It’s difficult to frame an entire argument in a short essay. What I leave out is greater than what I include, but you aren’t limited by these points of departure. As always, I offer them knowing that you might go in a different direction backed by greater detail, more anecdotal parallels, and less refutable logic.
The National Debt Continues to Grow
How is it that two people my age are among those who have driven the national debt to more than 33 trillion bucks? Is it because they suffer no personal consequences of socialism’s degradation of a populace? Because they are steeped in the ideal and not the real? Because they believe that “giving a man a fish” is better than “teaching a man to fish”? Because they are driven by self-aggrandizement and political power that rests on a spoon-fed population?
Those two people are Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, both with tens of millions of followers, people who said, “Yeah, go ahead, spend as you will. No skin off my back and money in my pocket. Just make sure I get my cut.” And that’s what socialism does, doesn’t it? It gives those in the present their “cut” while taking a cut from those whose lives lie in some indefinite future, a future in which the interest on that debt will exceed the defense budget.
What Did They Learn in School?
I can’t fault the followers too much, however. They grew up in an American educational program that shifted between an unforgiving system of “learning by rote” and its antitheses, Montessori-like systems of “learning what you want when you want at the pace you want as long as it enhances your self esteem.” Sanders and Biden would have grown up under the former and not the latter educational system, however. They were babies during WWII; they grew up in the forties, fifties, and sixties. From the time of their births they were both alive during the twentieth century’s atrocities against and immiseration of people in Nazi Germany, Cuba, South and Central America, China, North Korea and the Soviet Union under socialist/communist systems. They saw the exponential rise of wealth in capitalist West in contrast. So, how do two guys my age not know the dangers of socialism/communism? How do they not know that money has to be backed up by goods and services and not by whims and government fiat? How do they not remember the tyranny that arose in socialist/communist governments?
But they keep spending and spending… This time “it” will be different. "We will make as equitable redistribution of wealth as we showed we could make when we chose to spend half a billion dollars on Solyndra, on green tech, and various stimulus bills from which as yet un-tallied millions were stolen."
The Deep Past of Socialism
Socialism in some form isn’t new. It’s not even an exclusive product of nineteenth thinkers like Marx and Engels, social movements, or the rise of unions after the fall of European feudal societies and monarchs. Sure, those relatively recent times are roots of modern socialism and communism but they are shallow roots. No, go back further to ancient Greece and Rome to see oak tree tap roots running deeply into the soil of western civilization.
In the sixth century B.C. in Athens, Solon (born c. 630—died c. 560), named as one of the “Seven Wise Men of Greece” and a nobleman by birth, thought he’d become a man of the people by reforming the “draconian” laws of eponymous codifier Draco. Solon freed citizens who were enslaved by their debt and restored their land to them. (Can anyone say, “College debt reduction”). It worked for awhile. But then, as now, all political reforms swing on a pendulum between opposite positions and results.
Skip ahead to 133 B.C. and Rome, where Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus (born c. 163), a tribunus plebis, that is, a tribune of the people (plebeians), pushed a reform to effectively limit “the rich” landowners and increase farm production by redistributing land and subsidizing small-farm farmers and grain supplies. You’ll never guess what happened. Hearing of the reforms, people from outside Rome migrated to areas nearer the city in support of Gracchus and in anticipation of getting their share of the redistributed land. Some of the landed gentry and members of the Senate who felt threatened by the reforms instigated a mob to assassinate Gracchus in the same year of his reform movement. After his death, his brother Gaius took up the socialist agenda with the same result.
Socialism is a great idea when one has little. It’s a great motivator for the poor today. But its inevitable problems always surface: Rise of a dictator or an oligarchy, an increase in public debt with its inflationary trends and immiseration of the populace, inefficient production, and control by censorship and intimidation, the latter two inimical to freedom and safety. The pendulum swung in Solon’s time just as it swings in ours. In his old age, Solon warned that General Peisistratus would turn Athens into a dictatorship, but he was ignored and called “mad.” His warning: “A little time will show the citizens my madness, / Yes, will show, when truth comes in our midst.” And, of course, Peisistratus did declare himself dictator.
The Modern Parallel
Yep, the free phones, free hotel stays, free education, and free transportation to a city of one’s choice in our own times under Josephus Robinettus Bidenius, have generated a massive migration toward the free stuff and redistributed wealth that mirrors the circumstances associated with the reforms of Tiberius Gracchus. And those from whom the wealth is taken object today as they objected long ago.
