The problem with communism – and with some very recent ideologies here at home – is that they think you can change reality by screaming at it. (LANGUAGE WARNING)
Communism


“Rage Against the Machine” IS the Machine!
A buddy sent this to me. We are both on the same page but it brought a rant bubbling up to the surface:
CUE RANT:
What they do not realize is they have always been the machine. The main founder is a self admitted Marxist and they have supported Communist movements. Big Government control of the peoples lives. What the gov says is true, by edict. A co-worker asked me Monday, saying “didn’t you say a long time ago Rage is a Communist based band? But this song [playing in the shop at work] is about anarchy, why is that?” I explained these people want to seed anarchy/chaos as a tool to create a situation where the government has to swoop in with heavier control. They want to overturn the existing order to replace it.
Since the 60’s generation of progressives, they have adopted the CLOWARD-PIVEN STRATEGY.
- See more at DISCOVER THE NETWORKS.
LEFT / RIGHT VIEWS of GOVERNNMENT:
OLD AUDIO FROM APRIL 2011
60s versus 2020

Jim Jones and His Utopian Goals
(UPDATED – first posted late 2010) Jim Jones was a hard-core atheist/socialist. It wasn’t a “religious cult,” rather, it was a cult in Marxian ideology. Here is one example from a sermon of his:
Remember, as NATIONAL REVIEW makes the point, “Willie Brown, Walter Mondale, and Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter ranked high among his [Jim Jones] supporters.” Continuing with the line of historical connections between “Leftism” and Jim Jones, NR also clearly reports that the media still gets their biased views mixed up with reality:
…But the first draft of history depicted the political fanatics as Christian fanatics, despite the group’s explicit atheism and distribution of Bibles in Jonestown for bathroom use. The words “fundamentalist Christianity” were used in a New York Times article to describe Jones’s preaching. The Associated Press called the dead “religious zealots.” Specials on CBS and NBC at the time neglected to mention the Marxism that animated Peoples Temple.
Beyond the ideology that inspired Peoples Temple’s demise, the media whitewashed the politicians who aided and abetted them.
Learning that San Francisco mayor George Moscone appointed Jim Jones to the city’s Housing Authority Commission, a body of which he quickly became chairman, piqued my curiosity, which led to my writing Cult City: Jim Jones, Harvey Milk, and 10 Days That Shook San Francisco. This revelation, particularly shocking in light of the fate of his tenants in Jonestown, led me to come across this: Willie Brown, who would become the speaker of the California State Assembly and then mayor of San Francisco, compared Jim Jones to Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi. Harvey Milk described Jonestown as “a beautiful retirement community” helping to “alleviating the world food crisis.” California lieutenant governor Mervyn Dymally actually made a pilgrimage to Jonestown that led to a gushing reaction typical of ideological tourists.
The politically inspired delusions of San Francisco Democrats proved contagious. Jimmy Carter’s running mate, Walter Mondale, met with Jim Jones in San Francisco in 1976. Carter’s wife, Rosalynn, found Jones so impressive that she campaigned with him, ate with him, allowed him to introduce her during a campaign speech, telephoned him, and put him in touch with her sister-in-law, Ruth Carter Stapleton. Friends in high places suppressed investigations in the United States, misled officials in Guyana into dismissing allegations against the lunatic in their midst, and biased State Department hands into siding with Jones in his fight with outraged relatives of the captives in his concentration camp….
THE CITY JOURNAL has a short review of Daniel Flynn’s book, “Cult City: Jim Jones, Harvey Milk, and 10 Days That Shook San Francisco.”

God’s Law or Chaos (Anti-Christian PART 1.6)
(This is PART ONE POINT SIX of an “anti-Christian” series. PART ONE and TWO can be viewed, respectively)
Watch this powerful new sermon from Apologia Church. Dr. James White and Jeff Durbin both preach to the congregation about the recent events, #BlackLivesMatter, #Marxism, and #Communism. Don’t miss this vitally important message and be sure to tell someone about it!
What’s so controversial about Black Lives Matter? Shouldn’t everyone, especially Christians, agree with this phrase? Of course. Unfortunately, though, it’s much deeper than simply a phrase or statement. Black Lives Matter is an organization that Christians need to understand, especially when it comes to this important question: should Christians support Black Lives Matter?

