In this year that we celebrate 250 years since the Declaration of Independence—and the ensuing U.S. Constitution and unprecedented national prosperity—it is vital that Americans understand the evil roots of the communist movement that is seeking to supplant our nation’s birthright of liberty.

The biblical account of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4 provides a profound archetype for the destructive power of envy—the emotional and spiritual engine behind revolutionary ideologies. The biblical warning remains as relevant in 2026 as it was in the beginning: rule over the sin crouching at the door, or it will rule over you.

Cain, a tiller of the ground, grew resentful when God accepted Abel’s offering of the firstborn of his flock but not Cain’s produce from the soil. Rather than examining his own heart or effort, Cain allowed jealousy to fester. God warned him: “sin is crouching at your door; its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” Cain did not. He murdered his brother in the field.

The story is not primarily about material inequality or “unfair favor”; it is about the refusal to accept another’s legitimate success or divine blessing and the turn to violence and destruction that follows. Cain’s envy is the oldest recorded instance of what later became systematized in communist and socialist thought: the transformation of personal resentment into a moral justification for seizing what belongs to others.

Abel had done nothing wrong; he had simply offered his best in faith. Cain’s response was not reform or greater effort—it was elimination of the one who had more favor. This pattern repeats across history whenever movements frame achievement as illegitimate exploitation and demand redistribution through coercion.

Historical Parallels in Revolutionary Movements

The French Revolution began with Enlightenment abstractions about equality but quickly descended into the Reign of Terror, where resentment against the aristocracy justified mass executions and property confiscations. The guillotine became the instrument of “equity.”

In Russia, Bolshevik ideology explicitly weaponized class envy. Lenin and Stalin targeted “kulaks”—successful peasant farmers who had improved their lot through effort—as class enemies. Dekulakization involved confiscation, exile, and execution. The result was the Holodomor famine in Ukraine and the broader collectivization disasters that killed millions. Property was seized not because of individual crime but because its owners had achieved more.

Mao’s China followed the same script on a larger scale. Land reform campaigns executed or persecuted landlords and “rich peasants.” The Cultural Revolution mobilized youth to attack anyone perceived as having more status, education, or success. “Capitalist roaders” were purged based on resentment dressed up as revolutionary justice.

In this year that we celebrate 250 years since the Declaration of Independence—and the ensuing U.S. Constitution and unprecedented national prosperity—it is vital that Americans understand the evil roots of the communist movement that is seeking to supplant our nation’s birthright of liberty.

The biblical account of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4 provides a profound archetype for the destructive power of envy—the emotional and spiritual engine behind revolutionary ideologies. The biblical warning remains as relevant in 2026 as it was in the beginning: rule over the sin crouching at the door, or it will rule over you.

Cain, a tiller of the ground, grew resentful when God accepted Abel’s offering of the firstborn of his flock but not Cain’s produce from the soil. Rather than examining his own heart or effort, Cain allowed jealousy to fester. God warned him: “sin is crouching at your door; its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.” Cain did not. He murdered his brother in the field.

The story is not primarily about material inequality or “unfair favor”; it is about the refusal to accept another’s legitimate success or divine blessing and the turn to violence and destruction that follows. Cain’s envy is the oldest recorded instance of what later became systematized in communist and socialist thought: the transformation of personal resentment into a moral justification for seizing what belongs to others.

Abel had done nothing wrong; he had simply offered his best in faith. Cain’s response was not reform or greater effort—it was elimination of the one who had more favor. This pattern repeats across history whenever movements frame achievement as illegitimate exploitation and demand redistribution through coercion.

Historical Parallels in Revolutionary Movements

The French Revolution began with Enlightenment abstractions about equality but quickly descended into the Reign of Terror, where resentment against the aristocracy justified mass executions and property confiscations. The guillotine became the instrument of “equity.”

In Russia, Bolshevik ideology explicitly weaponized class envy. Lenin and Stalin targeted “kulaks”—successful peasant farmers who had improved their lot through effort—as class enemies. Dekulakization involved confiscation, exile, and execution. The result was the Holodomor famine in Ukraine and the broader collectivization disasters that killed millions. Property was seized not because of individual crime but because its owners had achieved more.

Mao’s China followed the same script on a larger scale. Land reform campaigns executed or persecuted landlords and “rich peasants.” The Cultural Revolution mobilized youth to attack anyone perceived as having more status, education, or success. “Capitalist roaders” were purged based on resentment dressed up as revolutionary justice.

Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge took it to its logical extreme under Pol Pot: Year Zero abolished private property, money, and most distinctions of achievement, resulting in roughly a quarter of the population murdered or starved in the name of erasing “unequal” outcomes.

