Alexander's Column

Populist Socialism on the Rise

Nov. 3, 2011

“99 Percent”? More like “20 Percent” but their Red cadres are growing

“The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.” –John Adams, 1787

The populist message of the Occupy Movement, the agelessly adolescent class warriors who make up Barack Hussein Obama’s Red October Uprising, now has the support of some 35 percent of Americans, mostly urbanites.

The Occupiers have now infested cities from coast to coast, including Oakland, Seattle, Denver, Austin, Chicago, Atlanta, Baltimore, New York and Boston. (For more on the Occupier movement visit our [YouTube Channel].)

Their mantra is simple (by necessity): “We are the 99 Percent, and we’re all victims of the 1 Percent.” By any objective standard, the 99 Percenters are not the brightest bunch, and they really represent the roughly 20 percent of Americans who are irrevocably dependent upon government subsidies and pay no income tax. Thus, this 20 percent has no vested interest in the cost of government and is predisposed to vote for the redistribution of others' incomes rather than work for their own. The underlying assumption is that it’s easier to confiscate wealth than create it.

This “entitled” 20 percent combines with the 10 percent of American labor who are collectivists and another 5 percent who are perpetual malcontents to thus form Obama’s entrenched socialist constituency of Useful Idiots.

The intellectually challenged Occupy morons have built their movement around the errant assertion that if the assets of the 1 Percent were redistributed, everyone would live happily ever after. Unfortunately, what the 35 Percenters really want is “redistributive justice,” Obama’s euphemism for socialism, which would actually require the redistribution of income from the other 65 percent of Americans families who live on earned income, so that everyone could be equally impoverished.

However, there’s a problem with liquidating the assets of the 1 percent (comprised of more celebs and pro athletes than Wall Street bankers), or even the top 25 percent of income earners: Most of their assets are on paper, and the rest of that “wealth” is in the form of small businesses and real property that support the jobs of tens of millions of Americans who, unlike the Occupy crowd, actually work for a living – and take pride in their occupations.

So what happens with liquidation? First, government deficits would almost double because 40 percent of all tax revenues are collected from “the rich”: No more income, no more tax revenue. Shortly thereafter, the economy would collapse, because half of all employers in the nation would have been liquidated. Then the government steps in to “nationalize” what is left of the private sector, leaving everyone under the same statist tyranny as Obama’s 35 Percenters – equally miserable, equally dependent upon the government, and that much closer to Obama’s mandate to implement Democratic Socialism.

The irrefutable fact remains, socialist economies always fail, as history has recorded with lucid repetition. In the inimitable words of former UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, “Socialist governments … always run out of other people’s money. They then start to nationalize everything.” Indeed, in the words of 19th century classical liberal Frederic Bastiat, “The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else.”

Of course, socialists never let reality intrude upon their classist fantasies of universal equality and happiness. Nineteenth-century historian Alexis de Tocqueville once observed, “Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”

If you have any doubt about the socialist motives of the Occupy Movement, consider this proclamation from my daily American Communist Party communiqué (yes, I subscribe to certain leftist publications, so, yes, I know my enemy): “We Are the 99%! The AFL-CIO has taken another step to embrace the Occupy Movement by creating their own We Are the 99% website. Also, CPUSA Chair Sam Webb has an article on the movement at the People’s World: ‘Occupy: embrace the new, build the movement.’”

Next, I suggest you review the official list of Occupy supporters, including Marxists, Nationalists, Fascists and even Islamists. What a sorry lot for a supporting cast. In an astounding demonstration of abject ignorance, some Leftmedia “journalists” and political hacks have attempted to draw like comparisons between Tea Party Patriots and the radical Occupy movement. Obama even asserted, “in some ways they’re not that different.” To set the record straight, we invite you to compare their respective rallies and decide for yourself!

Occupy v Tea Party

Given all this, it’s not surprising that the Occupiers' highest-profile support emanates from Obama himself, who proclaimed to a group of Occupiers, “You are the reason I ran for office.”

Obama claims, “People are frustrated and the [Occupy] protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works. … I think it expresses the frustrations that the American people feel. … The American people understand that not everybody’s been following the rules. These days, a lot of folks doing the right thing are not rewarded. A lot of folks who are not doing the right thing are rewarded.”

As to the Occupy Movement’s momentum, Obama says their agenda “will express itself until 2012 and beyond until people feel they are getting back to old-fashioned American values. That’s going to express itself politically in 2012 and beyond.”

By “old-fashioned” we suspect he’s merely re-warming some propaganda from one of the most notable of 20th-century socialists, that inheritance welfare liberal Franklin Delano Roosevelt. It was FDR, after all, who channeled Karl Marx when he proclaimed, “Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle.” For sure, Obama is modeling his reelection campaign after FDR’s 1936 campaign, when Roosevelt won on a class warfare strategy and avoided accountability for his failed socialist economic policies which sustained double digit unemployment until WWII.

Roosevelt issued a collectivist “bill of rights” in which he said that the government should ensure “the right to a useful and remunerative job … the right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation … the right of every family to a decent home … the right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health … the right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age … the right to a good education.”

For his part, Obama has been clear in his collectivist rhetoric: “[T]he wealthiest Americans have made out like bandits. … It’s not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

However, Obama’s silence on the growing civil unrest, is deafening!

