Free Markets, Free People


How important is this next election?

Allen West caused a bit of a stir the other day when he claimed that about 80 members of Congress were communists (my guess is he was speaking mostly of members of the liberal caucus).  Democrats reacted predictably and the usual flurry of denials was seen.  Even the Communist Party USA weighed in denying any members of Congress were members.  The fact that none are members or carried on the CPUSA rolls doesn’t really make a convincing case.

However I’m not even going to go there. 

But can anyone deny that there has been a rising drumbeat of leftist calls that would lead directly to a form of socialism if they had their way?  Bill Ayers?  Van Jones? 

And while members of Congress may not officially be “communists”, can anyone deny that a good number of them would be more comfortable with a socialist form of government than the relatively free one we enjoy now?  If so, explain Bernie Sanders.  If so, explain most of the liberal caucus.  If so, explain much of academia.

Richard Fernandez writes:

The thing about Communism, at least to the uninitiated, is that it appears to be identical in all respects to a hereditary aristocracy. If one didn’t know better it would seem that the more Communist a country, such as North Korea, the more it resembles a monarchy. In China the children of the Polituburo members are actually called princesses and princes and they gad about in a style that make the current European royalty look like a bunch of low-rent grifters.

How admirable then, that intellectuals like Cornell West, Van Jones and Bill Ayers can go around and seriously sell socialism and Marxism in the name of “equality” and “egalitarianism”. You know, because they are one with the Common Man. Their superior educations must provide a true insight into the nature of Marxist societies because to uninitiated the whole thing looks like a scam to trick people into waging “revolution”, in which a few odd million will be horribly killed, to create a worker’s paradise and Green society. Except all the resulting outcomes we actually examine reveal only societies ruled by an aristocracy no different from, nay more lavish than the Court of the Sun King’s at Versailles. Versailles didn’t even have indoor plumbing.

But at least it had trees and bushes in the garden. North Korea doesn’t. North Korea’s forests have been burned down by the happy peasants to cook their gruel and to keep from dying of cold in winter. Defectors heading south know they’ve reached the Republic of Korea because they can see trees again. In capitalist South Korea. And as for the environment in China … well why do you think the Red Princes and Princesses go to Paris to dance the night away?

Future generations may wonder how it was possible for sophisticated Western intellectuals to actually devote their lives to bringing about Communism as if it were anything more than a swindle.

The left loves to talk about “code words” when talking about race.  Well if there were ever code words for socialism or communism they can be found in the words and phrases the left associates with “equality” and “egalitarianism”.  Those concepts come to us not from the British enlightenment, but instead from the French Revolution.  And everyone knows how wonderfully that Revolution turned out for the majority of the French. 

The fact remains that, given the copious examples of the results of communism, a variation of socialism, through out the world, one can’t help but wonder at the intellectual bankruptcy of those who continue to tout it or its variations.  They claim them as an answer to a system that has some how “failed” even while it has provided a standard of living and a level of freedom never before seen on this planet. 

Theirs is nothing more than an ideology based in a belief.  A cult. A secular religion that drives those who have given themselves to this false god to proselytize their faith and work toward its establishment.

And they are the people Fernandez identifies plus plenty of others. 

Whenever anyone begins to talk about equality of outcome, fair shares and level playing fields, you should know where the discussion is headed.  Code words and phrases which lead to other good sounding ideas that eventually end up with individual mandates, “tax the rich” and other economy killers.  Once the economy is sufficiently crippled and the narrative is established that capitalism has failed, then “government is the answer.”

And you get speeches like this:

"If we would just convert these investments that we’re making through out government in education, research and healthcare. If we just turn those into tax cuts, especially for the wealthy, then somehow the economy is going to grow stronger. That’s the theory," President Obama said about the right at a campaign event on the tax code in Boca Raton, Florida today.

