The New American Way

April 21, 2010 at 10:25 (Uncategorized)

Like the big to-do about ‘global warming’ most leftist policies are based on fear of change or failure. As most wise men know, neither is necessarily a bad thing. It could be, but equally it could be a path to something bigger and better. On the flip side, the opposite nearly always ends in bad things.

The inconvenient truth for Waxman – something he would know if he weren’t a dogmatic partisan – is that he’s seeing a feature of Obamacare, not a bug. The ideological basis of the health reform package was never about lowering insurance premiums for the American people, increasing the quality of care, or decreasing the burden of health costs on corporate America. Quite the contrary; it was designed to advance a long-term agenda to cede massive authority to government, and to achieve a permanent social change in the path to prosperity. And, yes, to use increased costs to limit the options open to large corporations.

The aims of socialism are often misunderstood by most Americans, as the only socialist most know of is that harmless disheveled professor on the local campus. It’s a word which can hardly be considered insulting when an elected Senator of the Socialist party caucuses with the Democrats. While socialism is sold as a way to elevate the underclass, the actual result of its application isn’t to increase the prosperity of the poor – it’s a method of achieving permanent stratification by allowing the more productive members of society to pass any losses onto others.

The reason socialism fails, as my colleague Francis Cianfrocca describes it, is that it socializes losses, not gains. It is an application of the “too big to fail” policy across all levels of society – because the losers no longer face consequences for their mistakes, businessmen are happy to make more of them, morphing into the oligarchs of the Soviet era. The rich stay rich, the poor stay poor, and the classless society becomes one where the boundaries of class are nigh impossible to break.

President Obama has drawn many comparisons to Jimmy Carter and Woodrow Wilson, but his agenda is, in its all-encompassing approach, far more ambitious. As Josh Trevino has pointed out, where liberal projects once consisted of focused attacks on either end of the economic continuum – punitive taxes on the wealthy, union enabling, the minimum wage, and Lyndon B. Johnson’s war on poverty – Obama’s agenda is designed to destroy the ability to transit from one end of the continuum to the other. Every new cushion, apparently designed to ease the pain of losses, means new barriers obstructing individual freedom of action and the expected rewards of risk-taking, resulting in an immovable class society.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: