By Naton der Weise
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” — Karl Marx in his 1875 Critique of the Gotha Program
Ignoring the elaborate context of the utopia in which Marx’s socialist dictum hinges, one could easily be forgiven for thinking it is a perfect description for parasitism—the process by which one species dines off the body and labors of another.
The Soviets, faced with feeding millions of hungry workers, quickly realized this perceptual problem, and changed the last word of Marx’s maxim from “need” to “work”, claiming the USSR had not yet entered the stage of “pure communism” where work would yield to idle days for the masses, filled with intellectual pursuits promised by Marx, Lenin and Trotsky. In other words, the Soviets, where the rubber met the road, fell back to reality, or at least something like the capitalist “spirit of competition”, with the threat of execution replacing the profit motive. For the left to turn right at times of self-interest is practically an axiom, not unlike Democrat Chelsea Clinton’s pragmatic choice of an investment banker as a husband, rather than wedding an idealist like the Black Panther that her mother, as a radical lawyer, once defended for murder.
Shielded from the laborious requirements of Soviet-style socialism, today’s Obama leftists advocate intra-national parasitism, using the American free enterprise system as its host. This would appear similar to the communist system in China. But unlike the Chinese, the Obama approach is leading the United States into a dysgenic “idiocracy”—a condition that is far from the leisurely intellectual paradise envisioned by earlier orthodox communists.
Thus, the ship that makes up the American free market now tosses about in a corrosive sea of parasitic policies, such as:
• overlooking massive illegal entry of immigrants from corrupt and failed states
• unsustainable levels of legal immigration intended to create new voters who vote left
• an anti-merit job quota system for “protected classes”
• a health system enslaved into aiding communities which are unwilling to divest from failed cultural memes
• bizarre actions such as championing voting rights for felons, and reproduction rights for inmates
• aid to religious ideologies with hostile, doctrinal hatred toward a rational universal human rights standard
• coercion and corruption of what was once the world’s finest financial system for the purpose of subsidizing undisciplined, unearned purchases by “protected classes”
• schools which interpret “no child left behind” to mean no child shall advance too far ahead
• leveling policies designed to “hobble” productive communities and cultural traditions, rather than enforcing standards to reform under-productive communities
• grade and test manipulation to benefit students and employees from “protected classes”
• promote media interests which hide vastly disparate crime statistics that show “protected classes” not as victims but as overwhelming aggressors
And of course, this idiocracy will be lead by the Obama elite, which is actually sub-elite, intellectually speaking. Not to say they are not bright, just not the brightest. “The worst of the best” would be more accurate. They are American intellectual grifters, grafters and svengalis; the spawn of a socialist ecosystem that stretches back to the Russian Revolution. But instead of shooting a czar and installing a communist state, the Obama syndicate hosts off the body of the free enterprise system, via racial quotas, ACORN-type threats, ethnic lobbies, corruption of the university system, and other leftist politics paid for by the unsuspecting taxpayer.
The intellectual socialism of Trotsky is not achievable via these in vitro conditions created by the Obama ideology. In fact, socialism, capitalism or any other ideology is successful if the people it is meant to provide for are inept—whom Obama only worsens. Necessarily, the end state Obama is creating is not socialism, but a third-world kleptocracy. Obama, predictably, is a worst-of-the-best, evolving strongman—a quintessential apostle of decline.
This is a contrast to the Soviet socialist model. Indeed, the Soviets were curiously energetic in their determination to build a superior “new man” to compete with both capitalists and their socialist rivals, the nazis.
Actress Greta Garbo, referring to executing enemies of the Soviet state in her movie, Ninotchka, said it best: “We will have fewer, but better Russians.” That is not to suggest the Soviets had created an enviable model. Socialism, especially communism, is flawed in its basic assumptions about human behavior. Communism—socialism without a capitalist host—is brutal and fascist in spirit, if not in letter, although even that may be better than the degraded human condition found in failed states.
Obama and his core constituency want socialism, but will never agree with the requirements for making it work. It would require policies for population control and eugenics, as in China’s post-Mao version of socialism. After the mass murders of the Mao gang, China’s leaders saw the failure points inherent in communism. They made changes by adopting large parts of a natural economic system called—capitalism. 21st century China is a successful paradigm of a socialist state hosting off of a controlled free market, through an engineered population that is both capable and energetic. Obama’s dysgenic policies, on the other hand, will only produce corruption and decay, not functional socialism.