"Here is the news. We tried this for eight years before I took office. We tried it. It is not like we did not try it. At the beginning of the last decade, the wealthiest Americans got two huge tax cuts, in 2001 and 2003. Meanwhile, insurance companies, financial institutions, there were all allowed to write their own rules, find their way around the rules. We were told the same thing we’re being told now — this is going to lead to faster job growth, it’s going to lead to greater prosperity for everybody. Guess what? It didn’t," he said an audience at Florida Atlantic University.

Rewriting history to justify larger and more intrusive government.  Because the expansion of government is key to establishing their ideological preference.  The only thing different about this approach as opposed to the Russian or Chinese revolutions is it is a slow and stealthy takeover vs. a violent revolution.  The result will be the same at some point if it is allowed to succeed. 

And, as Fernandez points out, the result will be far from what anyone would reasonably identify as “egalitarian”.  It will be, instead, the establishment of a totalitarian regime and an aristocracy (based in the best of intentions, of course) focused on expanding and maintaining power.  It will indeed become Orwell’s worst nightmare.

Fernandez imagines future generation wondering how so-called Western intellectuals could actually devote their lives to establishing this misbegotten ideology. 

The answer: there’s no “intellectualism” involved at all.  It is unfounded faith which has them pursue it and hubris that has them believe it will succeed.  And in the end their simple ignorance of human nature, something they continuously and inevitably ignore, will again doom their belief to ultimate failure.

But not before they ruin the lives of millions, cast the nation into an unending downward economic spiral and so weaken it that recovery may not be possible.

It has been said this is the most important election in 50 years. Of course, we’ve heard that said about many recent elections.  In the case of this next one, though,  I think it is the most important election in 50 years.  Unless we want to have a lame duck president who is no longer answerable to the people (and happily informed the Russians he’d have more “flexibility” after the election), has been associated with people like West, Jones and Ayers and has demonstrated a propensity for executive rule, it is important to see he’s sent into early retirement. 

If we want to blunt or, hopefully, stop this relentless ideological creep toward bigger and more intrusive government and its inevitable result, this is the election with which to begin (and trust me, the GOP is no rose among thorns, many establishment GOPers are going to have to be booted out at some point as well). 

If you’re interested in returning to the path of prosperity, freedom, and smaller, less intrusive and less costly government, the guy in the White House needs to sent to his old house in Chicago in January of next year.

Yeah, this is serious.  It is time to make an effort to renew the revolution and reestablish the fundamental principals that made us the richest and most powerful nation on earth. In November we have a way to peacefully begin that process.  Or, as Dale has often said, the possibility of a less peaceful outcome, given the seemingly irreconcilable differences of the two side, may see us go in another direction altogether.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

40 Responses to How important is this next election?

  • With the election most likely being Obama vs Romney I don’t see a good result coming out of it.
    I won’t even be bothered to vote.

    • @tkc882 Really? See The Shark above. You see no daylight between Romney and Obama? I would vote for Kim Kardashian before subjecting this great country to another 4 years of BHO.

    • @tkc882 The best view that I’ve come to is that at least Romney has a clue about how economics works. Obama on the other hand shows why he won’t release his college transcript.

      • @Neo_ If he released them, we might discover some of his instructors didn’t think he was the smartest man in any room. That wouldn’t work for the “magic icecream brand” that was Baracka Obama. Buy one gallon of Obama, and it’ll taste like any flavor you want whenever you go to have some. If you want Pistachio, it would take like Pistachio, if you want Rocky Road, it would taste like Rocky Road, and all you had to do was buy one gallon, and it would be any flavor you wanted any time you wanted it.

  • Romney won’t exactly change the trajectory either. He’ll blunt it down a little. Woopee. That said, he’ll have my vote. The idea of Baracky getting to appoint a couple more Kagans or Sotomayors to the SCOTUS is bowel-clenching. As for the idea of a non-peaceful breakup – I think it’s inevitable. On one side you have real Americans, on the other a bunch of lazy cowards demanding cradle to grave teat sucking. It’s a miracle we’ve coexisted for as long as we have.

