PolySciFi Blog

Saturday, January 29, 2005


George Bush is a Socialist

During a speech on the 28th in Davos, Switzerland, Tony Blair pondered the following:
President Bush's inauguration speech last week, marks a consistent evolution of US policy. He spoke of America's mission to bring freedom in place of tyranny to the world. Leave aside for a moment the odd insistence by some commentators that such a plea is evidence of the "neo-conservative" grip on Washington - I thought progressives were all in favour of freedom rather than tyranny. The underlying features of the speech seem to me to be these. America accepts that terrorism cannot be defeated by military might alone. The more people live under democracy, with human liberty intact, the less inclined they or their states will be to indulge terrorism or to engage in it. This may be open to debate - though personally I agree with it - but it emphatically puts defeating the causes of terrorism alongside defeating the terrorists.
Somehow when Bush announces an intention to spread freedom and fight tyranny - traditional rallying cries of the Left - Bush is villified for it by the Left - called a Nazi no less.

Well, Bush has surrepitiously gotten to the left of the Left again. This time on Social Security reform.

One of the possible components of Bush's reform plan being kicked around is the creation of private accounts (or privatization if you must). As part of a private accounts plan, workers would retain ownership of a portion of their Social Security taxes, presumably with some investment in the stock market. After a few years, the thinking goes, most workers (presumably you'll be allowed to remain in a traditional social security program if you so choose) will accumulate a nice little nest egg whose value is buoyed by their stocks ushering in Bush's "Ownership Society."

Looking a little closer at this arrangement, (virtually) all US workers would own stock and thus own a piece of the companies that comprise corporate America. Effectively, US workers will own the means of production. Last time I checked, that's the definition of economic socialism. Further if the added capital in the economy serves as a boost to economic growth (as I believe it should - I'm a supply-sider), then the stock owners - the workers - will reap the benefit and a "workers' paradise" will be created.

However, Bush's ownership society workers' paradise won't be enacted through coerced wealth redistribution, massive interference in the market, or a violent uprising of the proletariat. Rather it will be accomplished as the natural outgrowth of free market capitalism. Somewhere Marx is confused but feeling a little vindicated.

So Bush's Social Security reforms will usher in a socialist workers' paradise and this market-loving-supply-side capitalist can't wait to welcome it with open arms.

Power to the people!!!

Via QandO, we learn that as expected, the Left is not on board. The Communist Party is not on board with the workers' paradise. Time for the reeducation camps.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?