Back in the day, in my misspent youth, I was a student at the University of Oregon. I took a class in Marxism from one of the school’s strident and outspoken Marxists, and it was one of more eye-opening experiences of my life. To the point, then: Obama’s statement is classic Marxist thought. My prof taught us the same thing in our class - that is, the wealth appropriated by the capitalists came from the labor of the workers. The delusion of the capitalist is that he thinks that the wealth came from his effort, when actually it came from the workers. One day, at least according to the Marxists, the workers will rise up and kill the capitalists, thereby taking the wealth that they created through their labor. As my prof used to point out to the delight of those of us with more pedestrian values, good and bad have different meanings based on who you are. When the workers kill the capitalists, it won’t be good for the capitalists, but it will be good for the workers.
Famous Cherokee warrior Elizabeth Warren said the same thing last year, I believe.
In any case, I recognized Obama’s meaning the moment he said it. It’s an expression of his ideological core values.
God help us.
Very eloquent summary.
‘Property is theft’ since ‘You didn’t build that’, you have no complaint when it’s taken from you by force (which is government) if necessary.
I did the same thing as you, only my course was in Comparative Religions. What I learned about a little understood religion called Islam alarmed and frightened me, because I could extrapolate into the future the events that eventually came true on a bright sunny September morning in 2001. Islam and Marxism have a whole lot in common.......
Made me fell real sick. She was trying to tell him she needed the money to get her car out of the shop.
My first college counselor told me that when "they" begin to march, he wanted to be right there with them. I got a new counselor. I always wondered where he thought all those marching people were going AND most importantly, WHO would be leading them all.
Sounds like the Good Lord has left some people to their own delusions.
Precisely. And altho the rest of your post is spot on, this is IMHO the real opportunity in the 2012 context.One day, at least according to the Marxists, the workers will rise up and kill the capitalists, thereby taking the wealth that they created through their labor. As my prof used to point out to the delight of those of us with more pedestrian values, good and bad have different meanings based on who you are. When the workers kill the capitalists, it won’t be good for the capitalists, but it will beObamaites can obfuscate until the cow come home, but two facts cannot be evaded:
- Obama was saying the same thing as Fauxcahantas notoriously recently said and, as the audio clip clearly documents,
- Obama was preaching to the choir when he said it.
There have been rebellions of this sort, in Russia and many other places. They are disastrous for the workers for one simple reason: It took leadership to assemble the elements of a successful (i.e., socially beneficial) business, and it takes leadership to keep adapting it to changing circumstances. And circumstances do change.We struggle to understand why journalism is in the pockets of the Democratic Party, but it the reason is actually obvious. For reasons having little or nothing to do with the public interest (and everything to do with the very different proposition of interesting the public), Journalism is about bad news. Consequently journalism is really criticism. The more assiduously the journalist seeks to “make a difference,” the more s/he engages in second guessing of the decisions made by those who do socially necessary things. That can make the journalist seem important and knowledgeable - and since journalists are fascinated with creating appearances, that is good enough for the journalist. It can even gain control of a country for the journalist (e.g., Mussolini’s Italy).
But second guessing is no substitute leadership. Let your “worker” who “did" build that try to continue its operation in the absence of the leadership which “didn’t build that” and she will learn soon enough what that leadership was actually working quite effectively accomplishing, and what he was preventing. The Marxist idea of killing the capitalist is actually nothing more than killing messenger who tells you that the sum of your demands for credit for “doing that” is greater than the value of what has actually been accomplished.
The profit or loss of a business depends quite critically on seemingly modest expenses. The under appreciated problem being that profit/loss is a small difference between two large numbers representing income and expenses. Thus, a 5% increase in expenses (very “reasonable” wage increase) and a “reasonable” 5% reduction in working hours (thus, of production and revenue) can throw a modestly profitable business into a crisis.
But of course in reality this election is about one fundamental question which the Obama Administration raises - do those numbers actually matter? You and I know in our bones that they do. Obama is behaving precisely as if they did not. And every election year we are reminded of just how many people are capable of believing that. The numbers may not matter, but the reality which they describe does. Just not to a superficial person such as a journalist. Until there isn’t any food on the shelves.
“Famous Cherokee warrior Elizabeth Warren said the same thing last year, I believe.”
She did say the same thing, and Rush (rightly) took her over the coals for it. Otherwise, not much play, but it does fire up their base.
Since the Dems don’t see a downside (i.e., Rush and maybe some other talker pointing it out is not a downside), they figured that Obama would get a free pass on it - maybe because they thought that Romney would campaign like McCain and not try to actually win.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!