Class Warfare and the Nature of Emotion in Politics

We are now under the two weeks to go mark for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. Barack Obama, in oh-so-typical ultra liberal fashion, continues to wage class warfare (and this mysterious specter of "change") as his primary tactic to secure victory. Just short of actually uttering references to the Proletariat, Obama dutifully provokes nationalized pity on the middle class. Mr. Obama is a master of his use of emotion in politics. You see, by painting the so-called "rich" as a collective greedy group of corporate executives who care nothing for the worker bees below them, a candidate can be very successful at drumming up cries of "unfair!" Do I deny the existence of greed of the elite of the elite? No, of course not. The bigger and significantly more pertinent question, though, is where does greed fit into the equation of capitalism? Surely the "worker bees" should be compensated for the collective greed of their employers! Right?

Like the great tax debate among the two candidates, most political discourse can be boiled down to fundamental principles. So, there is essentially one fundamental component, and one fundamental difference in leftist and rightist economic principles. The component is wealth. A nation's wealth exists among the people...the distribution thereof comprises classes. Where capitalism actually creates new wealth (and promotes individualized merit based success), socialism aims to utilize existing wealth to promote the general welfare (yeah, I said it) of the people. This is where wealth re-distribution, and media darling Joe the Plumber, come in. Obama's rhetorical plan involves no tax increases on 95% of Americans, while simultaneously establishing a massive tax increase on the other 5%. Well, you may be interested to know that more than a third of American already don't pay any income taxes. That's correct, the top two-thirds of wage earners are already covering the entire federal income tax revenue (this is under Bush's tax cuts!). Wait...here comes the best part: under the Obama tax plan, those people not paying any federal income taxes, will actually receive an annual check from the IRS. Aha! There's the light bulb...wealth redistribution. This isn't new, it will only be greatly expanded under Obama's plan. It has actually been going on for years. What nobody in Washington is willing to admit is that only by significantly curbing the size, scope, and influence (and therefore spending) of the federal government will this problem go away. As the budget deficit continues to grow legislators will seek a greater and greater tax burden on those actually still paying taxes. Oh yes...and that one third with no income tax liability at all? That number will actually expand to nearly half of all tax filers. This, folks, are those small doses of socialism finally manifesting itself as full blown Marxism that Nikita Kruschev was always talking about.

One paradox of our culture in the United States that I find exceedingly interesting is our nationalized sense that any intrusion of the government into private affairs, the basic tenet of socialism, is a bad thing. The paradox is that we continue to standby while we drift further and further in that direction. The enemies of free market capitalism have been very crafty in their approach. When you control the hand that feeds, you can create an environment of cultural dependency. As much as the analogy is degrading it is true: average Americans are sheep. This why emotive politics have been an invaluable tool for the left. It is not difficult to incite dissension among the ranks of classes...just use your bullhorn to inform the sheep that the people enjoying a higher standard of living than they are achieved it on their backs. These selfish fuedal lords are mindlessly driven by blind and unbridled greed to squash the "little guy" and sit around eating caviar and filets before having a cigar in their private smoking rooms. A poweful image indeed. It's also exceptionally untrue. The vast majority of the over-taxed public are hardworking Americans who set out to achieve the American Dream that they realized early on is not an entitlement or a right. It is a reward. It is a reward that is being eroded by the left in an attempt to "spread the wealth around," in the Promised One's own words.

And such is the nature of emotion in politics. Not unlike the Salem Witch Hunts of the 17th Century, all you have to do is spark the ignorant mob into a little finger pointing and everything else falls into place. Barack Obama must be sitting back, privately grinning at the prospect of his subjects engaging in class warfare (which he provoked) and then he publicly claims to be the savior of that great struggle.

When history judges our time, I sincerely hope for the sake of posterity that they can admire our generation as the one that finally saw through the wool over our eyes. Personally, I can breathe a slight sigh of relief in the knowledge that history will not look to my generation as the one that failed to restrain our government.

Sources and Further Reading:

The Wall Street Journal - 95% Illusion

The Washington Times - Tax Cut Socialism

The Wall Street Journal - Obama Talks Nonsense on Tax Cuts

Gadsden Flag

Obama is a Socialist

Barack Obama’s candidacy for President ostensibly exists as the one true vessel for “hope and change” for our troubled nation. Indeed, tens of thousands of the junior Senator from Illinois’ supporters consistently fill professional sporting venues to hear the Democrat Party nominee’s ideas for what he can do for them. They eagerly await the flood of government spending programs they feel they are entitled to.
This strikes me with more than a little irony. Was it really so long ago that another young Democrat was promoting a very different idea? On a cold January day in 1961, John F. Kennedy gave his inaugural address to his nation, and to the world. In his famous, and not so subtle, challenge to the American people he said, “And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” A concept undoubtedly lost on most people, the general electorate is only interested in what each candidate has to offer me, me, me.
Mr. Obama is not short on ideas. It’s the integrity (or lack thereof) of said ideas that has me worried. Make no mistake: Barack Obama is a socialist. From his plan to socialize (excuse me, nationalize) healthcare to his tax breaks for the “middle class” (how does anybody think he is going to pay for these programs), Obama’s entire platform is nothing more than modern, chic Marxism. The Obama campaign would have us believe that the privatization of Social Security is a bad thing! I suppose people currently investing anything in Social Security ultimately making more money would be a bad thing for Barack Obama, his campaign, and the Democrat Party. I shudder when I think about the average voter buying into this line of thinking.
One thing even Barack Obama is unabashedly unashamed to admit is that his Administration would promote massive spending. Somehow, this ridiculous expansion of government spending will be accomplished not by raising taxes, but by actually cutting them for the middle class. Wait, what? Mr. Obama should be careful with his plan to further tax the “upper” class; in 2005 the top 5% of wage earners paid almost 60% of all federal income taxes (IRS Data as published in the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119786208643933077.html). Who is complaining about a lack of fairness again?
I challenge the reader to understand what the American dream really is. The American dream is not the hope of receiving a government check to buy your house or go to college. What is it that entitles you to these things anyway? Are you entitled to go to college because you happen to be born in the United States? Sadly, I think many people have assumed the mindset of living in the Land of Entitlement instead of the Land of Opportunity, and Barack Obama is their fulfiller.
Obama is no John F. Kennedy. The inexperienced, empty-suit, all talk no walk, junior first-term senator from Illinois is full of good intentions but short on realistic application. It’s really no surprise that the top ten poorest cities in the United States have one thing in common: Democrat leadership. “It’s the disadvantaged who habitually elect Democrats, yet are still disadvantaged.” Barack Obama preys (politically) on the less-than-fortunate. I fear they are taking the bait. Hook, line, and sinker.