When Karl Marx published his Communist Manifesto in 1848 it was peddled around the world as the ultimate utopian vision of a worldwide human-centered society where differences between individuals and cultures would be washed away in a cleansing process that promised equality for all and an end to unfairness and injustice. A world where everyone serves as an interchangeable cog in the machinery of the social order.

Regardless of their nationality, communists are communists first. They share a closer kinship with communists of other nations than they do with their own countrymen. The will of the population is never a consideration. A tiny elite dictate the minutiae of everyday life to the unwilling masses for their own good. Academics and political apologists of the ideology never admit the obvious failures, as communism’s catastrophic economic and human devastation are dismissed as glitches to be ironed out in the next implementation.

The most obvious problem with communism is that it denies humanity. It denies any difference between people that makes us all unique and, when knit together, makes societies and cultures unique from one another. There is no allowance that some are athletic, others artistic, some are intelligent and some are physically gifted. That some cultures place a higher value on an industrious and an orderly social experience. Collectivism is an atheistic denial of God and the human soul and the reduction of human beings to mere animated bags of meat of no more value than whatever they can produce for the collective.

The traditional approach to forcing communism is to incite a large enough segment of the underclass to overthrow the political and economic systems of a nation through violent revolution.

A violent revolution, however “fair” it may be, is a harder sell in wealthy nations like the United States or Western Europe where there is a large middle class who work hard and earn a decent living and have the prospect of increasing their own wealth or putting their children in a position to achieve more in the future. So a different approach was developed.

There is still the pandering to the lower classes about the rich acquiring their wealth not because of work ethic, ingenuity or any other virtuous attribute, but because they are evil and take advantage of the poor. It is an ego boost that simultaneously absolves them of responsibility for their condition and reassures them in their envy. Standard Marxist propaganda.

In the West, however, there was never enough poor and too many middle class for this appeal to gain any real traction. The work-around for Marxists has been to simply reduce the middle class.

Globalism is their vehicle to accomplish this.

Although seemingly inconsistent, Marxists have joined forces with the fabulously wealthy as the only route to sufficiently reduce the enormous middle class and increase the lower class, for whom the standard communist pitch will work.

Traditionally, communists killed or banished intellectuals and the rich (called “economic saboteurs” by the Communist Khmer Rouge in Cambodia). Instead of being purged, in the new communism the rich are courted, intellectuals embraced and celebrities sought out for their influence and endorsement. The promise of increased wealth and a position among the elite is sold to the rich and those in positions of leadership in academia, politics, finance and business as a way of stroking their egos, not unlike the sales job used on the underclass.

Marxism has been rebranded as globalism, but its attributes are unmistakable: the never realized claim to want to elevate the poor. A plea for a simple culture through tortured social engineering from a centrally planned economy and society. A proclivity for atheism or, at least, a preference for any religion besides Christianity. Notwithstanding their claims of concern for humanity, both communists and globalists have a shockingly casual attitude toward human life and a penchant for throwing people by the thousands or millions into the meat grinder of wars to further their ideologies. Globalists espouse the interchangeability of people and cultures by calling for open borders and cultures mixed together regardless of the death and destruction it brings to their own countrymen.

Whatever else globalist elites claim about the North American Free Trade Agreement, its primary result has been to send American manufacturing jobs to Third World nations for cheap labor. Similarly, but in reverse, open borders in Europe and the U.S. have served to import Third World labor to do the jobs that could not be exported. Both circumstances are devastating to the middle class.

Globalists are globalists first. They share a closer kinship to each other than to their countrymen they claim to represent. For example, George H.W. Bush negotiated NAFTA, and Bill Clinton dutifully signed it into law. Obama pushed through Obamacare, but George W. Bush’s “ultra conservative” Supreme Court nominee John Roberts tortured logic to whitewash its constitutional problems away and assured it would be inflicted on an American public that never wanted it. Bush started a war in Iraq, causing consumer energy prices to skyrocket. Obama implemented absurd “green energy” initiatives and a regulatory war on coal driving consumer prices even higher. The Bushes, Clintons and Obamas raise enormous sums of money from their supporters by claiming the others “must be stopped,” but they personally support one another in their foundations, charities and other matters outside politics.

Even more telling this election season is the support of several Bush confidants for Hillary Clinton in addition to those in the Obama and Clinton political machines. The recent report that George H.W. Bush would vote for Hillary Clinton should have come as no surprise to anyone paying attention. Globalists are globalists first.

The British have successfully fired the first major shot with their refusal to follow the demands of our globalist masters and voted to leave the European Union. Americans have an opportunity to follow that up in November by electing a president who – for the first time in 28 years – holds the interests of America first.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.