Politics of Envy

Tom Donelson
December 1, 2011 Posted by Tom Donelson tomdonelson@aol.com

Envy is a destructive force that undermines society for it doesn’t engender growth or progress but a bureaucratization of society to enforce a false equality of results.   America was designed and still is considered a land of opportunity but there has been a debate on what is equality.  Do we have an equality of opportunity or do we strive for equality of results?  The latter is based on an envious notion that wealth is stolen and must be restored whereas the former is based on the premise that a society is filled with people with different gifts and allow those gifts to be explored and developed.

The problem with Occupy Wall Street is that unlike its counterpart in the Tea Party, the movement is based on an aspect on nothing more than envy that their plight in life is not their responsibility and their life have been stolen by the 1%.   The debate over taxes represents this debate in its fullest.  I have mentioned numerous times but it is worth repeating a hundred more, the debate over taxes is ending in the favor of free market advocates, namely tax rates matter and a more efficient tax system would be one that reduces or eliminate deduction in exchange for a lower tax rates for capital, business and the individual.  The intellectual debate is over, but the political debate is not.

When the President’s Deficit commission gave their report, they repudiated Obamanomics and Keynesian theories on steroids in favor of a 21st century of Reaganomics.  The real issue behind the debate is class warfare and the politics of envy.  Obama’s own theories have reflected that when he answered a question by Charles Gibson on capital gain taxes in the 2008 elections when he stated it was about fairness.  After being confronted with the reality that lowering capital gain tax in the Clinton years resulted in tax revenues increasing; Obama answered that it was about fairness.  He never even challenged the premise of the question that lower the capital gain tax raised revenues but accepted it. (Yes lefties of the world, Clinton cut capital gain tax significantly and revenues from capital taxes went up!)

The Point Where a Progressive Tax Becomes Class Warfare has been passed many times in the 20th Century.

For Obama, raising tax rates on the wealthy is not about taxing efficiency or even raising additional revenues since it is debatable proposition that you raised the revenues predicted. It is about class envy and punishing the wealthy, an attitude that Obama carried with him from his community organizing days.

The Tea Party was based on the premise that government has become too big and interferes with our freedoms and their attack on Wall Street centered on the cozy relationship that big business had with big government.   Tea Party has become the Party of Main Street and the struggling middle class wanting opportunity to move up.  The Tea Party comprehended correctly that much of Wall Street has aligned themselves with big government while many of Wall Street power players have supported the leftist agenda with money.  For the Tea Party, tax policy resides not around revenging Main Street but making the tax system more receptive to market forces, not market manipulation.   The appeal of Herman Cain 9-9-9 represents a return of a tax system in which skills of the entrepreneur takes precedence and not who you know.

The Obama attack on the wealthy

Occupy Wall Street complains about the market manipulators but they don’t see or understand the connection between the collaboration between Wall Street and big government, in particular this administration.  The high tax rates with liberal deductions work for the established business since they can influence results through lobbying which is why General Electric political pull has allowed it to avoid taxes and get tax deductions for much of its green technology.

The Tea Party goal is be the Party of opportunity, which is America at its best whereas Occupy wants equality of results guarantee by government but the problem is moral for should government force equality of results through legislation and who defines what is fairness?  In life, equality of results is a virtual impossibility.  Not everyone can play basketball like Michael Jordan could or Kobe Bryant does today nor does everyone have equal talents or equal desire to pursue similar goals.  Some purposely pursue lifestyle that may lead to charitable pursuit whereas others are wealth creators.  To enforce equality of results mean big government whereas seeking an Opportunity state simply means a government that governed by the rule of law and minimal regulation to ensure that all play be the same rules.

Obama and the Democrats have made it clear; they will fight on a class warfare in which government determines who are the winner; and who are the losers while the producer class will be punished; or least those who don’t cooperate with the grand vision.  Republicans and conservative have an opportunity to make more than a mere numerical case that Obamanomics doesn’t work but an moral case, do we want a government who determines what is fairness and a government who punish the wealthy or those wealthy who don’t fund the machine or produce the right goods?  Or a government that simply enforces the law and allows entrepreneur to produce goods and services consumers want and simply allow free or the freest entry into the marketplace as possible?  This is an election about freedom and what kind of future we hand our children and grandchildren.

The left has no intellectual argument to make and the politics of envy is not design to make an economy grow but institute power for the ruling class who gets to determine the winners of life’s lottery or the loser. This is why free market economics is not just superior in economic terms but morally as well.

