H2O MAN
 
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 06:44 am
Class warfare according to Barack Obama, Karl Marx

Nope .. I’m not ready to turn this class warfare thing loose yet. I know wealth envy and class warfare have been with us from the beginning of history … but now we have the leader (“ruler” in the words of his associates) of the free world promoting class warfare with a vengeance. In his speech yesterday Obama said “This is not class warfare, it’s math.” It’s clear, then, that Dear Ruler and I are operating with a different definition of class warfare. So here’s a definition we might use: “[T]he antagonism between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie is a struggle of class against class.” That definition is from Karl Marx. Barack Obama is the one engaged in the antagonizing, pinning ailing seniors against wealthy Americans, pinning college hopefuls against corporate profits.

On almost a daily basis, Barack Obama is engaged in an effort to demonize the wealthy (bourgeoisie) in order to drum up support from the proletariat. Remember that it was John Drew who wrote about meeting a young Barack Obama. At the time, Obama was coming to realize that he could have a better shot at a “revolution” if he went about through government and politics: “Whatever impact our encounter might have had on him, I know something about what Barack Obama believed in 1980. At that time, the future president was a doctrinaire Marxist revolutionary, although perhaps — for the first time — considering conventional politics as a more practical road to socialism.”

Moving right along .. a few more things about Karl Marx. Karl Marx’s contributions to the theory of class warfare included his belief that class conflict was a life-and-death struggle impossible of peaceful resolution. This is actually where I believe that Barack Obama differs from Karl Max, based on John Drew’s encounter with him at a young age. I do not believe that Obama wants to incite violence, but I do believe that Obama is using the bully-pulpit to antagonize voters and drive a wedge between two sectors of society that he believes are not mutually exclusive: the evil rich and the middle class or poor. To Barack Obama, a wildly successful wealthy segment of society only exists because that money that was taken from other people who are not wildly successful themselves. Their gain is someone else’s loss. This collective idea of wealth is exactly what we should be fearful of, and is exactly the reason why Barack Obama has no clue how to grow our economy. Wildly successful Americans can exist while growing the size of the economic pie for everyone, not just redistributing the size of the current pie.

The other contribution of Marx to class warfare theory was the concept that membership in a class is essentially permanent and hereditary. This is exactly the opposite of what some, like yours truly, believe to be the American Dream: the opportunity to work hard, earn a living, raise a family and make a better life for yourself than your parents. In other words, just because your parents mow lawns or clean houses for a living doesn’t mean that you have to do the same. In America, you can make anything of yourself, so long as you work for it. The opportunity is there. Well apparently this concept is fading. We are turning from an American-idea of opportunity toward a Marxist-idea of opportunity. From the Wall Street Journal …

Before 2007, Americans generally opposed higher taxes on the wealthy because they thought they would be wealthy too some day.

Not anymore. One reason President Obama’s “Buffett Rule” (applied to those making $1 million or more a year) may be politically popular is that most voters no longer see themselves reaching the $1 million mark – let alone $1 million a year.

According to a new poll from the Associated Press and CNBC, 79% of Americans say it’s unlikely they’ll have $1 million or more in assets over the next 10 years. Fully 61% said it is “extremely” or “very difficult” to become a millionaire in the U.S. today…

What’s even more surprising is that the U.S. no longer leads the world in its hopes for upward mobility. Australians are more optimistic, though only slightly: 72% of them said it’s unlikely they’ll become millionaires.

Here we are in Barack Obama’s America … sliding toward Marxism, whether we realize it or not.




By Neal Boortz
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 06:57 am
So, while it might not be class warfare, in that it is not the "haves" versus the "have nots," with the administration wanting to "spread the wealth around" it might just be the "givers" versus the "takers."

I always thought that in many personal relationships that we see that there are "givers" and "takers." Could this be the new paradigm for society?

So, rather than refer to those that would benefit from a society with more largesse as the "have nots," they might just be referred to as the "takers"? "Call 'em as you see 'em"!
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 07:25 am
We have contributors to society and parasitic leeches.

These parasitic leeches feel entitled to what that have not earned
and use the power of government to take it from the contributors.
Fido
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 07:31 am
@H2O MAN,
The entire burden of the cost of government, much of which results from a defense of property, wealth, and capital cannot be laid for long on the backs of those with the least capital, wealth, or property... It is a great idea to try, and if you are guided by the ideal of capital as benefitial to society as a whole by some mysterious means beyond the understanding of mortals, then you will lay all the obligation on one class, the working class, and lay all the privilage of serving mankind by maintaining wealth into perpetuity onto the leisure class... What is happening before our eyes is the very destruction of society, and if the system cannot be re-formed, our need for a new form will become evident to all...
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 07:35 am
Before 2007.

What happened between 2006 and 2007?

hmmmmm?
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  7  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 07:42 am
@H2O MAN,
Boortz is clueless knob, either ignorant or catering to the ignorant. You can't call the rich 'bourgeoisie' in a marxist sense - the bourgeoisie are those who control/own the means of production. So a hollywood plastic surgeon isn't bourgeoisie no matter how rich he is. Proletarians are wage labourers. Proletarians who have money invested are bourgeoisie in marxist terms (by being shareholders).