Project Veritas Exposes Sander’s Bolsheviks
So far this is just Twitter… but here is some info from BREITBART: (h-t RIGHT SCOOP):
…The video begins with a Project Veritas journalist asking an individual identified as Sanders organizer Kyle Jurek if “MAGA people” could be re-educated if Sanders wins the White House. “We gotta try,” Jurek replies. “In Nazi Germany, after the fall of the Nazi Party, there was a shit-ton of the populace that was fucking Nazified.”
“Germany had to spend billions of dollars re-educating their fucking people to not be Nazis,” he continues. “We’re probably going to have to do the same fucking thing here.”
“That’s kind of what all Bernie’s whole fucking like, ‘hey, free education for everybody’ because we’re going to have to teach you to not be a fucking Nazi,” he added.
In another part of the video, Jurek is seen discussing Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin’s use of gulags, where he claims that the CIA was overly critical of them. “People were actually paid a living wage in the gulags. They have conjugal visits in gulags. Gulags were meant for re-education,” he says.
Jurek is then seen suggesting that the most effective way to re-educate the billionaire class is to order them to “break rocks for 12 hours a day.”
“[The] greatest way to break a fucking billionaire of their privilege and their idea that they’re superior, go and break rocks for 12 hours a day. You’re now a working class person, and you’re going to fucking learn what the means, right?”
The video also shows Jurek warning that Milwaukee, host of this year’s Democratic National Convention, will “burn” if Sanders fails to win the party’s nomination. “If Bernie doesn’t get the nomination or it goes to a second round at the DNC convention, fucking Milwaukee will burn,” says Jurek. “It’ll start in Milwaukee and then when the police push back on that, other sites will fucking [explode].”
The footage concludes with Jurek issuing the chilling prediction that Milwaukee could see riots akin to the 1968 convention in Chicago, where left-wing activists engaged in violent riots in the streets. “Be ready to be in Milwaukee for the DNC convention. We’re going to make [1968] look like a fucking girl’s scout fucking cookout,” warns the Sanders field organizer. “The cops are going to be the ones fucking beaten in Milwaukee.”…
Many are just short clips of the same video… but the comments by the Twitter posters are key:
VARIOUS TWITTER CLIPS
Everyone watching #DemDebate should see this.
Bernie “free education” policies to “teach you how to not be a f**king nazi”; ‘There is a reason Stalin had Gulags’; ‘Expect violent reaction’ for speech. If Bernie doesn’t get nomination “Milwaukee will burn”pic.twitter.com/Koh6UTibbe
— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 15, 2020
Just imagine what the mainstream media would say if this was an @realDonaldTrump staffer threatening to go inside @MSNBC studios and drag pundits out by their hair and light them on fire in the streets.
They would NEVER stop talking about it.#Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/LiKiVBBABe
— James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 14, 2020
Extremely creepy @BernieSanders https://t.co/uOXLzcnzTG
— Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) January 14, 2020
In light of seeing the Bernie Sanders campaign organizer, Kyle Jurek, saying that those who resist socialist change should be shot like they were in Cuba, it’s worth remembering that Bernie said he was “excited” & “impressed” by Fidel Castro’s “revolution.”pic.twitter.com/cipnGNH46j
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) January 14, 2020
From Jurek’s Facebook: a photo of him holding a sign of a petrol bomb that reads, “The time is right for fighting in the streets.” https://t.co/6iTslFe4nC pic.twitter.com/2RDQjcrlFT
— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) January 14, 2020
Bernie Sanders Campaign Operative Makes Case For Concentration Camps:
– Stalin & gulags were good
– Gulags paid a living wage
– Billionaires should be sent to gulags to break them of “privilege”@BernieSanders hires communists who want to put YOU into camps if they are elected pic.twitter.com/6jHv26Ptwq
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) January 14, 2020
Less than 2 hours till #DemDebate
Will @wolfblitzer @abbydphillip @brianneDMR ask @BernieSanders about his Iowa staffer Kyle Jurek?
Will they ask if Kyle is alone in his views?
Will they ask Bernie to disavow Kyle’s statements?
Stay tuned#Expose2020pic.twitter.com/LOgWboGezd
— James O’Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 15, 2020

Communism on Full Display In Denver
Denver council member believes in “community ownership” and is excited to usher communism in, “by any means necessary.” Pat Gray, Keith Malinak, and Jeff Fisher discuss on Friday’s episode of “Pat Gray Unleashed.” Watch Candi CdeBaca give us a taste of what the future will bring:
GATEAWAY PUNDIT has this about Candi… I just want to say she is very cute… death ushered in by the likes of her and AOC. Communism with a smile from a pretty face:
Denver City Council candidate Candi CdeBaca is not shy about her love for communism. No matter how many times it has failed in violence, poverty and mass murder, she’s still a fan. In April Candi promised to push communism “by any means necessary.”
On June 5th Candi won a seat on the Denver City Council.
In an earlier debate Candi promised to push communism — by any means necessary.
The DAILY WIRE continues on to explain some more:
Encyclopedia Britannica defines communism as a “political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society.”
CdeBaca, who is a democratic socialist, also drew intense criticism for saying that she will “usher” in communism “by any means necessary.”
While it’s not exactly clear what CdeBaca meant when she said “by any means necessary,” PBS notes that Malcolm X used the phrase and it meant “up to and including the use of violence.”
The American Mirror added that “by any means necessary” also happens to be a radical far-left organization. Influence Watch reports on By Any Means Necessary (BAMN):
BAMN employs aggressive “militant” direct action and litigation to support its cause. BAMN protests of official government bodies have resulted in flipping tables and other disruptive outbursts. BAMN demonstrators have been arrested for inciting riots, throwing rocks at police, and destruction of property.
PAT GRAY and the gang over at BLAZE discuss this a bit:

Are The Kurds Our “Allies”? Kurt Schlichter Opines
Kurt Schlichter fills in for Hugh Hewitt and the beginning of the show focuses on his article titled, “Critics Aghast As Trump Keeps Word About No More Wars”. Kurt makes great points about the Kurds in Syria we were working with to defeat ISIS… and the endless type wars Trump promised to end. Good opener (and I included some of the back-n-forth between the producer and Kurt). See more about the PKK at WIKI.

Bernie Was FOR Communism Before He Was Against It
“Is it your assumption that I supported or believe in authoritarian communism that existed in the Soviet Union? I don’t. I never have. And I opposed it.”
Bullshit!

The Green New Deal | Hugh Hewitt
This is more of some commentary by Hugh Hewitt on The Green New Deal. Hewitt makes the point that this isn’t socialism, but Communism. Jonathan Swan of Axios (TWITTER) joins Hugh in discussing the utter lack of thought involved in this New Green Deal.
Hugh Hewitt reads through the Green New Deal and has some fun time with the grammar and lunacy of the text and ideas. I include TARZANA JOE’S (below) poem dealing with the New Green Deal. Long but informative.
POEM:
This year, the job’s been put to me
And so I should begin
Reporting as per statute
On the state our nation’s in
Unemployment’s at new lows
The market’s at new highs
But don’t be fooled, these numbers are
Disasters in disguise
What you don’t understand
About what these statistics show
The folks who process food stamps
Will soon have to be let go
And no sign is more ominous
No harbinger more fervent;
More damning to our country
Than an angry civil servant
And so I call on businesses
To do this town a solid
So we can hire more bureaucrats
To send help to the squalid
To quote the Madame Speaker
When quite rightly she reflects,
Nothing gives more stimulus
Than unemployment checks
Our Green New Deal will be the boon
For which we’ve all been yearning
And power plants, instead of coal,
Will run on yearbook burning
Now any time a country’s fate
And future are addressed
It’s right the situation
At the border be addressed
Some view immigration
Dourly and dimmingly
But I’ve been to the Rio Grande
And things are going swimmingly
Walls are just immoral
Brick and Mortar, a disaster
So our new legislation will soon outlaw
Lathe and plaster.
I could go on with my report
But it might bring me tears
And sad to say it stays this way
For two (or six) more years 0000000000 0

Students Asks About Communism and NAZIsm (Dinesh D’Souza)
Progressivism, communism, and fascism are three similar responses to the crisis of Marxism.

