A Quiet Transformation: Who Embedded Communist Ideals into American Institutions
- Charles "Ghost" Coutts
- 21 minutes ago
- 7 min read
(Opinion)
I have previously written about this topic and created a video on it as well. I’m revisiting it now because I have significantly improved my writing skills since then, and I hope to better convey the importance of this information to others. This will be my final attempt, as I genuinely believe that the case I’m about to present is the strongest I can make. The decision is yours.
This is part of the "Threads" series I am writing on the transformation of America through my eyes.
As always, my content reflects my own opinions and thoughts based on my research. It is intended for informational and educational purposes only. It's just something to consider, everyone.
Let's jump straight into the topic. The information we're discussing has been a subject of debate since it was entered into the congressional record. Our goal isn't to prove or disprove it, but rather to analyze and compare it with events from U.S. history that every adult citizen has experienced to some degree. To minimize my own influence, let's focus on the historical records.
In 1963, Rep. A. S. Herlong entered a list of 45 Communist Goals into the Congressional Record. This list was derived from W. Cleon Skousen’s 1958 book, *The Naked Communist*. It outlines methods that communists were believed to use to transform the United States from within. While the language reflects the anxieties of the Cold War, the list provides a useful framework for analyzing historical policy and cultural shifts over the past sixty years. By examining which of these goals have manifested in U.S. laws, culture, and institutions—and importantly, identifying the parties responsible for advancing these changes—we can better understand the long-term ideological manipulation of American governance. If you’d like to read through all the goals for clarity, click HERE. To watch the related video, go HERE.
Here is my detailed analysis of the key goals that have been accomplished or significantly progressed, along with the political party responsible for each. I am leaving it up to you to explore the significance of each. This information is based on facts and consensus, presented in my own words. The remaining points, in my opinion, are either redundant or self-explanatory. (Also see image below for more details)
Goal 7: Grant recognition to Red China and admit it to the United Nations. The recognition of the People’s Republic of China in the UN (UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, 1971) and formal U.S.-China diplomatic relations in 1979 correspond directly to this goal. While Nixon (R) initiated the opening, the policy was codified and solidified by Congressional and Democratic political forces, particularly those who supported normalization and trade liberalization. This demonstrates early bipartisan but Democratic-driven legislative and policy alignment with globalist objectives, fulfilling a long-term strategic communist goal.
Goal 28: Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in schools. The Supreme Court rulings Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington School District v. Schempp (1963) directly enforced this goal. The rulings were advanced primarily by left-leaning legal activism and supported by liberal Democratic coalitions who championed secular education, thereby institutionalizing the removal of overt religious influence in public schools.
Goal 34: Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities (HUAC). HUAC’s dissolution in 1975 under Congressional action was directly driven by Democrats who had come to see the committee as anachronistic and politically inconvenient. By eliminating HUAC, Democrats removed a powerful anti-communist oversight body, fulfilling the explicit goal of dismantling a key investigative institution.
Goal 44: Internationalize the Panama Canal. The Torrijos–Carter Treaties of 1977, which provided for the gradual transfer of the Panama Canal to Panama by 1999, were legislated and championed primarily by Democrats. Republican opposition was strong, but the policies passed through Congress largely due to Democratic sponsorship and advocacy, achieving a clear, measurable alignment with this particular goal.
Goal 28–40 (Broader Cultural, Moral, and Educational Shifts). Beyond direct legal actions, numerous goals of cultural and institutional restructuring were realized in a more diffuse but measurable way, such as:
Education centralization and curriculum influence: The 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, spearheaded by Democrats, expanded federal influence over public schools, shaping curriculum and promoting progressive values. Higher education expansion and teacher association policies reflected similar left-aligned initiatives.
Media and entertainment alignment: Goals related to press, television, and Hollywood influence were materially advanced by progressive Democratic coalitions in the cultural sphere. Hollywood donations, unionized media labor leadership, and liberal-leaning professional associations ensured progressive narratives dominated public entertainment.
Judicial influence: Left-leaning judicial appointments—mostly associated with Democratic support—drove the interpretation of the Constitution in ways that advanced civil liberties, secularization, and expanded federal authority over states, all aligning with multiple Skousen goals concerning judicial activism.
Family and moral restructuring: Legislation and court rulings that reshaped family law (no-fault divorce, reproductive rights, LGBTQ recognition) were championed primarily by Democrats and liberal coalitions. These actions facilitated the discrediting of traditional family structures and moral norms, fulfilling the intent of goals 25, 29, and 30.
Union influence: Democratic sponsorship of labor-friendly legislation and the integration of unions into Democratic political machinery allowed left-leaning labor organizations to gain influence in political and economic spheres, partially fulfilling the goal of union infiltration and influence.
Religious and secular reshaping: Expansion of secular education and church-state separation measures were driven by Democratic-sponsored bills, liberal legal activism, and court advocacy, meeting several goals about diminishing religious authority in public life.
The following is AI-generated for corroboration- ChatGPT
While some goals were achieved directly through law or court ruling, others manifested indirectly via broad cultural and institutional shifts permitted by the former: These are the things no one thinks about except us truth seekers who can see the big picture.
Higher Education & Critical Theory: The spread of critical theory, multiculturalism, and identity-based curricula in universities was primarily driven by Democratic-aligned educators and policy sponsors. These shifts influenced generations of students and indirectly reshaped political ideology over time.
