‘So long as our leaders tell us that we must trust them to regulate and redistribute our way back to prosperity, we will not break out of this economic quagmire,’ says Daniel S. Loeb, a prominent hedge fund manager on Wall Street — a Democrat and, in 2008, one of Obama’s strong supporters.
Unfortunately, it took Mr. Loeb a while to see the light (what was he thinking?), but he finally did, and I agree wholeheartedly. What in the world did he expect from a man running as a socialist promising to ‘spread the wealth’? Obama didn’t fool anyone. He always was a socialist and he remains one, both in theory and practice. Turn off MSNBC and all the rest of his blindly liberal sycophants, and simply study his own words in campaigns, and observe his own actions in office.
Loeb’s words ring true and clearly illustrate Obama’s problem. You can’t grow socialism without capitalism to support it. If everyone who produced wealth went on strike tomorrow, refusing to work until government got out of the economy, the entire political establishment as we know it (Republicans too) would vanish overnight. It would be the end not just of socialism, but the politicized economy created by ‘Republicrats’ over the last 75 or more years.
Still, Obama has a problem that Republicans and moderate Democrats never faced to this extent. He can’t keep growing the government without capitalism to support it. He cannot keep looting the economy unless there is a growing economy to loot. Recent numbers are showing that the American economy has almost stopped growing. Socialism requires prosperity in order to redistribute. Even Karl Marx understood that. Obama came into office when America was vulnerable and frightened by an economic crisis—but still richer than any society in human history. This was the perfect context for him to swoop down and nationalize everything in sight. He’s on track to his goal. Nobody has been able to stop him or slow him down (you’re a “racist” if you try). But he cannot succeed on the terms of capitalism. He can’t succeed on the premise of growing the private economy, which is what 70 percent or more of the population wants. They stupidly voted for him thinking that “spreading the wealth” would somehow create wealth. Obama can only succeed on the premise of redistribution, which he’s doing with money stolen mostly from future capitalists (via unsustainable debt).
Therein lies the heart of Obama’s contradiction. He’s counting on capitalism and private wealth to exist in the future so that he may destroy it today. This is impossible, and doesn’t even make sense on its own terms. What’s worse, Obama doesn’t want what most Americans want. Most Americans want a growing private economy. Obama wants a growing government and a morally humbled private economy, bowing to the wishes and whims of government. No society in history has ever (successfully) created such a thing, and none ever will.
Obama has to fail, because he wants to destroy that on which he depends in order to destroy it. No wonder these socialists and leftists are all so grouchy, mean and intolerant. I would be too if I were at war with reality.