Is Fascism Right Or Left?
Here is an extended quote from Dinesh D’Souza’s book, THE BIG LIE, detailing the easy switch from socialist leaders and unions to fascist — overnight:
…on March 23, 1919, one of the most famous socialists in Italy founded a new party, the Fasci di Combattimento, a term that means “fascist combat squad.” This was the first official fascist party and thus its founding represents the true birth of fascism. By the same token, this man was the first fascist. The term “fascism” can be traced back to 1914, when he founded the Fasci Rivoluzionari d’Azione Internazionalista, a political movement whose members called themselves fascisti or fascists.
In 1914, this founding father of fascism was, together with Vladimir Lenin of Russia, Rosa Luxemburg of Germany, and Antonio Gramsci of Italy, one of the best known Marxists in the world. His fellow Marxists and socialists recognized him as a great leader of socialism. His decision to become a fascist was controversial, yet he received congratulations from Lenin who continued to regard him as a faithful revolutionary socialist. And this is how he saw himself.
That same year, because of his support for Italian involvement in World War I, he would be expelled from the Italian Socialist Party for “heresy,” but this does not mean he ceased to be a socialist. It was common practice for socialist parties to expel dissenting fellow socialists for breaking on some fine point with the party line. This party reject insisted that he had been kicked out for making “a revision of socialism from the revolutionary point of view.” For the rest of his life—right until his lifeless body was displayed in a town square in Milan—he upheld the central tenets of socialism which he saw as best reflected in fascism.
Who, then, was this man? He was the future leader of fascist Italy, the one whom Italians called Il Duce, Benito Mussolini.
Mussolini’s socialist credentials were impeccable. He had been raised in a socialist family and made a public declaration in 1901, at the age of eighteen, of his convictions. By twenty-one, he was an orthodox Marxist familiar not only with the writings of Marx and Engels but also of many of the most influential German, Italian, and French Marxists of the fin de siecle period. Like other orthodox Marxists, Mussolini rejected religious faith and authored anti-Catholic pamphlets repudiating his native Catholicism.
Mussolini embarked on an active career as a writer, editor, and political organizer. Exiled to Switzerland between 1902 and 1904, he collaborated with the Italian Socialist Party weekly issued there and also wrote for Il Proletario, a socialist weekly published in New York. In 1909 Mussolini made another foreign sojourn to Trento—then part of Austria-Hungary—where he worked for the socialist party and edited its newspaper. Returning the next year to his hometown of Forli, he edited the weekly socialist publication La Lotta di Classe (The Class War). He wrote so widely on Marxism, socialist theory, and contemporary politics that his output now fills seven volumes.
Mussolini wasn’t just an intellectual; he organized workers’ strikes on behalf of the socialist movement both inside and outside of Italy and was twice jailed for his activism. In 1912, Mussolini was recognized as a socialist leader at the Socialist Congress at Reggio Emilia and was appointed to the Italian Socialist Party’s board of directors. That same year, at the age of twenty-nine, he became editor of Avanti!, the official publication of the party.
From the point of view of the progressive narrative—a narrative I began to challenge in the previous chapter—Mussolini’s shift from Marxian socialism to fascism must come as a huge surprise. In the progressive paradigm, Marxian socialism is the left end of the spectrum and fascism is the right end of the spectrum. Progressive incredulity becomes even greater when we see that Mussolini wasn’t just any socialist; he was the recognized head of the socialist movement in Italy. Moreover, he didn’t just climb aboard the fascist bandwagon; he created it.
Today we think of fascism’s most famous representative as Adolf Hitler. Yet as I mentioned earlier, Hitler didn’t consider himself a fascist. Rather, he saw himself as a National Socialist. The two ideologies are related in that they are both based on collectivism and centralized state power. They emerge, one might say, from a common point of origin. Yet they are also distinct; fascism, for instance, had no intrinsic connection with anti-Semitism in the way that National Socialism did.
In any event, Hitler was an obscure local organizer in Germany when Mussolini came to power and, following his famous March on Rome, established the world’s first fascist regime in Italy in 1922. Hitler greatly admired Mussolini and aspired to become like him. Mussolini, Hitler said, was “the leading statesman in the world, to whom none may even remotely compare himself.” Hitler modeled his failed Munich Putsch in November 1923 on Mussolini’s successful March on Rome.
