© Candi CdeBaca campaignCandi CdeBaca
Candi CdeBaca won a runoff race last week against former Denver city council president Albus Brooks, and she did it by promising to implement communist policies "by any means necessary."
CdeBaca was among three candidates that unseated incumbents in the Tuesday runoff, preliminary results show, and
she's already drawing comparisons to Socialist Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the 29-year-old who unseated 10-term incumbent Joe Crowley in New York's 14
th congressional district in 2018.
"It's historic," said Carlos Valverde, state director for Colorado Working Families, a political activist group that supported CdeBaca. "It is in the vein of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. ... A victory that really demonstrates people power over money power."
CdeBaca defeated Brooks 52.4 percent to 47.6 percent, though military and overseas ballots are still being counted.
The upset victory, and two other incumbent defeats, marks the most significant shift in city leadership in over 30 years, and Valverde contends it "began a movement" toward more progressive policies once the new members are sworn in this week,
The Denver Channel reports.
CdeBaca thanked her supporters on Facebook, where she claimed her secret to success was simply keeping it "real."
"The Eastside taught me really early what 'real' really means. Don't talk about it, BE about it. I knew in my heart if community who knew this principle still existed in the Eastside, they would see me and recognize real," she wrote. "If they didn't I was cool with it too because I wanted to serve those who understand this principle. They are here, they showed up, they recognized real."
In April, Jonathan Woodley posted a
video of CdeBaca during a "Denver Decides" candidate forum as she explained to voters exactly what she's all about, and why she plans to implement communism at every opportunity.
"I don't believe our current economic system actually works. Um, capitalism by design is extractive and in order to generate profit in a capitalist system, something has to be exploited, that's land, labor or resources," CdeBaca alleged.
"And I think that we're in late phase capitalism and we know it doesn't work and we have to move into something new, and I believe in community ownership of land, labor, resources and distribution of those resources," she continued. "And whatever that morphs into is I think what will serve community the best and I'm excited to usher it in by any means necessary."
By Any Means Necessary also happens to be a radical "anti-fascist" group known for instigating violent confrontations with Trump supporters and patriots across the country, including the deadly melee at a Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia in 2017.
The Cambridge Dictionary defines communism as "an economic system based on public ownership of property and control of the methods of production, and in which no person profits from the work of others."
It's a natural progression of socialism, which is becoming increasingly fashionable in American politics.
A
Harris poll conducted for Axios on HBO published Sunday found 55 percent of American women between the ages of 18 and 54 would prefer to live in a socialist country like Venezuela than the U.S. More broadly, the four in 10 Americans said the same.
Reader Comments
Thing is.., you can't hit the 'On' switch for a giant mill without a good excuse or an effective means to move the herd toward the intake valve. But Communism will do the trick, nicely.
If the SJW movement hadn't been stumped by Jordan Peterson and other notables, if more of those reason-free creeps managed to bully their ways into power, if more lawyers and justices, (we see why the Kavanaugh drama was such a flashpoint), then these monsters would be able to really give a good tug on the bank of starter switches!
When the crime of "Micro Aggression" is made a prosecutable offense by law, (that is, when you can squint at a person's words and actions, and spin the cognitive kaleidoscope until benign, innocent words are brought into sufficient alignment with some vague template of "offensiveness", then, pow! Off you go to the container processing plant! Anybody can be made out as guilty! Nobody is safe. There is no right and wrong, just your number waiting to be pulled for collection.
The same damned thing was laid out in Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago: Everybody accused was forced to endure a long and tortuous interview process in which the state goal was to establish guilt and your signature of self-denunciation. NOBODY was found innocent. The nonsense charges always, always stuck.
That's the SJW pattern to a tee! "Believe Women" is the same thing. You are guilty when accused regardless of how evil the liar.
That's Communism.
Ruth and Woodsman seem to be of the opinion that communism is worse. It's as bad as what we have now if sociopaths are allowed to run it. That's a given and there lies the problem.
There will always be, it seems, power hungry people who will ruin anything good to satisfy their lust for power and fame.
How but how do we rid ourselves of those and their followers if not by terminal radical measures ? There are no other solutions and the tender hearts and dreamers who fantasize that psychopaths, sociopaths and the like will come to see the light and suddenly have a change of heart have their heads up where the sun don't shine. That was crude and I appologise for that. Sometimes there are no good or polite way to say something.
I don't see the day where humans will live in harmony - almost embarrassing to use that word-. There are way too many differences between the current different societies on our planet to start with. And that's another hurdle.
Sounds like hell to me, but that's because I live in the comfort of individual privacy. Strip that essential, core privacy away from everybody, and you have to build new kinds of systems just to function. At such a level, true Service to Others based systems might become possible, and Service to Self systems may become im possible. In fact, the mental barrier, and one's willingness to advance to the point where it comes down completely, so that Objective Reality cannot be held back, may be the only determining factors. I disagree. The actual capitalist system we live in today doesn't kill millions of its own citizens by the train load and actively hunt down and punish competence to the point where public utilities stop working and everybody starves and goes thirsty, etc.
Sociopathy/Psychopathy certainly do their level best to try to destroy everything, but the fact of the matter is that you and I both have a reasonable level of security, food, shelter, these computers we're using right now, and the freedom to type on them without getting shot. That's pretty damned amazing.
It's as Churchill famously noted about democracy: Capitalism is the worst system of wealth distribution, except for all the others.
I was talking about the real deal, which has never happened. You are referring to the old USSR. It seems to be the only thing just about everyone thinks about when there is mention of communism or socialism. That system was total bs. It was like capitalism closed in on itself with nothing for the workers and a good life for the corrupt elite. And Stalin was paranoid so he used his position to get rid of a lot of good people. Stalin was no team player and that is a must for such a system to work. He was alone at the top and that is not how such a system will work.
As far as socialism, there were a few countries in South America who were in the right direction but since $$$ and power were not the priority some well meaning country decided to bring democracy -chaos- to them.
I'll repeat myself, humanity as it is now is nowhere near the level of maturity needed to achieve anything else than what we have now. We deserve every bit of crap we get from the authorities. Well, a great many of us are just stuck in it without any options.
The other method means man governs self first. We are in no way mature enough as a planet to pull that off. It would mean the abolition of property rights in full, based on a system of honor and trust. That is so absurd I am brain stem slapping myself for writing it.
We know it can exist, as it has existed in many indigenous cultures that the (see Israeli Flag) hoarders of labor value have offed for the benefit of land and resource "ownership". Who is the originator of the contracts that afforded anyone ownership over anything? (See Israeli Flag)