Outside of marxist readings bourgeoisie is mostly used interchangeably with 'middle class' not 'rich' or upper class.

Boortz neatly confuses the group earning a million dollars a year with the group who expect one day to have a million dollar in assets - as if they are the same people.

I can't speak for Americans but the average price of a house in Sydney is over half a million, and prices continue to rise so I can see why 72% would say the expect to have assets over a million. That doesn't mean they are rich comparatively.

A load of self serving bollocks - either he is super rich or paid to whore himself by the super rich.
Below viewing threshold (view)
parados
 
  6  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 07:51 am
@H2O MAN,
WHAT?

Boortz is pointing out that the American Dream is a myth? People are finally waking up to that fact it seems. That's not Marxism, Neal. It's reality.

The wealthy have long peddled the myth that others can be like them if they work hard enough. It's always been a myth supported by the few here and there that do make it.
Fido
 
  3  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 08:58 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

WHAT?

Boortz is pointing out that the American Dream is a myth? People are finally waking up to that fact it seems. That's not Marxism, Neal. It's reality.

The wealthy have long peddled the myth that others can be like them if they work hard enough. It's always been a myth supported by the few here and there that do make it.
It is absolutely the case that this society must produce new millionaires even at the cost of untold thousands of new poor so that the myth of advancement and opportunity remains unchallenged... But it is a myth, and a cruel myth that is harder and harder to sell to children who most need to be motivated by dreams... What kids see is more and more parents grimly slaving away suffering indignity and anxiety while out of necessity urgining their children on to greater and greater feats of education to be spared the endless druggery and pain of working for every penny which is no more than slavery... Some people still think they can work their way out of slavery... It is a hard sell to the young who see more of what is before their eyes: The Unhappiness of their Parents, and the utter futility of their existence... Will you believe what you see, or some unreasonable explanation of reality based upon an unfathomable metaphysics??? The only reason so many believe is that the cost of unbelief is so high... Accept the American Dream and dismiss with a wave all the incongruities of reality, or accept reality, and up the revolution...
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 03:22 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

We have contributors to society and parasitic leeches.

These parasitic leeches feel entitled to what that have not earned
and use the power of government to take it from the contributors.


Makes sense.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 03:25 pm
so start the ******* war already, there's nothing on tv these days, hopefully the revolution will be televised
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Sep, 2011 03:48 pm
@Foofie,
I think he's talking about the people that use lobbyists to get tax breaks so those that feel entitled can take from others that contribute.
Fido
 
  0  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 06:28 am
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

We have contributors to society and parasitic leeches.

These parasitic leeches feel entitled to what that have not earned
and use the power of government to take it from the contributors.


Makes sense.
first; my little dog is called foofie, for her little foomancho moustache, but since she barks a lot with a little grating bark, most of what I say to her are not tender with affection, but shut up foofie.

Next; what of all those who have earned only ask in vain for government to support their having a fair share of what they earn, and a fair share of influence in government...It is law that determines what is ones fair share, and as long as it is possible it is those who control government who cantrol law... Yet, law is simply a form, and a form of relationship that is only as good as how well it works for people... The people are the law, and the king of England found that out, and the king of France, and the Czar or Russia... Do you suppose if the king of England were reasonable, and presented with a rational choice of giving the people of America independence or giving them justice that he would have denied them justice??? Those who consider law as a thing in itself are beyond the scope of reason, and time an again it has been the people who have made them reasonable with the simple act of dispossessing them... The law is not fixed and neither are property relation...With only a third of the population a determined number of people took this land from the king who took it from the natives... The law is not what is done, and finished... The law is what is done and gotten away with doing... The people say what is law... The people make the law... What is obvious now must some day make sense to all people: That the rich are taking too much, and in the process destroying this nation, the unity upon which our survival depends, and robbing each of us of our inalienable right to happiness...

We could all be rich, because if we were free we would own our own futures... We feel lucky in this moment if we can own a few moments where we do not have to give our attention to the pleasure of our bosses... Those thrown out of their jobs and onto the streets are receiving the greatest of lessons from their former masters... They are learning to live with uncertainty, and when they can do that, and no longer accept hopeless servitude only because it is certain, then freedom will be at hand... Now they go hat in hand to the boss asking with every sign of respect for a job... They need to ask for every damned thing, and the government too...The rich need to beg for their lives, and beg for the opportunity of joining a new society in a new world as a equal...
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 06:42 am
@djjd62,
djjd62 wrote:

so start the ******* war already, there's nothing on tv these days, hopefully the revolution will be televised
The revolution has begun, and you can always count of violence from the reactionaries... Don't expect to see it... If you want your life to be your own, then be the revolution... Sitting on the sidlines will not make it happen... It will not be televized or on the internet...Join the team; but understand that this time there will be no team, no waste of energy in organization... A little shake is all it takes to bring down governments and economies like ours; but that shake has to come from people willing to be, and act as individual... Don't mourn, don't organize, but act against the state and economy.. Tear it down, and then, make something better...Don't believe that before you can destroy the imperfect you must have perfection to replace it with... That is a snare... Simply know that to replace the worse with the better is possible without the impediment of the worse sort of people... Have the courage to make your own law and live with it... Have the courage to embrace uncertainty that will get no better as the situation stands, but that will not get better so long as we scurry from it, and will not get better at all until it gets worse... Make of your life an impediment to the juggernaut of capital that is razing this land and destroying this nation... Resist...
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 06:49 am
@parados,
parados wrote:

