Radical leftists and Islamist activists are increasingly converging inside the Democratic Party as Democratic Socialists of America, forming what can only be described as a "red-green alliance."

United by their hatred of America and capitalism, this unholy alliance of far-left radicals is drawing support from migrant voting blocs and purple-haired white liberals holding worthless woke college degrees who work three jobs. Perhaps it was not capitalism that failed those with worthless woke degrees, but the Marxists who run the educational-industrial complex known as college.

This week alone, DSA candidates expanded their influence inside the Democratic Party, intensifying far-left, anti-American rhetoric that could ultimately benefit Republicans, conservative commentator J.T. Young argues in a new opinion piece published by The Hill.

"Democratic socialists are taking over the Democratic Party. Republicans benefit from Democrats' escalating civil war in five ways," Young wrote.

Those five advantages include:

First, regardless of outcomes, socialists confronting other Democrats in primaries splits the party. Prior to having their own candidates, Democratic Socialists of America were hostages within the party. The left-wing fringe had to support moderate Democrats, because these were the furthest left electable option. Democrats automatically got their votes without having to contend for them.

But now given different options, socialists do not have to support other Democrats in primaries. If they win primaries, more traditional Democrats may not support democratic socialists in the general election, and vice versa. In both cases, real battles are being waged across real ideological divides. Feelings are not necessarily healed after elections are over. Instead, they likely will only grow rawer.

Second, even if the two sides manage to come back together, money has been burned. The cost of these intraparty fights can be substantial — over $80 million in the Democrats' Michigan Senate primary — and the money for both sides comes out of the Democrats' limited fundraising base. The cash being burned fighting each other cannot be later used against Republicans in general elections or for close races where Democrats need an extra boost to win.

Third, if democratic socialists are nominated, they have a higher chance of losing general elections than establishment Democrats. This isn't just conjecture. While socialism polls well among Democrats, with 66 percent viewing it positively according to Gallup, it doesn't with independents at 38 percent and does terribly with Republicans at 14 percent. Democratic socialist nominees risk losing significant votes for the Democratic Party in general elections.

This doesn't mean that there aren't districts so deeply blue that Democrats still won't win; two recent victories in the New York primaries are an example. It just means that if democratic socialists are nominated, they have a greater likelihood of losing. It also means that in comparison to a conventional Democrat, the party will likely need to expend more resources to bring them to victory; this means fewer resources for other races.

Fourth, if democratic socialists win nominations, they will pull the overall Democratic delegation further left once in office. This has already happened since the Squad's entrance to Congress and the growing influence of Democrats' large Progressive Caucus. The positions these members take, and force the entire Democratic caucus to vote on, can politically endanger party regulars.

Fifth, if democratic socialists win general elections, they force establishment media to cover their extremism. Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) is a case in point. She has been called out for extremism so publicly visible that the party had no choice but to push James Talarico for Texas's Senate seat. Now, Talarico is every bit as extreme as Crockett; he just isn't as well-known for it. Once they're elected, Democrats can't hide their crazy, and the media must cover it.

The repercussions from democratic socialists' increasing incursions into the Democratic Party are not mutually exclusive. More than one scenario can apply in each democratic socialist's run. And in virtually every instance, at least one of these negative scenarios applies.

Democratic socialists' collateral damage to the Democratic Party is as real as it is mounting. Their assault on the party cannot end soon enough for moderate Democrats or last long enough for Republicans. For Democratic leadership, it is a recurring nightmare; for Republicans, it is the gift that keeps on giving.

The nightmare is playing out as multiple insiders close to the Clinton family - establishment Dems - have voiced their concern that DSA is absolutely batshit insane:

Mapping the five factions within the Democratic Party, the picture becomes clearer than ever that DSA is far left, reformist socialist.

Even more insane:

That's why, in their own words, they want to burn the American system and capitalism to the ground:

Much of the Marxist revolution is hiding in plain sight within the nonprofit world:

The DSA and its fellow Marxists have latched onto "affordability" because it is one of the most popular issues to campaign on. Marxists are parasitic and latch onto popular trends, but their goal is never to resolve the underlying problem, whether it involves affordability or stopping data centers from being built. Rather, their stated goal is to destroy the West, end imperialism, and crash capitalism.

Let's not forget DSA's unofficial spokesperson Hasan Piker has called on his followers to "kill capitalists" ... 

Piker again...

The White House has gotten the memo:

The State Department as well:

What comes next, ahead of the midterms, is the Trump administration ramping up anti-communist propaganda. A majority of Americans still favor capitalism. We suspect the Red Scare is back.