It’s Superbowl week, Greece just elected a Communist
government, and Barack Obama has indicated he has no intention of changing his
strategy, even after his historic mid-term rebuke. It’s a perfect time for me to bravely attempt to tie these
disparate things up in a neat little bow.
What’s more, I will do it with fully inflated analogies and rhetoric.
Suppose there were two football teams, the Marxists and the
Smithians. Each team has adopted
an opposite management approach.
The Marxists have policies wherein every player, coach, and employee is
paid the same, every player is given the same amount of game time, and
positions are decided by a committee of people who've never played football.
The Smithians have policies wherein every player, coach, and employee
negotiates their own salary, and game time and positions are determined by
ability, circumstances, and a football coach’s judgment.
Now suppose you were a committed Marxist who inherited the
Smithian team. How would you convert
them to your preferred system?
Karl Marx addressed this dilemma back in 1848 and prescribed
violent revolution. Of course, his
world was vastly different from ours (and I don’t think he was thinking about
football!). Modern
Marxists have searched for a less kinetic approach. This has split the Marxists into two groups, one that still
favors violent revolution and direct confrontation, and another that favors
democratic revolution and indirect confrontation.
Among the thinkers who preferred the latter approach were
two people at Columbia University, Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. Their theory was that if Smithian
economies were overburdened by progressive Marxist redistribution, they would
eventually collapse in on themselves and Marxists would become the democratic
majority. The spark for the
strategy was a tactic from Saul Alinsky, “Make the enemy live up to their own
book of rules.” In other words,
load up on debt, dependency, and obligations, and then blame the Smithian
system when it reaches a crisis.
This would achieve the same result Marx had prescribed, only politically and without violence.
This is exactly what has happened in Greece. The Greek system collapsed in on itself
because they had created a progressively redistributive system that resulted in
a majority of the electorate being dependent on government. This resulted in a massive debt burden that eventually
became a crisis when the debt got downgraded to junk. As a Euro member, Greece could not
unilaterally print money to pay off its debt, a strategy countries have used
throughout history. Backed into a
corner, the Greeks chose Communism, just as Cloward and Piven predicted.
So, what’s this got to do with Barack Obama?
What would a committed Marxist in the Cloward and Piven mold do if he obtained power in the US? Would he work tirelessly for government
rules to subsidize mortgages for those who cannot afford homes in the hope that
it might collapse the system?
Would he maybe run up more debt in eight years than all previous
presidents combined? Would he
reduce workforce participation and greatly increase government dependency? Would he work tirelessly for
progressive redistribution of wealth?
Would he avoid any direct Marxist or Socialist language and instead fall
back on vague terms such as “hope” “change” and “fundamental
transformation”? Would he possibly
nationalize healthcare, student loans, community colleges, daycare, etc. in an
attempt to consolidate votes, and eventually collapse the system? Would he try to flood the voter rolls with dependents and illegals?
If you have followed Barack Obama and his past, you would
know by now that he attended Columbia University and was introduced to the
Cloward and Piven strategy there. You might also know of his affinity for
Saul Alinsky and his roots as an Alinsky Community Organizer. You might also know that Frances Fox
Piven was
all but present at the signing of Obamacare. You might also know that she is among those behind
Obama’s recent executive action on immigration. What you probably don’t know is that she, and the then
living Richard Cloward, were present at the signing of Bill Clinton’s 1993
“Motor Voter” bill.
That's them right behind Clinton. Do the
math.
Incidentally, which football team would you bet on long
term, the Marxists or the Smithians?
(UPDATE: An earlier version of this post placed Frances Fox Piven at the signing of Obamacare. That was likely incorrect.)