  • “The thing about Communism, at least to the uninitiated, is that it appears to be identical in all respects to a hereditary aristocracy.” Yeah, and I consider our political gentry the first step. I wrote this, in 2007: http://qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=6250 ===========================================================================
    From that post: “I’ve had the feeling that we’ve now started inexorably down the path of more and more unaccountability for our elected representatives. Blogs can squawk all day about what jackasses they are, and how they are limiting our freedom or making bad decisions of various kinds, but if a bunch of them don’t lose their office as a result, our squawking means nothing of consequence. And the political gentry have made it clear – if they can rig the game in their favor, they’ll do it. I think they’re very close to having it so rigged that we can’t overcome it through the normal political process.”

  • Well, any break up would have to be initiated by the conservatives, because the liberals sure aren’t going to let loose of their warm fuzzy feelings to free themselves from ‘conservative’ tyranny. I just don’t see it happening. Some ‘unrest’, yes, in places where the free ride meets the buffer stop.

    • @looker Wait till the blue model failures cascade. They’ll try to swim from their sinking ship to places where the red model is still afloat. You think real Americans are gonna let the blues swamp their boat too?

      • @The Shark Being as I’m in Texas and watching it happen around me, yes, they will. Question is how long before the people we fished up from the water decide they should be in charge of the boats? That’s where the unrest comes in, it’ll happen unrestfully in the blue places first. Then again, if Detroit hasn’t gone over to looking like Beirut yet….maybe that’s not how we’ll solve the problem. But I don’t want all of us to look like Detroit….

        • @looker Once blue models truly fail, when services are nonexistent, taxes sky high, the minorities and unions rioting, you’ll see a wave of blue refugees fleeing to real America. That’s where the rubber will meet the road. They fouled their own nest, dont let them foul yours too

      • @The Shark “You think real Americans are gonna let the blues swamp their boat too?”——–Yep. New Hampshire is an example.

        • @timactual Really, not much different than why we’ll have a victory celebration mosque right handy to the WTC site. We don’t want to believe they’d do that sort of thing, we’re nice, we’re good tolerant people, despite the dunning we take in the media. And by the time we realize we’ve been taken in, it’s too late to undo using good, tolerant methods.

  • The Empty Election
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0412/75084.html

    It sheds some insight but I don’t agree with all of it.

  • I get a kick out of conservatism when they get on this kind of anti-communist/anti-socialist band wagon. Doesn’t McQ believe in ‘equality’—as I gather from his essay? Doesn’t he know that socialism/communism is an economic system—like capitalism—and not a system of governing? Doesn’t he know that the terms like democratic or dictatorship determine the form of governance? Doesn’t he realize the no system—whether communist, capitalist, or socialist—is not pure?

    Does he think the political system in America is aristocratic—which he characterizes as communist? How about the Bush’s—two presidents from that family, and going on a third. Or maybe you measure an aristocracy by mere money, rather than succession—I think Harry Truman or Bill Clinton was the last president who was elected and not a millionaire at the time. And now he want to elect one of the greatest aristocrats in American history—Mitt Romney—soley on the basis that he is a Republican and may share some of McQ’s values (actually, Romney has flip-flopper so much since 2008, who knows what he really stands for)?

    • @tadcf “Doesn’t he know that socialism/communism is an economic system—like capitalism—and not a system of governing? ” Seriously? What, do you have a book of idiotic sayings that you refer to when you fly by on your daily pass?
      ========================================================================
      A third Bush President? American aristocracy characterized as communist?
      ========================================================================
      the general gist implies you’re about 19 years old with a recent education, not much attention to actual history, not much insight into human nature, questionable ability to comprehend written information and a collection of idiotic leftist talking points. You can see, I like you.

    • @tadcf “Doesn’t he know that socialism/communism is an economic system—like capitalism—and not a system of governing?”—–Wow. Stunning ignorance. If you can’t afford to buy books, get a library card. Obviously the internet is beyond your capabilities.
      Suggested authors; Marx, Lenin, Mao, etc.