When Hitler first came to power he kept a bust of Mussolini in his office and one German observer termed him “Germany’s Mussolini.” Yet later, when the two men first met, Mussolini was not very impressed by Hitler. Mussolini became more respectful after 1939 when Hitler conquered Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Belgium, Norway, and France. Hitler continued to uphold Mussolini as “that unparalleled statesman” and “one of the Caesars” and confessed that without Italian fascism there would not have been a German National Socialism: “The brown shirt would probably not have existed without the black shirt.”
Hitler was, like Mussolini, a man of the Left. Hitler too was a socialist and a labor leader who founded the German Socialist Workers’ Party with a platform very similar to that of Mussolini’s fascist party. Yet Hitler came to power in the 1930s while Mussolini ruled through most of the 1920s. Mussolini was, during those years, much more famous than Hitler. He was recognized as the founding father of fascism. So any account of the origin of fascism must focus not on Hitler but on Mussolini. Mussolini is the original and prototypical fascist.
From Socialism to Fascism
So how—to return to the progressive paradigm—do progressives account for Mussolini’s conversion from socialism to fascism, or more precisely for Mussolini’s simultaneous embrace of both? The problem is further deepened by the fact that Mussolini was not alone. Hundreds of leading socialists, initially in Italy but subsequently in Germany, France, and other countries, also became fascists. In fact, I will go further to say that all the leading figures in the founding of fascism were men of the Left. “The first fascists,” Anthony James Gregor tells us, “were almost all Marxists.”
I will cite a few examples. Jean Allemane, famous for his role in the Dreyfus case, one of the great figures of French socialism, became a fascist later in life. So did the socialist Georges Valois. Marcel Deat, the founder of the Parti Socialiste de France, eventually quit and started a pro-fascist party in 1936. Later, he became a Nazi collaborator during the Vichy regimeVacques Doriot a French communist, moved his Parti Populaire Francais into the fascist camp.
The Belgian socialist theoretician Henri de Man transitioned to becoming a fascist theoretician. In England. Oswald Mosley, a socialist and Labor Party Member of Parliament, eventually broke with the Labor Party because he found it insufficiently radical. He later founded the British Union of Fascists and became the country’s leading Nazi sympathizer. In Germany, the socialist playwright Gerhart Hauptmann embraced Hitler and produced plays during the Third Reich. After the war, he became a communist and staged his productions in Soviet-dominated East Berlin
In Italy, philosopher Giovanni Gentile moved from Marxism to fascism, as did a host of Italian labor organizers: Ottavio Dinale, Tullio Masotti, Carlo Silvestri, and Umberto Pasella. The socialist writer Agostino Lanzillo joined Mussolini’s parliament as a member of the fascist party Nicola Bombacci, one of the founders of the Italian Communist Party, became Mussolini’s top adviser in Salo. Gentile’s disciple Ugo Spirito, who also served Mussolini at Salo, moved from Marxism to fascism and then back to Marxism. Like Hauptmann, Spirito became a communist sympathizer after World War II and called for a new “synthesis” between communism and fascism.
Others who made the same journey from socialism to fascism will be named in this chapter, and one thing that will become very clear is that these are not “conversion” stories. These men didn’t “switch” from socialism to fascism. Rather, they became fascists in the same way that Russian socialists became Leninist Bolsheviks. Like their Russian counterparts, these socialists believed themselves to be growing into fascism, maturing into fascism, because they saw fascism as the most well thought out, practical form of socialism for the new century.
Progressivism simply cannot account for the easy traffic from socialism to fascism. Consequently, progressives typically maintain complete silence about this whole historical relationship which is deeply embarrassing to them. In all the articles comparing Trump to Mussolini I searched in vain for references to Mussolini’s erstwhile Marxism and lifelong attachment to socialism. Either from ignorance or from design, these references are missing.
Progressive biographical accounts that cannot avoid Mussolini’s socialist past nevertheless turn around and accuse Mussolini—as the Socialist Party of Italy did in 1914—of “selling out” to fascism for money and power. Other accounts contend that whatever Mussolini’s original convictions, the very fact that his fascists later battled the Marxists and traditional socialists clearly shows that Mussolini did not remain a socialist or a man of the Left.