But the times are different, $33 trillion different and snowballing toward indefinite, if not infinite, debt in a massive redistribution of wealth by fiat: Let there be green energy. Let there be no more fossil fuels—at least, no more for Americans.
Admittedly, there are differences between the ancient and modern worlds. Industrialization and technology have made some of the world’s poor richer in goods than ancient and medieval gentry. TVs and phones, electronics of all kinds, electricity and indoor plumbing, public infrastructure transportation, energy supply, and relative safety—with the exception of some inner cities—all make life easier for the poor today than it was for the poor of ancient Greece and Rome.
Inequalities exist, plenty of them, for sure, especially under free markets that drive capitalism. But things—living conditions—are relative, aren’t they? There are differences between living the luxury life of an ancient or medieval aristocrat and living the poor life of a lower class family today, especially in an affluent country with social programs supported by taxes.
Of course, there are people who go hungry. There are the homeless just as there were homeless people whose plight partially underlay Gracchus’ reforms. But in a society that currently has an estimated eight million unfilled job positions, is there not something to be said for personal initiative? For capitalistic entrepreneurship and energy? Is there not something to be said about the millions who have voluntarily dropped out of the workforce because of government policies?
And as I wrote in the introductory paragraph, I realize that the simple question posed in the last sentence has multiple complex answers.
Where’s the Balance?
Sanders and Biden became adults during a time of burgeoning affluence, and both are steeped in wealth with multiple homes and amenities too numerous to mention. Immiseration isn’t their personal future. They speak of financial equity from a position of financial inequity. They speak from positions of untouchable wealth and financial security (that is, for Biden, as long as the money keeps flowing from foreign sources through his son and brother). The point is that those who are secure pay little or no price for redistributing the wealth of others. Sanders and Biden are multiple homeowners. They have the wherewithal to bask in luxury.
Reforming capitalist America doesn’t entail personal reform for either Biden or Sanders. It doesn’t mean redistributing their land holdings, like Sanders’ lake house or Biden’s beach house. Reformation is easy when no personal reformation is required.
Thirty-three trillion dollars of debt is easy to maintain when no personal pain occurs in its repayment. Two guys my age sitting virtually on top the inequity pile deem redistribution as the way to a better future when, if they only looked back, they would see that that ideal future has always succumbed to the whims of greed, graft, and control.
The National Debt Continues to Grow
How is it that two people my age are among those who have driven the national debt to more than 33 trillion bucks? Is it because they suffer no personal consequences of socialism’s degradation of a populace? Because they are steeped in the ideal and not the real? Because they believe that “giving a man a fish” is better than “teaching a man to fish”? Because they are driven by self-aggrandizement and political power that rests on a spoon-fed population?
Those two people are Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, both with tens of millions of followers, people who said, “Yeah, go ahead, spend as you will. No skin off my back and money in my pocket. Just make sure I get my cut.” And that’s what socialism does, doesn’t it? It gives those in the present their “cut” while taking a cut from those whose lives lie in some indefinite future, a future in which the interest on that debt will exceed the defense budget.
What Did They Learn in School?
I can’t fault the followers too much, however. They grew up in an American educational program that shifted between an unforgiving system of “learning by rote” and its antitheses, Montessori-like systems of “learning what you want when you want at the pace you want as long as it enhances your self esteem.” Sanders and Biden would have grown up under the former and not the latter educational system, however. They were babies during WWII; they grew up in the forties, fifties, and sixties. From the time of their births they were both alive during the twentieth century’s atrocities against and immiseration of people in Nazi Germany, Cuba, South and Central America, China, North Korea and the Soviet Union under socialist/communist systems. They saw the exponential rise of wealth in capitalist West in contrast. So, how do two guys my age not know the dangers of socialism/communism? How do they not know that money has to be backed up by goods and services and not by whims and government fiat? How do they not remember the tyranny that arose in socialist/communist governments?
But they keep spending and spending… This time “it” will be different. "We will make as equitable redistribution of wealth as we showed we could make when we chose to spend half a billion dollars on Solyndra, on green tech, and various stimulus bills from which as yet un-tallied millions were stolen."
The Deep Past of Socialism
Socialism in some form isn’t new. It’s not even an exclusive product of nineteenth thinkers like Marx and Engels, social movements, or the rise of unions after the fall of European feudal societies and monarchs. Sure, those relatively recent times are roots of modern socialism and communism but they are shallow roots. No, go back further to ancient Greece and Rome to see oak tree tap roots running deeply into the soil of western civilization.