      • @timactual And a little history might be in order for him a well. I’m gathering he has some disdain then for the various European government parties that are clearly political and classify themselves as socialists.

    • @tadcf Like its cousin (fascism) communism is a totalitarian system. See the “total” part in that word? That means it is all encompassing. Everything. Everybody. Socialism is slightly less so…but only slightly.

      • @Ragspierre It’s all another clear miss by Washing Machine Charlie.

      • @Ragspierre Just to be snarky…
        Only slightly? Remind me again what the nationalist socialist slogan was?

        • @tkc882 There really are some nominally democratic socialist models.

        • @Ragspierre Sure, I can democratically vote to make people slaves. We did that already. So, why not democratically vote to take people’s stuff, and give it to other people? Wait…..this sounds really familiar somehow….I’ll let you know come April 15th how it worked out for me again this year…..

        • @looker Greece, Italy, and Spain come to mind… Models…nobody said SUCCESSFUL models….

      • @Ragspierre Socialism provides the illusion of freedom

    • @tadcf Ladies and gentlemen, let me point out something about the nonsensical tirade above. It does not contain the word “Obama” anywhere in it. ==========================================================================
      That’s presaging the arguments of the left for the next seven months. Given that Obama has practially nothing to brag about from his term – and will have precisely nothing if the Supreme Court dumps Obamacare – the left is cravenly desperate to make this entire election about something other than Obama’s record. It’s going to be “look how awful Romney is” spiced up with non sequiturs about politics and economics. The objective is to move the discussion somewhere, anywhere away from Obama’s abysmal record in economics, cronyism, increased racial tensions, abuse of power, and most especially his Herculean contribution to the debt mountain.

    • @tadcf You’re kind of all over the map here dude. I guess I’ll refute your “points” in order:
      1) Sure we believe in equality. We all have the same rights, and the same opportunity to live our lives and try to be successful. THAT’S equality. By your definition, the most equal state on earth is NoKo. Kill that noise pal
      2) Comm/Socialism are socio-economic systems
      3) Nobody here will argue that the American system at present is too geared towards “dynasties” and building a permanent political class.
      4) He wants to elect Romney for the reasons described in the post above. NOBODY here is singing hymnals to Romney (unlike the lefties who sing for Barack Hussein Obama! Mmmm-mmm-mmm!) We acknowledge him as the lesser of two evils.

    • @tadcf “From each according to his ability, to each, according to his needs” – yes, that doesn’t sound at all like it would be a social order/system of government, does it? I wonder who handles the TO each thing, yes I’m sure there will be a big socially based warehouse where ‘each’ shows up in order to receive his ‘to’ and it will be, uh, not administered by anyone, it’ll sorta be like a free love thing where we just take what we want man, and the warehouse will restock itself man, and it’ll be cool, and groovy man, can you dig it?

    • @tadcf “Doesn’t he know that socialism/communism is an economic system—like capitalism—and not a system of governing?”

      So all those socialist political parties in the U.S. and around the world are not interested in governing?

      And the socialist governments running socialist programs and taking control of various industries are just engaging in economics but not governing?

      I mean, pal, you are an idiot.

  • West was referring to the Progressive Caucus. He MAY have been a LITTLE hyperbolic…but not much.

  • If for NO other reason than to get rid of Eric Holder, I will enthusistically vote AGAINST Obama. Of course, there are legions of OTHER reasons, too.

  • “Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way — Lee Iacocca” …

    It’s time for this Pres**ent to get out of the way.

    • @Neo_ Thomas Paine :)

      • @looker It “Paine-s” me to say, you’re right

        • @Neo_ Ah, I looked it up man, I just thought that was way too good for Iacocca to have come up with but was willing to give him credit, till I saw Paine, and I figured you’d want to know. I do learn a lot on this internet thingie, guess I’ll always be a ‘reference room page’ at heart.

  • My reaction to West’s claim that 78 to 81 Democrats in Congress were Coimmunists was, “That’s it? So few?”