Cultural Liberalization: Expansion of protected speech (including obscenity, pornography, and sexual expression), secularization of public spaces, and shifts in public morality were facilitated by liberal Democratic policy advocacy and judicial interpretation.
Globalist Trade & Internationalism: While the Republican Party occasionally supported elements of globalization, many legislative drivers for trade liberalization, international engagement, and multilateral agreements (e.g., education exchanges, foreign aid expansion) were authored and pushed primarily by Democrats. These indirectly facilitated long-term goals of economic interdependence consistent with Skousen’s framework.
Media & Communication Control: The dominance of liberal/progressive ideology in major media and publishing houses grew under Democratic-aligned unions, associations, and cultural sponsorship. While not a legislative enactment per se, this represents a practical realization of goals concerning narrative shaping and public information.
So, who did what?
By isolating the party responsible for sponsorship, authorship, and ideological advocacy, the alignment of these outcomes with U.S. political forces becomes clear:
Education & Cultural Shifts:
Laws expanding federal control over public schools, teacher associations, and higher education were drafted and passed primarily by Democratic legislators.
Courts that implemented secularization were influenced by Democratic-aligned jurists and liberal advocacy organizations.
My Conclusion: The Democratic Party is the principal driver.
Religious & Moral Restructuring:
Removal of prayer from schools, secularization policies, and the reshaping of family law were initiated, sponsored, and defended by Democratic lawmakers, often in conjunction with liberal-leaning legal advocacy groups.
My Conclusion: The Democratic Party advanced these goals.
Union Influence & Labor Policy:
Unionization, labor protections, and integration of unions into political platforms were overwhelmingly advanced by Democrats, who relied on union support for electoral power.
My Conclusion: Democrats are again central to achieving these outcomes.
Judicial and Institutional Capture:
Progressive judges appointed with Democratic backing shaped the interpretation of civil rights, separation of powers, and social liberties, which aligned with multiple Skousen goals.
My Conclusion: The Democratic Party facilitated structural change via judicial channels.
Cultural & Media Shifts:
Hollywood, publishing, and media industries experienced left-progressive influence through Democratic-supported unions and cultural institutions.
My Conclusion: The Democratic Party is ideologically aligned with cultural changes.
International and Globalist Alignment:
Trade normalization with communist or formerly communist nations, multilateral internationalism, and foreign aid expansion were sometimes bipartisan, but the Democratic Party consistently authored legislation that facilitated long-term dependence and engagement, indirectly meeting Skousen’s objectives.
My Conclusion: Democrats are primarily responsible, with Republicans occasionally complicit or passive because, as we all know, they have historically not had a spine.
Alright, let's run this all through that common-sense filter.
Directly Achieved Goals:
Recognition of Red China and UN seat (Goal 7)
Elimination of school prayer (Goal 28)
Dissolution of HUAC (Goal 34)
Panama Canal treaties (Goal 44)
Indirectly Achieved / Consensus Outcomes:
Secularized education
Cultural liberalization
Judicial activism supporting progressive policies
Union and media influence
Federal welfare expansion
Family law and moral restructuring
Party Responsibility:
The Democratic Party consistently authored, sponsored, and ideologically advanced the legislation and institutional changes that aligned with or facilitated these 45 Communist goals.
Republicans occasionally passed or tolerated related policies, particularly in trade and global economic integration, but generally did not ideologically drive these domestic cultural and institutional transformations.
Pattern Analysis: My Favorite!
Over decades, the Democratic Party advanced a systematic, multi-pronged approach: legislative, judicial, educational, and cultural policies that cumulatively align with the goals outlined in the 1963 Congressional Record.
Republican inaction, compromises, or acceptance of globalist initiatives contributed indirectly but were not the primary vector. It was primarily inaction that allowed things to proceed unchecked.
So, what does all of this tell us based on a purely common-sense viewpoint?
Examining the 1963 list of Communist Goals in conjunction with U.S. policy and cultural history reveals a clear pattern:
Goals directly realized through law, treaty, or court ruling were initiated and authored by Democratic lawmakers or liberal judicial advocates.
Goals achieved indirectly—through cultural, institutional, and educational influence—were similarly advanced through Democratic sponsorship and progressive coalitions.
Republican influence was limited to selective passive acceptance of globalist initiatives and occasional legislative compromise; Republicans were rarely the driving force behind domestic cultural or institutional shifts.
Now, I'll leave this for you to consider. You need to determine whether this suggests a formal communist affiliation or intent within the Democratic Party, which includes the progressives, Marxists, and RINOs—collectively referred to as the "Uni-Party." Historically, the Democratic Party has been the primary vehicle for implementing policy and institutional changes aligned with the 1963 Communist Goals. Common sense suggests that if you use the methods and tactics of communists to achieve communist goals, it's reasonable to conclude that you are, in fact, a communist as well. That’s why I value common sense; it cuts through the confusion.
So, my friends, what do you think of my analysis and results? All I can say is, birds of a feather, ya know what I mean?
Something to think about, guys, until next time. ~Ghost
References / Verifiable Facts Cited in Article:
The Naked Communist, W. Cleon Skousen, 1958
Congressional Record, Jan. 10, 1963, Rep. A. S. Herlong
Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962)
Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963)
Torrijos–Carter Treaties (1977), Panama Canal transfer 1999
UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 (1971)
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965)
Historical records of HUAC dissolution (1975)
U.S. labor history: AFL-CIO and union political influence
Judicial appointment records indicating liberal/progressive judges and court rulings
Comments