Comments on: The Discreet Charm of the Left-wing Plutocracy

By: deguello

deguello — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:26:30 +0000

#146 Pelaut: You seem to have done pretty well with my”streaming words”,however,sometimes I am forced into less-than perfect formats due to time constraints. Will try to do better.

By: The Ring… » The Dialectical Playa - Laying the smackdown on politics, art, and culture with a strong pimp hand…

Mon, 09 Nov 2009 03:20:21 +0000

[...] link to article here [...]

By: Marianne7

Marianne7 — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 03:10:18 +0000

Warren Buffet is a bit of a conundrum, but Soros is an easy call. He puts money into places he feels will tip the US dollar into thae tank, and makes billions off of shorting currency. No big puzzle there.

By: pelaut

pelaut — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:51:26 +0000

#99 deguello:
You seem to understand Marx/Lenin/Stalin-ism.
Can you please use common punctuation, sentencing and paragraphing so YOU can be understood.
No one reads streaming words since the idiot professors told them Ulysses was good literature.

By: jimmydale

jimmydale — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:01:24 +0000

Great insights. I need guidance if possible. I can’t stand phony ultra liberal Democrats or staunch ultra conservative Republicans or put another way, arrogant elitists. Is there another group my views could fit with?

By: deguello

deguello — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:45:28 +0000

#140 WESTERN CANADIAN: I think you are totally right,besides,insulting them is sooo much fun!A contradicted Stalinist is an unhinged Stalinist and an unhinged Stalinist exposes his criminal psychosis in outrageously,funny ways,reinforcing our principles,and validating our hatred of them.

By: Banned by Huffpo

Banned by Huffpo — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:44:18 +0000

This is one of the best summaries of what drives the leftist elite I’ve ever read.

I think they believe by virtue of their birth into wealthy families and a youth of pampered indulgence, this gives them the right to rule the lives of the lumpen proletariat.

Since they are obviously favored by God, they are destined to heights of power and leadership, and are entitled to take from others whatever they feel is necessary to maintain their royal lifestyle.

And through income redistribution, they ensure that the masses have just enough to live on to get by, yet are still miserable in their daily existence by having to endure endless waits in medical offices, food lines, government offices, etc, ad nauseam. Which is, of course, their goal (see “The Great Society” results for a perfect example.)

Of course, the rules don’t apply to them, so they are free to consume resources at a rate that would make Jabba the Hut blush.

Ignore the trolls and their fallacies of extension . . . it’s a waste of eyeball movement to read their juvenile posts.

By: Danny Lemieux

Danny Lemieux — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:58:01 +0000

There is another factor at work as well, Dr. Hanson. A number of years a ago, a Chinese friend once hosted a delegation of Chinese officials to the U.S. He thought that they would be greatly impressed by how many Americans owned cars. Instead, they were appalled, maintaining that such as state of affairs should never be allowed to happen in China. The reason? If all Chinese owned cars, one of these officials’ most important perks (black limos) would have lost its meaning.

Wealth is closely intermingled with social status and all is relative. There are two ways for people to get “rich”: one is to gain more wealth, the other is to deprive others of their wealth, thereby protecting the preferred perch of the wealthy in society.

It must really gall these aristocrat wannabees (Gore, Pelosi, Soros, Edwards, etc.) to see people in the middle class enjoy so many aspects of lifestyles that used to be the exclusive domain of the super-wealthy. Their embrace of Leftwing “redistributionism” is really a way for them to put the rest of us riff-raff back in our place, knowing that (like Soros’ currencies), our loss is their social gain.

By: Lawrence Kohn

Lawrence Kohn — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:56:15 +0000

Stalin actually was a close second to Mao in the murder department but Tristan’s point still stands. In any case, to understand Al Gore one must go to his father’s bio. Edward Jay Epstein’s book on Armand Hammer, the superrich Soviet agent of influence,. details how Al Gore senior was a Hammer supporter in Congress in Hammer’s efforts to get access to US Presidents for himself and for the Soviet Union’s desire for trade credits. Following Gore senior’s defeat he went on Hammer’s payroll and that change gave Al Gore Jr. his first economic boost and chance to mingle with the higher classes. Note also the “post” Soviet interest in Gore Jr’s endeavors through such environmentalist institutions such as the Gorbachev foundation. Ecological and environmental concerns I think are legitimate to a degree but the scare tactics reflect, I think, in part, an effort to undermine US economic power and therefore eventually its military power which remains the bulk of defense against the imperial ambitions of Russia and China and their Latin American, North Korean, and Middle Eastern (Iran, Syria, and their terrorist proxies) clients.

By: Tristan

Tristan — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 08:25:47 +0000

Don’t forget that for most of the 20th century members of the communist party in half of the world would say, do, or believe anything to hold on to or expand their power and influence and ideals were only the first of many casualties. Ultimately people act in their own self-interest, but those interests and incentives may not be obvious to outsiders.

I would assume that the liberal wealthy benefit in a number of ways via their expressed beliefs. They may gain access to the state resources, advance their social status, acquire some political protection, make valuable business connections, obtain inside information, gain more defenders in the community (think Al Capone’s charity work), and lastly, just believe that they are doing the right thing for society and giving back some of the fortune granted to them.

Like any belief system it will be self-supporting even in the face of negative evidence. Many people thought well into the 20th century that Communism was good for the working people, even though Lenin crippled the economy and murdered millions in just a few years and Uncle Joe went on to enslave and kill more people than Hitler, with Anita’s mentor Mao running a close second.