There have been a number of articles written angrily countering the definition of the Obama agenda as “socialist”. While I would agree that this textbook definition is not applicable in total, I believe that we are seeing an aggressive prosecution of a trend that has been ongoing for some time. Advocates of this radical shift in American society and politics know that the majority of the American people will never willingly submit themselves to such a concept but as the advocates of this change realize, it can be done by degree. In 1956, Nikita Khrushchev uttered the often misunderstood quote “We will bury, you!” speaking of the eventual defeat of democracy and capitalism. On August 24, 1963, Khrushchev himself remarked, “I once said, ‘We will bury you,’ and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you,” a reference to the Marxist saying, “The proletariat is the undertaker of capitalism”.
What we are experiencing today is what I call “Marxism by degree”. Many of my opponents reject that this is happening because it isn’t wholesale – it doesn’t fit the textbook definition on a macro level; however, it is not arguable that there are sections of our society and economy that are being transformed by degree and this is opening the door to faster future erosion of our liberty. It does, in fact, fit the definition on a micro level – when there are many micro level changes, they eventually add up to a macro shift. It is stunning how many of Obama’s supporters cannot see that that they are being used for this “grand plan” unless, of course, they are Marxists as well. What is Marxism? Webster defines it as” the political, economic, and social principles and policies advocated by Marx; especially : a theory and practice of socialism including the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, the class struggle, and dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society.” Marxism isn’t socialism, but socialism is one of the pillars that support it. I think that an examination of the components of Marxism can shed a lot of light on our current struggle against the Obama agenda, let’s examine each and keep score.
Socialism – this has been covered, ad infinitum. Webster’s primary definition is what most people think of when they hear the term: “any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.” What gets less attention is the tertiary definition of: “a stage of society in Marxist theory, transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.” Socialistic policies are necessary to create the path to Marxism, the eventual goal of which is a master planned society where the value of all work is equal, where there is no God, where there is a dictatorship to control the masses and class distinction is removed. I’ll admit, it does have a seductive, Star Trek/United Federation of Planets feel to it. The problem is that America would have to be stripped of two things that we have fought wars over – freedom and self determination. Current incarnation: the health care bill, cap and trade, redistributive tax policies. Score: Government 1, Freedom 0.
The labor theory of value – this is a proposition that the value of any good or service is only determined by the amount of labor required to generate it. Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? In fact, the addition of a Marxist twist turns it into a way to equivocate the value of skilled and unskilled labor, therefore the “value of a commodity increases in proportion to the duration and intensity of labor performed on average for its production. Part of what the LTV means by “socially necessary” is that the value only increases in proportion to this labor as it’s performed with average skill and average productivity. So though workers may labor with greater skill or more productivity than others, these more skillful and more productive workers will thus produce more value through the production of greater quantities of the finished commodity: each unit still bearing the same value as all the others of the same class of commodity. By working sloppily, the unskilled workers may drag down the average skill of labor, thus increasing the average labor time necessary for the production of each unit commodity. But these unskillful workers cannot hope to sell the result of their labor process at a higher price (as opposed to value) simply because they have spent more time than other workers producing the same kind of commodities.” The Marxist application of this theory also requires a facet of socialism to work – notice that there is no discussion of the worth of the raw materials – this is because there is no private ownership of anything. The state controls all the wealth of the political system. Current incarnation, minimum wage laws, affirmative action, the “living wage”, immigration policy (illegal immigration deflates wages). Score: Government 2, Freedom 0.
Dialectical materialism: In this fusion of Friedrich Hegel’s dialectic thought with the materialism of Ludwig Andreas von Feuerbach, it states that all things that happen or exist have an explanation in logic and nature. It rejects any possibility that there are any supernatural reasons for anything; essentially it states that there is no God. Marxists defend this position by stating that it is a desire to live strictly by logic but my understanding and opinion is that it is used to remove any possibility of allegiance to anything but the state. Since the state controls all natural things, owns all property, controls all social activities, dialectical materialism leads to the “state” being the alpha and omega, the question and the answer to all. The people must look to the state for everything. Current incarnation: abortion, the welfare state and the removal of religion from public life. Score: Government 3, Freedom 0.
Class struggle and the dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society: in Marxist theory, this statement does not apply to social class (i.e. the conventional understanding of upper, middle and lower as we understand today); rather it defines class according to economic class. Membership in a class is defined by one’s relationship to the means of production, i.e., one’s position in the social structure that characterizes capitalism. Marx talks mainly about two classes that include the vast majority of the population, the proletariat (the laboring class – the worker) and the bourgeoisie (owners of capital or means of production). The end result of this “struggle” would be that the workers overcome the owners to become the owners. Current incarnation: the takeovers of the financial sector, government sponsorship of union ownership in GM and Chrysler, the student loan takeover and the use of the epithet “racist” to substitute race for economic class. Score: Government 4, Freedom 0.
Marx envisioned that this struggle built on the former pillars would lead to a classless society where all were equal regardless of effort, ability or knowledge. That is embodied in his famous quote, “from each according to his ability to each according to his need.” In this communist society, all would work to the glory of the state…except, of course for the ruling class until there was no need for classes or states. Current incarnation: the Democrat controlled Congress and the Federal bureaucracy. Score: Government 5, Freedom 0.
Final score: Government 5, Freedom 0. Don’t be fooled, we are entering an accelerated period of Marxism implemented by degree. To not see it is to be willfully blind to current events and to become a “useful idiot” as Soviet sympathizers in the West were called. The Obama administration is just the current iteration in a disease that started long ago. We are being seduced down the path of indentured servitude and shared mediocrity with the promise of a “glorious” future.