s (proud affiliate of the CP-USA) closing remarks in a speech delivered in 2021:

“We as a Party would like to invite those who are not yet members to join us to collectively work to achieve a more democratic, humane, and sustainable society. We’re not going back . . . Forward Together!”

Now consider Kamala Harris’s comments in an acceptance speech at the DNC just over a month ago:

“America, we are not going back. We are charting. A. New. Way. Forward.”

But perhaps this is just a coincidence? After all, these are fairly innocuous words that many people might put together. But when combined with another of her favorite phrases on the campaign trail one might need to consider the possibility that Kamala Harris knows exactly what she is doing.

“What can be. Unburdened by what has been.”

Another seemingly meaningless statement but it is not meaningless at all. Consider atheist academic Eric Weinstein’s, who should not be confused as a conservative, insight on it:

“…There's a line in Marx where… sometimes you hear certain phrases like when AOC (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) uses the phrase “We Have A World to Win” which comes from the end of the communist manifesto originally written in German. I used to hang out in the Revolutionary bookstore in Cambridge Massachusetts with the Communists because they print everything in every language so if you're trying to learn multiple languages they'll print the same text in all of these languages and you can compare. It basically says you have to wipe out what has been to arrive in the new and where’s it from what can be unburdened by what has been. It's not a direct translation but it occurs in Karl Marx.”

This very concept, the concept of unshackling from the past of oppression so that we can embrace the revolution of the future is Marxian thought through and through. It is a revolutionary language intended to omit the past and embrace the classless and stateless future. Is Kamala Harris intentionally repeating this Marxian adjacent rhetoric? Perhaps not, but the fact that the lines and dots connect should not be ignored. Books could be written concerning these disturbing connections (like Tim Walz stating "One person's socialism is another person's neighborliness") . We have only scratched the surface here. Suffice it to say that it seems, at least to us, that the Harris/Walz ticket is either

actively

accidentally

forwarding policies that, taken to their logical ends, are designed to usher in Communistic style governance. Only the bulwark of our constitution and system of checks and balances (systems that Harris seems bent on “reforming”) would stand in the way.

The Policies of Harris & Walz

2024 is a very unique election as the policies Trump and Vance advance do not seem to be that much different from those that Bill Clinton advanced in 1992. The policies advanced by the modern-day Democrat machine in 2024, however, are to the extreme left of Bill Clinton in 1992 and even Barack Obama in 2008. Given their platforms in 92 and 08, although we would not vote for them based upon abortion alone (at least Clinton said abortion should be "rare"), we can see how a Christian could have cast a vote in 92 or 08 for the Democrat Party as the two parties shared much more in common back in the good old days. Interestingly, I (Stratton) left the Republican Party in 07 because I opposed George W. Bush's leadership. I became a free thinking registered Independent. With that said, as Dr. Robert A.J. Gagnon has recently stated, it is a sin of commission to vote for Harris/Walz and it seems to be a sin of omission to fail to cast an effective vote against them. As noted above, a vote for Harris/Walz is a vote for:

*State-sponsored child abuse through the trans cult (chemical castration and surgical mutilation of minors).