View all comments

142 Comments

Chip Bulin said:

Where's the Hollywood crowd? Should they not join in with the anti-everything Occupy crowd? Oh, wait, they have too much money. So... why aren't the Occupy group turning on the professional atheletes and The Screen Actors Guild? Just a thought.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Fox 2! said:

Perhaps the Manticoran system would work here: to vote, you have to pay more in taxes than you receive in transfer payments and direct subsidies. See David Weber's Honorverse

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Edward said:

Why should anyone be surprised at these protesters? Their "99%" reflects their knowledge of mathematics aquired the "new math" that the schools teach today. The premise of which is "Your answer may not always be right, but it's never wrong."

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Jim Reese in Odessa. Texas said:

Support and passage of the Fair Tax (H. R. #25) would go a very long way toward solving a lot of the problems in this country. Why do most people recite the problems, instead of concentrating on a solution? fairtax.org

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:36 PM

John Tyreman said:

Of course, your exactly correct. The obvious parallel thought is that the working folks would take a hit if this obama supported redistribution were implemented but the workers would recover and continue...on the other hand the occupiers would immediately spend the received funds and start planning another effort for more funds. It would be a never ending repetition effort to squeeze more out of the real workers...Thus the entire occupy effort should be shut down now. If they want to march 24/7 demonstrating their 1st amendment rights fine but as soon as they sit or squat, they are trespassing and should be arrested. Enough is enough.John

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:36 PM

SubVet said:

Who is John Galt?Hopefully, there are many of us in the "Contributing Class" who are making preparations to simply walk away from this expanding nonsense.The idea of a simple life up in the mountains somewhere is becoming more appealing as each day goes by. Why should I bother to work so hard to earn fiat currency that the government takes most of to redistribute to those that choose to do nothing?Besides, the coming collapse is inevitable at this point and why not start learning how to exist comfortably in what, as the many dystopian novels of the near-future are depicting, is nearly certain to be realized?

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:44 PM

Allen said:

That 20 percent you say are, "Entitled", they are not. No where does it say a person who does not pay for anything, does he have title to anything. He has the right of pursuit. To be entitled, you first must be an a monetary position for it use, whether it be a ticket, or an insurance premium. The ID 10 Ts you are talking about are the receivers of doles, handouts, subsidies. A person pays for Social Security, he is entitled.He pays for Medicare, he is entitled. He gets Food Stamps, he is not entitled, He is on welfare, He is not entiitled. Or maybe you have a different copy of the Bill of Rights and Constitution than I have.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:44 PM

The Editor replied:

Thanks Allen, that is why in our copy of today's edition, "entitled" is in quote marks...

1 of the 99 said:

You really don't get it do you. This movement has been going on for nearly 100 years. The brightest and smartest humanitarians the world has to offer have finally had enough of the weak, criminally insane greed of the rich. We want you all prosecuted and jailed for life. The 1 % , the corrupt politicians , the corporate fat cats are history. Leave now and be spared. You have no where to go as this is a global movement. You have already lost. The rest of the world has no place for you. We are sick of allowing you carry on your petty ways. Do you get it now ?

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Mike McGinn in People's Republic of Maryland said:

At least when Carter was president we merely had an idiot in the Oval Office. Idiots can cause damage, but its generally random in nature. On the other hand, Obama seems intent on destroying our society, our way of life, and this great nation of ours (or at least what's left of it). Given a choice between only Carter or Obama, I'd take Jimmy any day.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Barry Payne in Merritt Island, Fl said:

The problem is not Wall St it is the Republican and Democratic Parties. Either Party could end the corruption at any time. The unholy alliance started way before Greenspan praised Keating's business model then got promoted to Fed Chairman by Reagan. The commercial real estate scam was not run by the S&Ls it was run by the Republican and Democratic Parties. Then latest in the long line of housing bubbles was not caused by Wall St it was the Republican and Democratic Parties. Larry Summers, Timothy Gietner, Paul Volker, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke have worked for both Parties.The real problem is that the people ripping off America every year for hundreds of billions of dollars are the Parties leaders and will never be brought to justice. The thought of holding the people in charge responsible is unthinkable to most Americans because it would be putting their Party leaders in prison. How the American voter has come to tolerate the level of in your face rampant lawlessness is a testament to the skill of the media consultants employed by both Parties.If you vote for a third Party your throwing your vote away.If you vote for the same Party your throwing America away.Barry Payne, Titular Despot Emeritus

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:48 PM

Ralph Smith said:

Excellent job of calling the kettle black. Keep it up, we're listing.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Greg Williams said:

Could it be that these malcontents are just pawns (and we know they are) being used (as malcontents are the easiest to be manipulated into any type of activity that fits a rebellious agenda) to create a 'crisis'. The Obama Admin and liberals, knowing their hand has been played and exposed, are realizing that the people (even many who were easily duped the first time around in '08) are now seeing what the real "Change" was that they wanted to bring and they know they can't win in an election even with the media and ACORN's (or whatever name they're going by this time around) help. They are certainly not above creating a crisis and are willing to create one that would 'require' them to call for a 'military state of emergency' and suspend or even cancel the elections! He and they are certainly not beyond this as is evidenced by all they have done in the past 3 years (as the ends justify the means in every case when it comes to their agenda and ideology and we've seen that in every decision and deception that's been put forward). Thanks and God bless in Christ!

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:49 PM

DJ King said:

Communism is such an ugly, UGLY thing!

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Daryl said:

Seems to me Obama just spoke out for the trickle down effect,even though he did not mean it that way, money spent creates money to make more stuff to sell which creates more jobs to make the stuff to sell. dang vicious circle...

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Terry Lee said:

Your vitriolic messages have escalated to the edgy, frenzied tones of those who attempt to promote false analogies. The Tea Party is made up of who are about to be has beens; the Occupy movement is made up of those who will inherit the mess. Those who cannot see this have their heads in the sand.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:52 PM