Tags: , , , , , ,

7 Responses to Politics of Envy

  1. Political Campaign Expert » Blog Archive » A Hollywood Republican » Politics of Envy on December 2, 2011 at 10:46 am

    [...] Original post: A Hollywood Republican » Politics of Envy [...]

  2. Spaceghost on December 8, 2011 at 12:27 am

    Right, yes. “Envy”. Exactly. Here’s the harrowing tale of a guy who was thrown in jail for peacefully occupying a park in LA along with dozens of others. He’s a writer/producer for “Family Guy.” What a shiftless, loser!

    http://culvercitycrossroads.com/2011/12/05/dear-editor-lapd-arrests-the-truth-at-occupy-la/

    • Tom Donelson on December 9, 2011 at 7:04 am

      You shifted into the truth and fail to realize, “Occupy a park in LA” So the lawlessness of making a Park unavailable for the public after weeks of occupation even stress the patience of one of the most liberal adminstration. I will take you more seriously if you actually condemn the violence that has occur nation wide along property destruction, losses for many small businesses, prevention of people going to work, the number of rapes reported, the anti-semtism recorded including in LA.

      Tea Party: no arrest, Occupy: arrests in the thousands.

      Tea Party: no property damage, often picked up after themselves. Occupy: In the millions.

      Which brings me to the intellectual bankruptcy of the whole left today. The Democratic Party leadership supported the movement but refuse to condemn the violence of the movement. You are supporting mob rule as oppose to the rule of law. It is that simple. Mob rule is what black shirts of Mussolini did in the 1920′s or the Nazis and Communist did in the lat 1920′s or early 30′s to bring down the Weimer Republic.

      Occupy is a movement in which many members are perfecly willing to commit violence as Democratic Pollster Doug Shoen found out when 30% of those Occupy he polled said, violence is a ok. If you have a movement based on the premise of what government can do for me, ecnonomic collapse is not far behind.

  3. Spaceghost on December 9, 2011 at 2:28 pm

    1. Learn to write coherent sentences. Seriously, it’s sad.

    2. Really? Not a single actual response to the article? Did you even read it? It has some big words so I don’t doubt you were intimidated, but I’ll nutshell it: PEACEFUL protestors harassed, physically abused and imprisoned by cops. Property destroyed by them, including a tent where free health care was provided, and media reported as garbage left behind by protestors. Author of the article is a successful TV writer/producer, so probably not there out of envy of anyone. Voluntarily, peacefully offers himself to the cops and is treated with violence.

    And not a word about that? Nothing condemning it? Not an “I disagree with the movement, but yes, that’s messed up”? Or how about “Okay, maybe they’re not ALL doing this out of envy”? Nothing? You can’t even defend your own column? Can’t even attempt to?

    Again: Sad.

    3. >>Tea Party: no arrest, Occupy: arrests in the thousands.

    First off, not true.

    http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/04/15/20110415Phoenix-tea-party-rally-arrests-abrk.html

    And second, my God, can you miss the point. Does it sound like the Occupiers in that article deserved to be arrested? Were they behaving any more violently than the Tea Partiers? They were sitting there quietly with their arms linked. You really think it was a good use of time, energy, and tax payer money to throw all those people in jail, to say nothing of the brutality with which they were arrested?

    Jesus, the mind just reels.

    4. >>Tea Party: no property damage, often picked up after themselves.

    Yeah? Are you sure?
    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090926154855AAU67U0

    And of course, never mind the fact that it was THE COPS who created all the garbage and it might not have gotten left behind if they hadn’t arrested everyone, but whatever.

    5. >>The Democratic Party leadership supported the movement but refuse to condemn the violence of the movement.

    Hm, I’m unaware of any cases where Dems refused to condemn violence of the movement when there has BEEN violence of the movement. At the moment, I’m extremely aware of YOU refusing to condemn the violence of the COPS on the peaceful protesters. What is one to think?

    6.>>You are supporting mob rule as oppose to the rule of law.

    Yes, you know how you can tell when mob rule is in effect? When the mob is sitting in a park with linked arms and chanting “We are peaceful.” SCARY!! MOB RULE! BOOOOOO!

    7.>>It is that simple. Mob rule is what black shirts of Mussolini did in the 1920′s or the Nazis and Communist did in the lat 1920′s or early 30′s to bring down the Weimer Republic.

    Right. Exactly. Peaceful chanting protestors demanding accountability for the people that wrecked the economy = Nazis. How did I not notice that before?

    (You’re aware that you’re insane, right?)