But these explanations make no sense. When Mussolini “sold out” he became an outcast. He had neither money nor power. Nor did any of the first fascists embrace fascism for this reason. Rather, they became fascists because they saw fascism as the only way to rescue socialism and make it viable. In other words, their defection was within socialism—they sought to create a new type of socialism that would actually draw a mass following and produce the workers’ revolution that Marx anticipated and hoped for.
Vicious fights among socialist and leftist factions are a recognized feature of the history of socialism. In Russia, for example, there were bloody confrontations between the rival Bolsheviks and Mensheviks. Later the Bolsheviks split into Leninists and Trotskyites, and Trotsky ended up dead on Lenin’s orders. These were all men of the Left. What these bloody rivalries prove is that the worst splits and conflicts sometimes arise among people who are ideologically very similar and differ on relatively small—though not small to them—points of doctrine.
In this chapter I will trace the development of fascism by showing precisely how it grew out of a doctrinal division within the community of Marxian socialists. In short, I will prove that fascism is exclusively a product of the Left. This is not a case of leftists who moved right. On the contrary, the fascists were on the left end of the socialist movement. They saw themselves not as jettisoning Marxism but as saving it from obsolescence. From their perspective, Marxism and socialism were too inert and needed to be adjusted leftward. In other words, they viewed fascism as more revolutionary than traditional socialism.
[….]
Mussolini didn’t believe in race and he wasn’t initially a nationalist; rather, he was a revolutionary syndicalist. The term syndicalism refers to the associations or syndicates to which workers belonged. These were autonomous workers organizations that resembled unions, but they were not unions because the syndicates were organized regionally rather than by corporation or occupation. As dedicated Marxists, the revolutionary syndicalists agreed with Marx that class associations were primary, and that they must be the organizing principle of socialist revolution.
Very much in keeping with this class emphasis that was so central to Marx, the syndicalists, strongly influenced by Sorel, sought to rally the labor syndicates through a general strike that would overthrow the ruling class and establish socialism in Italy. This is what made them “revolutionary.” They intended to foment revolution, not wait for it to happen. They were considered the smartest, most dedicated people in the Italian Socialist Party and they occupied the left wing of the party.
The big names in revolutionary syndicalism were Giuseppe Prezzolini, Angelo 0. Olivetti, Arturo Labriola, Filippo Corridoni, Paolo Orano, Michele Bianchi, and Sergio Panunzio. Most of them were writers or labor organizers. All of them were socialists, and shortly all of them would be camelascists, even though Labriola opposed Mussolini’s regime when it came to power and Corridoni, who was killed in World War I, didn’t live to see it.
Mussolini was their acknowledged leader. He knew them well and conspired with them at meetings and rallies. He read their books and articles and published in their magazines like the Avanguardia Socialista, founded by Laboriola, which was the leading journal of syndicalist thought. Mussolini also reviewed and published the leading syndicalists in his own socialist publications.
Like all revolutionary socialists, the syndicalists had little faith in democratic parliamentary procedures and, consistent with Sorel and Lenin, they sought a charismatic leader who would inspire the workers to action. Mussolini, more than anyone else, fit their prescription. Mussolini was the one who led the syndicalists into a union with the nationalists in order to form the new socialist hybrid called fascism in Italy and (with some modifications) National Socialism in Germany.
The syndicalists organized three general strikes in Italy in 1904, 1911, and 1913. Mussolini supported the strikes. The 1904 strike began in Milan and spread across the country. Five million workers walked off their jobs. The nation was paralyzed: there was no public transportation, and no one could buy anything. Even so, the strike ended without causing either the fall of the government or the installation of socialism.
- Dinesh D’Souza, The Big Lie: Exposing the NAZI Roots of the American Left (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2017), 65-70, 82-83.

Narcissism Girds the Statement of “Not Real Communism”
Jordan Peterson, Canadian clinical psychologist and professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, speaks with The Epoch Times about Postmodernism and Cultural Marxism. Communism is estimated to have killed at least 100 million people, yet its crimes have not been fully compiled and its ideology still persists.