Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram

Roger Sherman, students of American History will know, was a Connecticut patriot, the only Founding Father of the United States to have signed all four major U.S. founding documents.

Sherman served in the Connecticut House of Representatives. He was a justice of the Superior Court of Connecticut and a treasurer of Yale College. An early supporter of American independence, he represented Connecticut in the Continental Congress, where he signed the Declaration of Independence and helped draft the Articles of Confederation.

Sherman is best known, even among journalists who have not cracked a book on the American founding since their college years, as the author of “The Connecticut Compromise.” The Constitutional Convention was hopelessly deadlocked on a question that had bedeviled patriots since the Roman Republic had been crushed first by Caesar and later by barbarian hoards from the north: In a true Republic, who should decide what should be done? It is this question that the U.S. Constitution answers.

In a federated system of government, the founders well knew, the Republican vision cannot be met by allowing large states to dominate smaller states. The principle of representation must be widely distributed without favor or fear throughout the body politic.

Sherman’s compromise divided the national legislature, the present U.S. Congress, into two bodies, a House and a Senate; the House membership would be chosen proportionally by popular vote, and the Senate membership – two Senators for each state -- would be chosen by state legislators, later by popular vote. The compromise balanced representation in such a way that large population centers could not deny representation to smaller population centers, either states or municipalizes within the states. And it was only after the Convention had adopted Sherman’s compromise that the members of the Convention could proceed to build a truly representative republic, so important was the settlement of the issue facing the delegates to the national Constitutional Convention.

The Democratic Socialists of America’s mission statement has for some time been shouted from every rooftop in the nation. The newly elected Mayor of New York City (and Wall Street), Zohran Mamdani, is a card carrying member of the DSA. The group is not hiding in the bushes. It is boastfully socialist.

Here are a few notable propositions drawn from its 2026-2027 manifesto:

“DSA’S MISSION IS TO UNITE WORKERS INTO A POWERFUL POLITICAL MOVEMENT TO WIN THE BATTLE FOR DEMOCRACY AND CHANGE THE WORLD (capitalization original). Our goal is to put workers in charge of the government through a new democratic constitution that establishes civil, political, and democratic rights for all, based on proportional representation in a single federal legislature, and ends the role of money in politics, with a government by for and of the working class and with powerful labor unions and social movements. Organizing in every city and town, we hope to build a socialist society where people come before profit, basic needs are guaranteed, the largest corporations are put under public ownership and democratic control, peace around the world is secured, and workers around the world join together in common struggle to construct socialism worldwide. This year defeating the far right, protecting the rights of the working class from the U.S. to Palestine, and fighting for democracy are our top priorities. Through our grassroots struggles, we will build a. movement with the power to take on the capitalist class and build an equal democratic and liberated world.”

Virtually the whole DSA manifesto has been cobbled together from unattributed socialist/communist sources here presented as a series of orthodox propositions; heterodoxy, or indeed the slightest deviation from Saints Marx and Stalin, will not be permitted. Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto rooted firmly in a central perception – “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” — breathes lustily from every paragraph. The DSA, this writer has pointed out elsewhere, is an organization whose members are loosely bound by a pre-Marxian anarchist imperative. Before utopia enters, armed to the teeth, through the front door, any rational political or cultural order must be shown the back door. A barren desert is the perfect picture of anarchic ambition.

Politicians in Connecticut should warmly embrace Sherman’s Compromise for four reasons: 1) Sherman is a state constitutional hero, and states should embrace such men; 2) his Compromise extended the political franchise broadly throughout the nation and within states; 3) he should be regarded justly as the “father” of the US. Congress; 4) it is therefore inconceivable that in Connecticut any member of the state’s U.S. congressional Delegation – all of them are Democrats who have professed an abiding affection for democracy – should accede to a DSA mandate that would require the abolition of the U.S. Senate and all State Senators.

Why haven’t some curious in-state journalists asked the state’s two Democrat U.S. Senators, Dick Blumenthal and Chris Murphy, which side of this political barricade are they willing to die on: 1) the continuance of senatorial representation or 2) its abolition at the demand of DSA “reformers”?

For U.S. Senators Blumenthal and Murphy, the answer to the above question, would represent a political “life or death” decision.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'