    7.>>Occupy is a movement in which many members are perfecly willing to commit violence as Democratic Pollster Doug Shoen found out when 30% of those Occupy he polled said, violence is a ok.

    Gee! That’s only slightly more than the amount of Republicans (24%) who think that Obama might be the anti-Christ. Not making that up.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/03/22/scary-new-gop-poll.html

    You make this too easy. Have a nice day!

  4. Tom Donelson on December 9, 2011 at 7:03 pm

    Make it too easy, yea right. Anyone defends anarchaist and riotersis not winning a debate with most Americans.

    In November, 6 folks arrested for threatening violence with weapons, use of violence, and of course my favorite caught jerking off. That is just two days of blotter report in LA,I suspect if I looked harder I will find even more. Did it occur that maybe those arrested were asked to leave and chose arrest? Bottom line, most cities including LA lost their patience with the protesters when things start getting out of hand. So if the protestors were asked ot leave, then yes, they deserve to be arrested and I will bet you that they intended to be arrested. LA is run by very liberal mayor who actually had sympathy with the movement. Ask your mayor that question, why he arrested those people. I don’t know whether they were asked to leave before hand or not, but like I say ask our very liberal mayor why.

    As for Tea Parties, incidence you mention were a rarity if that; not routine which has become the case of Occupy group. You failed to mention the incidence in which Tea Party members were attack by lefties, for example a black tea Party beaten by two union goons and another Tea Party finger bitten off. Tea Party arrested: O, Occupy members:In the thousands. Case close, do you really think there is comparison of the violence committed by Occupy and Tea Party? If so, you have lost contact with reality of the real world.

    Number of dollars probably lost in Tea Party demonstration: 0 since most often, Tea Party members actually picked up after themselves. Rapes at Tea Party movement: 0 Occupy: numerous reported and in some Occupy areas like New York, women found themselves staying in the same tent for protection and in some cases, Occupy groups refuse to allow to cooperate in rape investigation. Bottom line a woman is safer at Tea Party movement than a Occupy movement.

    There have been violence at Occupy movement including what happen in Oakland which saw million of dollars of destruction and I won’t bore you with details of violence at other cities. My point is when a movement uses violence as a means and there is no doubt that many Occupy groups have used violence; so how does this advance your cause? If this is your idea of a peaceful movement in which folks shit wherever, destroy private properties like in New York where small businesses found their bathrooms busted, or the riots in Oakland, plus the various report rape is part of the scene, you have a problem with a movement. Here is the bottom line, much of what Occupy is doing and much of what some of their leaders is closer to totalitarian vision as oppose to a democratic vision. Their action speak for itself and this is your idea of a future movement?

    If you want these folks on your side, well, don’t ever tell me about what great believer in freedom you are. No where in this have you condemn the excesses of this movement. When a pollsters find that 30% of a movement supported by the leadership of a major political party and some of those 30% act on that violence, you have a problem with your movement.

    So a person who supports a movement hijacked by anarachists, plagued with violence, is not a person to be calling others insane but name calling comes natural to you, even if logic doesn’t.

    As for Tea Party, most of the leaders did what they could to discourage bad behavior were successful. Like No Arrests! What part of no arrest escape your mind!! The reality is that Occupy is the left wing verson of the Tea Party. One is dedicated to smaller government and more freedom and the other more expansive government. Here is the irony, much of the left is funded by the 1% and crony capitalists who give their money to Democratic Party.

    Bottom line Tea Party no arrests; Occupy: thousands for various reason like destruction of properties, rape, assaults, and violating varous local ordiances that Tea Party actually followed.
    Now if you want to pretend that your brilliance is winning by my guest. Here is a word for you, PEACEFUL does not include rape and assault and we are not talking about a few isolated incidences Againg repeat after me, Zero arrests for Tea Party, thousands of arrest for Occupy. That is your idea of Peaceful?

    In October, the DCCC, sent out a petition supporting Occupy while much of the violence started to happen and I notice you didn’t quote one major Democratic leader actually condemning the violence. Actually, what I have seen is that the leadership have simply cease to talk about Occupy for a simple reason, Occupy is becoming a political liability. But then when rape, plunder and pillage becomes the norm of a movement; it is wise to desert just a moment.

  5. Spaceghost on December 9, 2011 at 10:43 pm

    Tom –

    Seriously, I’m not just trying to be glib here, but what the hell is wrong with you?

