Marxism, Redistributorizing, and the 21st Century
I have to comment on all this Marxist cruft.
People are accusing Obama of being a Marxist, and a redistributor of wealth and such. That is not even so last century, it’s so two centuries ago. I mean, really.
If anyone is paying attention, Obama is a pragmatist. It seems to me that his sole criteria for policy is whether it works or not, and whether it works for the ultimate furtherance of the goals set out in the preamble to the constitution, which he taught in law school:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
I do realize that’s so three centuries ago, but it’s certainly a good start, and something that all Americans should agree that folks should work towards. Where’s the problem? I do realize that libertarians would probably not like to think about insuring tranquility or promoting general welfare. Perhaps they should get a constitutional congress then, and come up with a better mission statement for America, perhaps one without roads paid for by taxes.
It would also be awesome for people to come up with actual arguments rather than just using a label as a term that is supposed to be an argument in and of itself. Oh, he’s a socialist, you must be concerned. No, really, what he’s pointing out is that the policies of the current administration and government have failed. Failed for everyone. From people not working to the middle class, to the upper class, and now people who have lost significant investments, the current economic policies do not work. Heck, even Randian Greenspan is declaring his surprise for this turn of events.
There is nothing Marxist, or socialist about pointing this out. The whole point of the Obama campaign is to get beyond the labeling-politics of the last twenty+ years, in order to devise policies that work. Who knows what that actually will look like, but I don’t think it will be straight out of Das Kapital. How about just calling it Obamanomics, or mayby Obamics, hmmm. no. Uh, Barackseyan. um. Baracking my brains for a good term. Progressive is good, but also so two centuries ago.
How about just a thought that maybe he will devise a brand new economic idea that encompasses everything we learned about the cause of the great depression, how we got out of it, what didn’t work about those ideas, what did work about reforming programs that no longer addressed needs (welfare to work), what hasn’t worked about the last eight, and what might be a blueprint for another fifty years of growth?
I realize you’d have to be pretty smart to take all of that into account, but I think BO’s up to the task.