I think he's talking about the people that use lobbyists to get tax breaks so those that feel entitled can take from others that contribute.
Who is that who is contributing; because we would not miss the rich at all if they were all washed down the toilet like so many turds, but if the working class were to vanish, they would bleed money trying to teach the worthless to work with so little practice... Look at your local paper... There may be few enough of jobs looking for workers, but there are usually none saying capitalist's wanted... They do not want more capitalists, but less, because they see them in their true light: as a worthless class having no more value than they own...

They know who creates the value, but even with people to create value, they can do nothing without markets, and to have the ultimate of wealth those people have destroyed their domestic market with low wages that barely buy subsistence, and do not allow for luxuries like money in the bank...
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 08:53 am


What class of people will be the target once the rich are gone?
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 08:54 am
@Fido,
The reactionary left is just itching to start riots and blood letting in the streets.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 10:09 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

The reactionary left is just itching to start riots and blood letting in the streets.
It is the reactionary right... They are tired of their gated communities, and their renta cops... Now they want to turn this place into one huge prison, as it is already in fact... I hope the left knows now that they do not have to be violent or organized... All they have to do is resist, and since the right is already resisting, the thing will fall in no time... I hate to say it; but the right hates the government the left feels it cannot live without, and should hate because it is a useless old liar... The left should join the right in bringing the government down, and then form up, and take what they want from the right... There does not have to be bloodshed... There is no reason for anyone to get even a scratch bringing the government down... It is rotten, and the right, and the rich need it; but do not have the sense to fund it; so the whole thing is ready to fall...Timber, Mudderfugger..
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 10:14 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



What class of people will be the target once the rich are gone?
Anyone who thinks they are better than the rest of us, who thinks they should take their living our of our veins is fair game to me... If you don't like us, and don't want to be one of us, and if economic equality and political equality are obnoxious to you then get the hell out... It may be inevitable that people should take jobs of service to humanity and turn them to self service, but it will never be right or acceptable... Too many parasites kill the beast.. I want life for the beast, for humanity.. I want death for the parasites...
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 21 Sep, 2011 03:26 pm
@hingehead,
hingehead wrote:

Boortz is clueless knob, either ignorant or catering to the ignorant. You can't call the rich 'bourgeoisie' in a marxist sense - the bourgeoisie are those who control/own the means of production. So a hollywood plastic surgeon isn't bourgeoisie no matter how rich he is. Proletarians are wage labourers. Proletarians who have money invested are bourgeoisie in marxist terms (by being shareholders).

Outside of marxist readings bourgeoisie is mostly used interchangeably with 'middle class' not 'rich' or upper class.

Boortz neatly confuses the group earning a million dollars a year with the group who expect one day to have a million dollar in assets - as if they are the same people.

I can't speak for Americans but the average price of a house in Sydney is over half a million, and prices continue to rise so I can see why 72% would say the expect to have assets over a million. That doesn't mean they are rich comparatively.

A load of self serving bollocks - either he is super rich or paid to whore himself by the super rich.


There are quite a few specific differences between Marxism as expressed by Karl Marx and the political philosophy and policy practices of the Obama Administration, but then so too were there specific differences between Marxism and Leninism, Stalinism and Maoism, and yet there aren't too many people arguing that the isms of those who actually obtained and wielded power were not strikingly similar to that of the philosopher.

Since so many people take such strong exception to any claim that Obama is a Marxist or a Socialist, we should all agree that he is an Obamist and that rather than being a stalwart supporter of Socialism or Marxism, he is the figurehead of Obamism which can then be compared to Marxism and Socialism.

The classes that the Obamists are seeking to pit against one another don't match up perfectly with those identified by Marx, but the political process they favor can still easily be described as the promotion of "class warfare."

Boortz may have confused the group earning a million dollars a year with the group who expect one day to have a million dollar in assets, but Obamists haven’t. They know there is a clear difference between the two and yet they want to target them for revenue as if there wasn’t and this is because they also know that the levels of government spending they require to remain in power can’t be funded by “millionaires and billionaires” alone.

But they also have no intention of bleeding billionaires dry either, because if they did that, they would have to rely solely on institutional billionaires like the Labor Unions to fund their campaigns.

One need only participate in A2K to appreciate how inclined Obama supporters already are towards punishing The Rich, although few agree with Fido that the punishment should include hanging them from light poles.



 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama's Class Warfare
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/15/2020 at 11:07:21