The phenomena of capitalist systems with socialist controls are not an accident, but the result of a law of economic civilization. Every successful economy in history is a mixture of socialism and capitalism, the only question remaining is finding the proper mix. The opposite extremes of communism and laisse faire capitalism don’t work, any more than pure democracy protects the rights of the minority. In a successful economy, socialism is a bill of rights putting checks and balances on the democracy of capitalism.
Socialism in practice never produces the nanny state Obama’s core constituency inwardly desires, in which the productive class is enslaved to meet the needs of the unproductive. Ironically, pure socialism—communism—has an uncanny knack for adopting the worst traits of pure capitalism—but none of the best.
When communism progresses at all, it is by forced march, since there are no natural incentives after the initial excitement of foundation. That early, energetic phase of communist planning can benefit from what could be called the “kibbutz effect,” in recognition of the farms established along socialist principals in the founding days of Israel. Israel did not need threat of execution or monetary gain then for motivation. The desire for survival was enough motivation for an intellectually superior community that had just survived the Holocaust to defend a land it held in deep cultural significance from inept, numerically superior neighbors. The commune system was successful under these short-term conditions. Later, the large majority of kibbtzim morphed into for-profit enterprises, under the management of a new generation of Israelis more accustomed to relative affluence than constant thoughts of physical and cultural survival. Israel, where communism was at best a nice idea, had this option. Elsewhere, in places where communism softened but was not optional, the new generation would sum up the state ideology as, “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.”
Obama’s conception of socialism is a concoction of secularized Christianity charity and democracy, amounting to handouts to “protected classes.” It is not only at odds with successful implementations of socialism, it is even in conflict with Christianity and democracy. Take it from the experts:
• “If Anyone Will Not Work Neither Shall He Eat” – Apostle Paul, 2 Thessalonians 3:10-11
• Vladimir Lenin adopts Thessalonians 3:10-11 as the first principle of socialism in his 1917 work, State and Revolution
• “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” –Thomas Jefferson
• The 1936 Soviet Constitution, Article 12: In the U.S.S.R. work is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, in accordance with the principle: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.”
It seems that honest work for honest benefits is a belief that certified Christians, democratic idealists, and even hard-pressed communists can agree on. It is a definition of work that requires results. It is not merely filling a Potemkin position for which one is unqualified, like the jobs Obama’s core constituency expects.
“Whoever is kind to the cruel will end up being cruel to the kind.”—from the Midrash
Obama’s abstract socialism is the opposite of China’s functional socialism. Obama advocates leniency for terrorists and other criminals, racial set-asides, and wealth leveling, only to see crime increase and the economy crash. Meanwhile, China executions thousands of criminals a year while also promoting the growth of a healthy, intelligent, qualified population, resulting in lower crime and a booming economy. In other words, China knows that civilization requires quality people—something all communities have, but who are often held hostage by their inverse. Simply put, for socialism, or any ideology, to be successful, human biology and evolution require continual maintenance and improvement—eugenics, but only “eugenics with a human face,” to adapt a phrase from a past attempt to soften communism. Such realism would make for a stronger, happier nation across classes and colors. Anything less puts a nation at a disadvantage to other nations which recognize and act on this basic fact. Eventually, dysgenic nations will be in extreme peril not only internally, but by being ripe for conquer.
Raising the intelligence and health of humanity would not seem controversial, except for a vile period when it was linked to nationality and race. But eugenics is not a competition; it should be monitored by an international committee composed of a variety of professions and interests, so as not to degenerate into creating clones of “perfect people,” but to provide the foundations for a diverse selection of healthy, capable people who can avoid disasters like those we currently face. Good intelligence is a necessity, especially as technology advances to ever greater heights, and a healthy start for every child should be a basic right every society does its utmost to provide. Those who block such policies take ownership of avoidable man-made disasters. Ultimately, raising intelligence and good health across the human spectrum would make moot today’s false arguments on ideology, social justice, and inequality. And that’s real progress.
