Che Guevara is a Pop Culture Icon and hero of many politicians and A-List Hollywood celebrities like Barack Obama and Jay Z, who themselves embrace the Identity Politics and Social Justice movements. Wearing Che t-shirts and having his image inked on one's body is a symbol of solidarity with those who fight against the abuse of Power in society. But few really know the real Che and his history of racial bigotry, persecution of the Gay community and mass murder during the Cuban Socialist Revolution. In spite of the historical documentation, the cultural elites proudly embrace Che as a symbol of the struggle against Power in society. It's a profound expression of hipocrisy, that people who embrace the Black Live Matter movement and fight for LGBTQ protection on every level, proudly wear the T-shirt of a man who violently discriminated against the black community and committed any and all members of the gay community into concentration camps in Cuba. Is it ignorance or hipocrisy that drives a love of Che? Or is it simply recognizing that, when it comes to defeating Power, the ends justify the means even if that involves murder and the persecution of the most loved and protected communities?

Identity Politics is becoming a force in the American Political scene, and even though it is creating significant momentum, it is nothing more than a contemporary expression of Marxist thought. Identity Politics is simply groups of people who claim a cultural group identity such as being black, female, LGBTQ, or Hispanic, and each group claims that they have experienced injustice, discrimination and oppression from the power that comes by the hand of privileged oppressors within society. As a result these groups see the world through the lens of power and the oppression it causes, seeking to bring injustice to an end by restoring equality and fairness to those who have been exploited. This is the continuation of the Marxist narrative that saw the world as a series of relationships based upon the exploitation of the lower classes by the upper class as the rich accumulated wealth. Post Modern philosopher like Michele Foucault saw that the oppressive use of power was not limited to the accumulation of wealth, but felt that oppression happened at every level of society, even in the most independent institutions. As Johnathan Haidt points out, students at universities are now taught to see the world through the framework of power, privilege and the oppression it creates, and therefore feel empowered to end the injustice it causes by a tribalistic effort. The tribalism adopted by Socialism ended in the worst atrocities the has yet known as they sought to end exploitation described by Marx. One can only speculate how far Identity Politics will go in an attempt to bring injustice to an end under the new understanding of Marxist ideology.

Democratic Socialists claim the Socialism today is different from the “Old School” of the past, and in many ways they are correct. Every ideology changes over time and one would expect changes in the expression of Socialism over the last century. As the 20th Century came to a close, the world became aware of the genocide practiced in Socialist countries and the failures of every Socialist economy. With that, it became clear that Socialism as it had been practiced, was a complete and total failure. But Post Modern philosophers weren't ready to give up on the ideas of Karl Marx. They agreed that Capitalist societies were the source of all oppression and exploitation, but the oppression came not from the accumulation of wealth, but of power. Power is the ability to control or influence others in society by the use of coercion or force and it doesn't require some one to be wealthy in order to use it. In the minds of Michele Foucault and Jacques Derrida, power existed in every institution of society resulting in violence and exploitation. The new Marxist revolutions would attack political and social institutions to expose this violence through a new movement of people who embraced the ideas of Marx. This movement has come to be known as Identity Politics and the quest for Social Justice justice. It has the potential to shape the 20th century as profoundly as the 21st.

Socialists claim they seek economic justice, but in reality they seek vengeance against those they feel have caused oppression, exploitation and suffering. There is a incredible difference between the two and it's the quest for vengeance that has lead to murder and genocide within Socialist countries. Jordan Peterson provides a frame work for understanding the difference between the search for justice verses vengeance in his talk, “Identity Politics and the Marxist Lie of White Privilege” which you can find on YouTube. Peterson defines justice as the use of the minimum level of force necessary to end oppression and suffering. Vengeance seeks to go beyond that to exact punishment and retribution against those who are labeled as oppressors. Peterson asks, “Is it compassion and the search for justice that has produced 100 million corpses in Socialist countries?” The answer is no; it's vengeance that produces 100 million dead. Democratic socialists claim a kinder and gentler socialism that seeks economic and social justice, and yes there are an abundance of people who seek only that. But there are always those who seek vengeance and retribution, and they have always emerged through out the history of Socialism. One would expect them to emerge yet again, even in our American society and political system.

