The Russian Revolution of 1917 was one of the 20th century’s most monumental events, ushering in a decades-long communist system of government that saw the Soviet Union rise to the stature of a global superpower.

The violent uprising “marked the end of the Romanov dynasty and centuries of Russian Imperial rule, History.com noted, adding that it was led by Bolshevik Party leader and Leftist revolutionary Vladimir Lenin.

Before becoming the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the Bolsheviks “destroyed the tradition of czarist rule” mostly by destroying nearly all of the history associated with the czars — monuments, statues, history books and other references to the country’s monarchical past.

Lenin got the peasant masses to follow him by convincing them that the ruling class, along with the capitalist economic, social, academic and cultural systems and institutions they had built, were inherently corrupt, unfair and systemically biased against them.

Are we seeing some of the same activities now being put in place by the American Left, with the blessing and assistance of an increasingly Marxist Democratic Party? The answer, without question, is yes.

The biggest difference now, compared to the days when Lenin’s Red Army was fighting the capitalist-czarist White Army, is there is not nearly as much violence. 

Yet.

Rather, as the National Review notes:

We’re in the dawn of a high-tech, bloodless Cultural Revolution; one that relies on intimidation, public shaming, and economic ruin to dictate what words and ideas are permissible in the public square.

It’s become clear that the American Left has seized upon a couple of recent events to launch an all-out effort to destroy our country from within, to seize control of the levers of power through intimidation and, where necessary, force. The perceived weakness of President Donald Trump combined with the economic collapse caused by coronavirus-related shutdowns and the disturbing death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police have provided American Leftists with their “Lenin” moment.

The revolution is manifesting itself in the Democratic Party, as noted by Samuel Culper, founder of Forward Observer. He wrote this week:

One of the more interesting trends we’re watching is the bifurcation of the Democratic Party. 

In structure, it’s slightly reminiscent of how the Republican Party broke along the Conservative Inc. establishment and the Tea Party starting in 2009. …

There’s a political insurgency being waged within the Democratic Party, pitting establishment moderates against their socialist challengers.

Socialist-Marxists are leading the political insurgency. They include ‘Squad’ members Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar, whose rhetoric could have been ripped right out of any speech given by Lenin or his Communist successors.

Culper notes that gaining a socialist foothold nationally is one thing, but that’s all it will be for the foreseeable future — a foothold. Where ‘the revolution’ is really going to come from is at the state and local levels:

By gaining more power at the local and state levels — electing lower court judges and district attorneys, for instance — socialists can do more to form a judicial blockade against what they describe as neo-liberal and fascist policies at the national level.

The argument has proven accurate with regard to the political power exercised by the courts and city councils during the COVID-19 shutdowns and, more recently, the riots and civil unrest. Local politicians can also provide cover for socialist disruption and facilitate the socialist insurgency.

Culper goes on to note that Prof. Frances Fox Piven has recently encouraged socialists and Marxists not to shy away from using violence in local activism (hence the destruction of statues, monuments and other historical references to our founding — not just those tied to slavery and inequality).

In calling for “a revolutionary transformation,” Piven has warned socialist followers not to “fall on this very narrow path of nonviolence,” arguing that “the violent capacity of the crowd is an important way of defending its ability to exercise disruptive power.”

“While the socialist movement builds counter-institutions, militant trade unions, local economies, and autonomous zones — and turns grassroots organizing into social power — its political organizations are expanding representation in Congress and injecting socialists into state and local political positions,” Culper writes.

“This is yet another sign of how the United States is changing, and is another indicator that socialist success has staying power.”

Whether or not President Trump is reelected is of little consequence. If he is, then the violence will only increase; if he’s not, the violence will only increase. The difference is there will be less push-back on the federal level without Trump in the White House. 

Sources include:

ForwardObserver.com

NationalReview.com