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!

Appeal_patriots_day_1

View all comments

142 Comments

Tim Carey said:

Turn the fire hoses on them.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:52 PM

BuzzardB in Havertown said:

Please think and act with intelligence. Compete and quit complaining . The occupiers are like a basketball team that complains about the referees' missed calls, but not acknowledging that their 25 missed free throws contributed to their 5 point loss! Quit bitching. I am happy to be an American. The occupiers are a bunch of woosees. Go picket Chuck Shumer, Barney Frank and Dick Durbin, and find Chris Dodd's house on which he received a preferential mortgage rate. There you can camp out. I hear it's got plenty of room.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Dr. Pete Kleff said:

That this movement has gained any traction is itself very troubling.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Dr. John E. Russell said:

One of my elder friends heard FDR say,"Some of my best friends are communists."See http://www.jrcministries.org/religion-a-politics/64-communism.html

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:55 PM

American Rifleman in McKeesport,PA.15132 said:

Nothing to see here.Move along! OWS:bunch of tantrum taking kindergarten punks.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Ed said:

Say what you want, but the Occupy movement has gathered more attention and is steamrolling faster than the Tea Party movement ever did. Just goes to show how far left the country has shifted. I've said it before and I say it again, we've passed the tipping point. Don't be surprised to see "BHO" rally the troops and snatch victory from the jaws of defeat once again. The Republican nominee, regardless of who it is, will feel like Hillary did in '08... WTF happened!

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Chris RIchards said:

You're preaching to the choir. The Establishment Republican complex is playing reality TV with our future by giving each other black eyes WHICH IF under normal circumstances had occurred 16-20 years ago would have prevented the horse's ass cadre of Republican candidates who are bored with nothing better to do than RUN FOR PRESIDENT, and most inportanly would have given us a back bench of small government conservatives that we the tea party have begun to build. Instead, an entire generation of country club Republicans have allowed the whining liberals into our camp and here we are. Time for new definitions - if it acts like a Liberal, leftist, spend other people's money, cut-out then it is NOT a freedom loving, small government, run to the gun fire, Conservative. Shut UP - I don't want to hear Republican leadership any more - I am not listening - I am waiting for Action! Consistent, PRINCIPLED ACTION!Enough is Enough. Stop quoting your liberal mealy mouthed "twice-a-day-right-The-other-23-hour-and-58-minutes-WRONG" Republican establishment mouthpieces that got us here in the first place.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Gayle Sollenberger said:

As always, Mr. Alexander, a great article. As for the celebrities and major sports figures, when they start opening their mouths, I turn the channel. I found out a long time ago, they can't speak coherently or with any sense unless the words are from a script, written by someone else. I don't go to their movies or their games. Money is hard to come by these days and I have no intention of giving wealthy celebrities and sports figures my hard-earned money, so they can turn around and use it to tell me how to live my life.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:02 PM

glenn dupuis said:

As a military retiree, and social security recipient (reduced)I still am paying taxes to support the 50% that want to have all the benefits without the obligation to work or serve. America is in it's final death throws and those that are protesting will end up eating each other to survive.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Mike in NC said:

Unfortunately I'm afraid the erosion has gone too far along. I think the majority of Americans are too stupid to be in a Democracy, and the Dems know it. In fact they are counting on it. I do not have a warm and fuzzy feeling about our future. Even my own daughter voted for the lying socialist.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:10 PM

Mr Z said:

Haven't heard someone mention that the "Occupy" movement may be the beginning of a "Hugo Chavez" type takeover of the country...

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:12 PM

Jan said:

You are, as usual right on. I love you guys!

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Paul Mudge said:

I wonder what Sam Webb does for a living, or is he simply supported by donations to "the party" the way union leaders are paid.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:17 PM

Brian Boerman said:

OWS is not as far off the truth as we might like to believe. Unfortunately today, Wall Street is not about "investing," it's about "trading."Today, Wall Street firms get very fat profits while the investors lose. The SEC mandates that my account manager gets 1% of my FUND every year, even when it's losing money. That's blatantly unfair. So is the fact that a true individual American "investor" cannot compete with computerized trading and account churning for kick-backs in the financial institutions.Today, American businesses show increasing profits, but their profits are not re-invested in American jobs. William Jefferson Clinton gave my employer a tax BREAK for off-shoring my R&D job to a communist nation. I'm a well-educated high-tech R&D professional, not "generic" unskilled labor.So there's a lot to be mad about. To some degree, the OWS people have correctly selected ONE of the right targets, albeit unknowingly. Let's not just put on our blinders and paint with too broad a brush. That's often what we accuse the other side of -- let's be better than that.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Glen Jorgensen said:

A lot of inflammatory rhetoric on both sides here. While Mark is right on in his assessments (I have not seen him wrong yet!), the growing angst in society is based on something. And this is angst that is being expressed from both sides of the political spectrum (TeaParty and OWS crowd). Generally, the poor and middle class ARE worse off than in the past and the rich ARE better off. Why? A lot of people want to blame the politicians (see http://www.myconfinedspace.com/2011/11/02/prosperity-regression/blame_reagan-jpg/ for an interesting graphic). I don't endorse positions, I just want look at facts. Why is this trend extant? IS someone to blame? but I wonder if something else is at play here.

Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 1:21 PM