    You have now had ample opportunity to read that letter to the editor. Being the nice guy I am, I even summed it up for you. Peaceful protestors were violently arrested. It’s not complicated, that’s what happened at that particular rally. I’m not talking about other rallies, other than to rebut your repeated assertion that there have been “no arrests” at Tea Parties, which is just flat-out wrong, but I’ll say it again: I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT OTHER RALLIES.

    I’m awaiting (in vain, I know, but what the hell) your reaction, ANY reaction, like even just a SENTENCE, with regard to what happened at THAT RALLY IN LOS ANGELES as described by THAT PARTICIPANT, and beyond that, the point of posting that link wasn’t even about the police brutality or the unnecessary arrests, it was about calling the lie to your claim that the Occupy movement is based on poor people envying rich people. The writer of that letter leads, I’m pretty sure, quite a comfortable life as a writer/producer of a popular TV show. Whatever the reason he’s out there in the park (again: sitting and chanting peacefully. OOH, SCARY! NAZIS! MOB RULE! GET THE PEPPER SPRAY!), it ain’t envy. My guess is that he wants, like most of the Occupiers, accountability for the people who wrecked the economy, something that everyone should desire regardless of political stripe, but of course, you folks don’t because that’s not among the talking points.

    Seriously, man, it’s reeeeeally simple: a) Do you genuinely believe that that guy was there out of envy? b) Do you approve of what the police did to the peaceful protestors as described in his story?

    Did he just MAKE THE WHOLE THING UP?

    Just read the goddamn thing, already. If you read it, then you’re deliberately dodging, which is weak. If you didn’t, then you’re deliberately avoiding the truth, which is even weaker.

    So c) Which is it?

  6. Tom Donelson on December 11, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Actually you have avoided the truth. It is the third response and you have yet to confront the problems with the Occupy movement including LA. John Nolte of Breibart and others have essentially tracked various cases of violence and so far we are up to 400 plus incidences nationwide. Over the past 10 weeks, Occupy LA have seen assaults,public indecency, attempts to take over businesses and finally the mayor of your fair town have essentially forced to act in the matter of public health and safety. One report had workers using hazmat to clean the grounds; contrast that to Tea Party events where they actually left the place cleaner that most.

    Now you talk one incidence if true is bad but was the individuals ask to leave the park before? Or did they chose to stay in harms way?

    While the majority of the Occupy movement want to change the system, there is significant minority who have decided on a more violent attempt. I am not talking a individual here or there, but a large number as Doug Schoen has pointed out, maybe 30% plus.

    The reason that you are not talking other rallies or LA Occupy movement in general is because you have no leg to stand on. Assaults, destruction of private property, closing freeways, attempting to take over selected businesses to hamper them, and simply crapping whereever is becoming part of many Occupy movement including LA.

    Or I should add that number of anti-Semitism signs at LA Occupy events that appeared. I have given you three opportunities to condemn the overall violence that has been damaging to your cause, you have refused to do so. As one pundit noted, rape counselors are not required at Tea Party events.

    Which brings me to the final point on the danger of the politics of envy and what happens when a Political Party bases a policy on punishing a particular group as oppose to a more sound policy. Another of our writers does a great job on discussing Obama talk in Kansas and its weakness and it does compliment my own piece on the Politics of Envy. You didn’t deal with the issues that I wrote about and its negative effect.

    I will be following up on the effect of Occupy movement and its danger to the Democratic Party among other things. Occupy movement is the left version of the Tea Party but that is not good news as I will discuss in a future article. You have to confront one reality, your movement has been tolerated groups and individuals willing to cross lines and use intimidation and violence. I have yet to read one leading Democratic leader with a public statement condemning the violence of Occupy movement. There are no public statement by Obama, Pelosi, Reid or any leadng Union leaders condemning the violence.

    You are avoiding the truth and if you are going to use curse words and just engage in petty name calling, don’t waste my time and go on other sites where cursing and name calling is accepted. The original article is a long piece discussing a serious problem for the left and well argued. The Democratic Party is evolving into a radical force in which much of its own moderate voices have been jettisoned and Occupy is but one part of a Party shifting farther to the left. As I pointed out in the politics of Envy and other pieces, there is a bipartisan consensus forming. President own deficit commission rejected the politics of envy and has begun the process of finding solutions to our problem. Maybe you might take a more serious approach.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Feature

Avi Lerner Rips President for Piracy

Chairman of Millennium Films, Avi Lerner says that POTUS is afraid of Google and other internet companies that profit from motion picture piracy.

Epilog C An Immoral Jihad

“Moral nihilists assert that morality does not inherently exist, and that any established moral values are abstractly contrived. Nihilism can also take epistemological or...