These were not aberrations. They flowed directly from the core Marxist premise that unequal outcomes stem from exploitation rather than differences in talent, effort, culture, family structure, or providence.

The “justification of violence and property seizure on the basis of resentment toward those who achieve more through their own effort” is not a bug of communism—it is the feature. Philosophers from Edmund Burke onward warned that abstract demands for perfect equality, untethered from tradition, law, and human nature, produce tyranny.

Biblical values provide the moral dimension: the 10th Commandment explicitly forbids coveting what belongs to your neighbor. Envy is treated as a serious sin precisely because it corrodes the soul and society.

Proven economic theory, drawing from thinkers like Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek, and Milton Friedman, emphasizes that wealth creation is not zero-sum. When property rights are secure and effort is rewarded, the rising tide lifts far more boats than redistribution schemes ever have.

Socialist experiments consistently produce the opposite: shared poverty, capital flight, and the empowerment of resentful elites who control the redistribution apparatus.

The Modern Example of Zohran Mamdani

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani fits this pattern with striking precision. Elected in 2025 and sworn in January 2026, Mamdani—a democratic socialist and DSA member—campaigned on and later advanced policies that explicitly invoked racial and neighborhood demographics to justify shifting tax burdens.

During his campaign, he proposed reforming New York’s property tax system to “shift the burden” from overtaxed homeowners in outer boroughs to “more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.” The language was not accidental. It framed success and property ownership in predominantly white or higher-wealth areas as an inequity requiring correction through higher taxation.

When confronted on camera as mayor-elect—“So you intend to tax the white neighborhoods more?”—Mamdani deflected by claiming the reference to “whiter” neighborhoods was merely a neutral description of current geography and assessment patterns, not an expression of racial intent: “the use of the term was a description of neighborhoods, not a description of intent.” He insisted the goal was simply a “fair property tax system.” This rhetorical move—stating a racially charged policy, then retreating to colorblind language when challenged—is a classic example of the same ideological sleight of hand that allows resentment to operate under the cover of “equity.”

As mayor, Mamdani released a Preliminary Citywide Racial Equity Plan that cited stark wealth disparities (median white household wealth over $200,000 vs. under $20,000 for Black households) and attributed them primarily to “systemic racism.” This was used to justify expanded DEI initiatives, higher taxes on wealthier residents and corporations, and even proposed cuts to NYPD positions.

This warped belief system represents the migration of classic communist class envy into identity-based form. Instead of “bourgeoisie vs. proletariat,” it is reframed as historical “oppressor” groups (often white or Asian Americans who have achieved through effort, culture, and family stability) vs. designated victim groups—pure identity politics.

The Marxist remedy remains the same: use state power to seize or redistribute resources on the basis of group identity rather than individual conduct or neutral rules.

This tyranny violates core constitutional principles—equal protection under the law, colorblind governance, and the sanctity of private property. Conservatives rightly note that such policies are themselves divisive and unconstitutional. They ignore cultural and behavioral factors that drive outcome gaps (two-parent households, educational attainment, work ethic, time preference) in favor of perpetual grievance.

They disincentivize the very behaviors—saving, investing, maintaining property—that create wealth in the first place. New York has seen repeated cycles of high-tax, high-regulation policies driving businesses and productive residents outward; accelerating this through explicitly demographic targeting risks accelerating capital flight and fiscal strain.

The Enduring Historical Critique

From Cain’s field to the guillotine, the gulag, the killing fields, and contemporary identity-driven redistributionism, the straight line of human envy connects the dots. The impulse is the same: resentment toward those who have more—whether through divine favor, personal effort, or cultural inheritance—is elevated into a political program that justifies coercion and violence.

American constitutional philosophy counters this destructive human impulse with ordered liberty: secure property rights, rule of law applied equally, personal responsibility, and a moral framework that treats envy as a vice to be mastered rather than a credential for power.

History shows that societies built on resentment and redistribution eventually consume their own productive capacity. Societies that channel human ambition through secure rights and cultural norms that celebrate achievement rather than punish it generate unprecedented prosperity.

These are the enduring lessons that every American must rediscover in this year that we celebrate 250 years of true freedom, if we are to continue to be the greatest and most prosperous nation in the history of God’s earth.

AUTHOR

Mike Stenhouse

Mike Stenhouse is CEO of the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a free market think tank. He holds a degree in economics from Harvard University. Follow on X MSten37.

RELATED ARTICLE: Here’s How Democratic Socialists Of America Has Evolved Over The Decades

RELATED VIDEOS:

Emma-Jo Morris on Mamdani’s Islamo-Communist NYC

Zohran Mamdani bans all from attending an America 250 ball drop in the heart of NYC

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.