In the sixth century B.C. in Athens, Solon (born c. 630—died c. 560), named as one of the “Seven Wise Men of Greece” and a nobleman by birth, thought he’d become a man of the people by reforming the “draconian” laws of eponymous codifier Draco. Solon freed citizens who were enslaved by their debt and restored their land to them. (Can anyone say, “College debt reduction”). It worked for awhile. But then, as now, all political reforms swing on a pendulum between opposite positions and results.
Skip ahead to 133 B.C. and Rome, where Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus (born c. 163), a tribunus plebis, that is, a tribune of the people (plebeians), pushed a reform to effectively limit “the rich” landowners and increase farm production by redistributing land and subsidizing small-farm farmers and grain supplies. You’ll never guess what happened. Hearing of the reforms, people from outside Rome migrated to areas nearer the city in support of Gracchus and in anticipation of getting their share of the redistributed land. Some of the landed gentry and members of the Senate who felt threatened by the reforms instigated a mob to assassinate Gracchus in the same year of his reform movement. After his death, his brother Gaius took up the socialist agenda with the same result.
Socialism is a great idea when one has little. It’s a great motivator for the poor today. But its inevitable problems always surface: Rise of a dictator or an oligarchy, an increase in public debt with its inflationary trends and immiseration of the populace, inefficient production, and control by censorship and intimidation, the latter two inimical to freedom and safety. The pendulum swung in Solon’s time just as it swings in ours. In his old age, Solon warned that General Peisistratus would turn Athens into a dictatorship, but he was ignored and called “mad.” His warning: “A little time will show the citizens my madness, / Yes, will show, when truth comes in our midst.” And, of course, Peisistratus did declare himself dictator.
The Modern Parallel
Yep, the free phones, free hotel stays, free education, and free transportation to a city of one’s choice in our own times under Josephus Robinettus Bidenius, have generated a massive migration toward the free stuff and redistributed wealth that mirrors the circumstances associated with the reforms of Tiberius Gracchus. And those from whom the wealth is taken object today as they objected long ago.
But the times are different, $33 trillion different and snowballing toward indefinite, if not infinite, debt in a massive redistribution of wealth by fiat: Let there be green energy. Let there be no more fossil fuels—at least, no more for Americans.
Admittedly, there are differences between the ancient and modern worlds. Industrialization and technology have made some of the world’s poor richer in goods than ancient and medieval gentry. TVs and phones, electronics of all kinds, electricity and indoor plumbing, public infrastructure transportation, energy supply, and relative safety—with the exception of some inner cities—all make life easier for the poor today than it was for the poor of ancient Greece and Rome.
Inequalities exist, plenty of them, for sure, especially under free markets that drive capitalism. But things—living conditions—are relative, aren’t they? There are differences between living the luxury life of an ancient or medieval aristocrat and living the poor life of a lower class family today, especially in an affluent country with social programs supported by taxes.
Of course, there are people who go hungry. There are the homeless just as there were homeless people whose plight partially underlay Gracchus’ reforms. But in a society that currently has an estimated eight million unfilled job positions, is there not something to be said for personal initiative? For capitalistic entrepreneurship and energy? Is there not something to be said about the millions who have voluntarily dropped out of the workforce because of government policies?
And as I wrote in the introductory paragraph, I realize that the simple question posed in the last sentence has multiple complex answers.
Where’s the Balance?
Sanders and Biden became adults during a time of burgeoning affluence, and both are steeped in wealth with multiple homes and amenities too numerous to mention. Immiseration isn’t their personal future. They speak of financial equity from a position of financial inequity. They speak from positions of untouchable wealth and financial security (that is, for Biden, as long as the money keeps flowing from foreign sources through his son and brother). The point is that those who are secure pay little or no price for redistributing the wealth of others. Sanders and Biden are multiple homeowners. They have the wherewithal to bask in luxury.
Reforming capitalist America doesn’t entail personal reform for either Biden or Sanders. It doesn’t mean redistributing their land holdings, like Sanders’ lake house or Biden’s beach house. Reformation is easy when no personal reformation is required.
Thirty-three trillion dollars of debt is easy to maintain when no personal pain occurs in its repayment. Two guys my age sitting virtually on top the inequity pile deem redistribution as the way to a better future when, if they only looked back, they would see that that ideal future has always succumbed to the whims of greed, graft, and control.
RSS Feed