Socialism's brutal history had been kept hidden by the countries that embraced it for countless decades, until evidence of the autrocities began to emerge in the latter half of the 20th century. The genocide that defined Socialism in the USSR had been the model for every Socialist government there after. And it wasn't the accidents of dictators, but the intentional actions of intellectuals and some of the most highly educated people the world had ever known. Khieu Samphan was a Cambodian intellectual who developed a variation of Marxist economic theory as his doctoral thesis, while studying at the prestigious, Sorbonne University in Paris. After rising in within the Socialist revolutionary party, Khmer Rouge, in Cambodia, Samphan reorganized the countries entire population to fit the economic model he developed in an effort to achieve economic equality. The results are depicted in the 1984 movie The Killing Fields. Millions were exterminated and Samphan was convicted of genocide. Socialism is always a coordinated effort between countless numbers of ideologically driven, highly educated people. Sampham dismissed the narrative that Socialism's bloody history is the result of the the actions of a few dictators.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez rise within the Democratic Party has been unprecedented. A recent poll published by NBC news shows that 75% of Democratic or Democrat leaning voters would vote for her in a presidential campaign. This in spite of the fact that, at age 29, AOC isn't eligible to run until she is 35. What's behind her surge in public support? Her Democratic Socialist platform promises everything under the sun to everyone and proposes to pay for it by taxing the rich and redistributing income. Again this is promise of a kinder and gentler face of Socialism today; the old school dictators are genocide are gone from today's Socialist movement or so we are told. That's simply not the case as a January 22, 2019 New York Times editorial shows. The piece written by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, both economics professors at UC Berkely, demonstrate that Socialists still embrace the Dark Side of Socialism, which begs the question can the Darth Vader's who were responsible for genocide, be far behind? Saez and Zucman openly state that the true value of Ocasio-Cortez's plan is not simply that it soaks the rich (their words), but that it controls free markets, which restricts the accumulation of unjust wealth and the exploitation of marginalized people. This exploitation and injustice tears apart at fabric of society, and threatens the existence of democracy. Their definition of democracy is one in the same with that of Valdimir Lenin, the original Darth Vader of socialism who's Russian Revolution initiated the use of concentration camps to target those who practiced exploitation and opposed the Socialist State. As a result 66 million people died in the Soviet Union. There is a battle two different concepts of democracy here in America, a Socialist form that seek to control free markets and conquer a perceived exploitation vs one that believes individuals have the right to self determination within free markets and free society. In the past the Darth Vaders of Socialism murdered over 100 million people in defense of Socialist Democracy. Only history will tell us if the Darth Vaders will rise once again against those who oppose socialism.

Socialism claims to bring economic equality to the oppressed classes, but it seeks vengeance and retribution against those it claims are responsible for causing suffering. Vladimir Lenin sought to oppress the “minority exploiters” through the use of a series of concentration camps used throughout the Soviet Union, where Socialists systematically murdered 66 Million people through starvation, torture and forced labor. He was the first person in history to develop these camps and use them against his own people. This reveals the true nature of socialism. Although it claims to be compassionate, seeking to end oppression, it exacts vengeance against those it labels as oppressors. Every socialist government has committed genocide, nearly all through the use of concentration camps. As American politicians are embracing socialism, people need to know the brutal history of socialism as the decide its influence on our country.

Democratic Socialists claim socialism works; it's failures of the past result from it's abuse by dictators who perverted it's application. Socialism works if it's applied and practiced in a fair democratic process. Venezuela embraced socialism by electing Hugo Chavez through a democratic election in 1998 and the results for Venezuela under a socialist government were predictable. These conditions continued after under the current president Maduro. Amnesty International brought the humanitarian crisis of socialism in Venezuela to light in a September 20, 2018 article which showed the government using military force, committing murder to ensure socialist control, mortality rates skyrocketing and over 85% of it's citizens live in poverty. Socialism is socialism and continues to create economic and humanitarian disasters where ever it's been tried. Democratic Socialists own this one. This was socialism embraced by a democratic process, yet the results remain the same, no matter the circumstances it has been applied.

Do you know the history and philosophical ideas that are the foundation of Socialism? Most people don't; especially those who are the biggest proponents of socialism. It's founded in the philosophy and economic theory of Karl Marx. Marx saw Capitalist societies as nothing more than people exploiting each other for economic gain, which was the source of all oppression and suffering in the world. He proposed a new society that moved beyond capitalism that focused on achieving economic equality for all, i.e. a communist society, thus ending oppression. Vladimir Lenin set out to put the theories of Marx into practice in the Russian Revolution of 1917, and at the outset of the revolution he realized he had a problem. It would have been impossible to immediately implement a communist right away, so he devised an “interim” government as a transition from capitalism to communism. He called this Socialism which has been practiced y every Marxist revolution ever since. It's doubtful there has ever been a true communist government ever, and of the murder ad genocide that's happened is the responsibility of Socialism.

Democratic Socialists cite European and Nordic countries as example of successful examples of Democratic Socialism. The problem is that these countries are Capitalist economies. Socialism is understood as the government control of an economy to bring about economic equality and an end to the exploitation that greed and the pursuit of wealth produced within a Capitalist society. It seeks to bring Capitalism to an end and create a society where peoples needs are met through a fair and equitable sharing of resources. If this is the case why do Socialists claim Capitalist economies as Socialist success? True socialist economies have been a complete failure where ever they have been tried and the success of socialism now comes not on its own merits, but by relying on Capitalism to produce excess wealth that it can tax and then redistribute to people in lower income classes. Socialism seeks to transform Capitalist economies from within by enacting laws which ensure economic fairness. The end result is that the socialism cannot succeed on its own, but requires Capitalism to provide the basis for its own existence.