|
Many have suggested that Obama is
a socialist. Increasingly, some are arguing that Obama is a fascist. In fact, Obama shares traits with both socialists and
fascists. A socialist wants complete government ownership and control of all property and the means of production—with
a few people in power skimming wealth off the top for their own personal benefit. A fascist is willing to accept a limited
amount of private property ownership, but demands control of it—with a few people in power skimming wealth off the top
for their own personal benefit. (The fascist at least has enough sense to recognize that some capitalism is needed to create
the wealth he wishes to confiscate. The socialist neglects to realize that in destroying capitalism he is also destroying
the creator of the wealth.)
If the government takes over all the banks, that is socialism. If you own a small business
and the government allows you to keep it, but burdens you with so many taxes and regulations that it calls the shots on most
of your business decisions, that is fascism. (You are relegated to the position of caretaker.)
”ObamaCare”
is socialism, because the federal government will eventually become the single-payer of all health care expenses. (Regardless
of his denials, that is Obama’s plan: put all private insurers out of business. It is not even a “Trojan Horse”
scheme, because almost everyone can clearly see the troops pretending to hide inside the horse.)
Obama’s hoped
for “cap and trade” “global warming” legislation is fascism, because it will be used to strictly control
businesses, while still allowing their private ownership. (Obama may not want to own GM or Chrysler outright, but he wants
to tell them what cars to build—regardless of whether Americans want those vehicles.) Arguably, “cap and trade”
may lead to the nationalization of the energy industry, with the government taking over the oil and utility companies to “control”
the rising costs the legislation itself causes. That would be socialism.
In 1931 Adolph Hitler wrote: “What
matters is to emphasize the fundamental idea in my party’s economic program clearly—the idea of authority. I want
the authority; I want everyone to keep the property he has acquired for himself according to the priniciple: benefit to the
community precedes benefit to the individual. But the state should retain supervision and each property owner should consider
himself appointed by the state. It is his duty not to use his property against the interests of others among his own people.
This is the crucial matter. The Third Reich will always retain its right to control the owners of property.” Hitler
said it was okay to earn a living, as long as you don’t keep too much of what you earned for yourself—which sounds
suspiciously related to the job of Obama’s “pay czar.” Hitler said that the community comes before the individual—which
sounds suspiciously like “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody” (as Obama
told “Joe the Plumber”). Hitler said he should be the ultimate authority—which sounds suspiciously like
surrounding oneself with three dozen or more unelected “czars” who answer only to the President.
The problem is not, however, whether
Obama is a socialist or a fascist. The problem is that he is opposed to free market capitalism—the system responsible
for making the United States of America the most prosperous nation on earth, where all men and women can achieve greatness
if the government stays out of their way. Obama’s hatred for capitalism—and even the American way of life—is
turning a bad, long recession into an incredibly bad, very long recession.
The economy is not recovering from
the recession because owners of businesses are frightened to death of what Obama and the federal government will do next.
No business owner in his right mind will spend money to buy new equipment, expand his operations, or hire additional employees
when he doesn’t yet know how much ObamaCare, cap-and-trade, “card check,” and other proposed restrictive
and extensive legislation will cost him. (The few businesses that are expanding are those which are betting they will be able
to make money off the new federal schemes.)
That is exactly what happened during the 1930s. The Great Depression continued
far longer than it should have because Franklin D. Roosevelt kept raising taxes, adding regulations, imposing new burdens
on business, violating the U.S. Constitution, and doing the unexpected—all of which are the best way to get businesses
to do nothing. They act—or avoid acting—out of fear. What happened in the 1930s is happening today. Business owners
are frightened to death that they will be unable to survive the rising taxes and increased regulations they see coming. They
are just biding their time, hoping some miracle will save them. Election Day cannot come fast enough for them. If that doesn’t
save them, they are resigned to closing their doors, sending their workers home, and retiring early on however much they can
get from a liquidation of assets.
Most Democrats (and too many Republicans) are ignorant of basic laws of economics,
and blindly pass legislation believing it will help—when it will in fact do harm to the economy. Others—like Obama
and his closest advisors—know full well what they are doing. They know that the more Americans suffer, the more willing
they will be to accept legislation that would ordinarily be strongly opposed. That is what Obama’s chief of staff Rahm
Emanuel mean when he said, “Never let a crisis go to waste”—which can also be interpreted as “Kick
‘em while they’re down.”
When a man is trying to save his family
from rising flood waters, he will accept a boat ride even from the person who dynamited the dam. But those who know better
will sit on their roofs and wait for the water to recede—and then go after the bastard who blew up the dam and destroyed
their lives.
Don Fredrick
October 12, 2009
Copyright 2009 Don Fredrick
|
