Progressives, do you buy into this?

You can see and hear Nancy Pelosi’s envy of — and hatred for — individualism, success and hard work in this clip.

Is it much of a stretch to imagine a progressive agenda that includes the following?

  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
  2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
  3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
  5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
  6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
  8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
  10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

I didn’t draft this list, nor did FDR, LBJ, or BHO. Here’s the original.

But let us have done with the bourgeois objections to Communism.
We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling as to win the battle of democracy.
The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total of productive forces as rapidly as possible.
Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production; by means of measures, therefore, which appear economically insufficient and untenable, but which, in the course of the movement, outstrip themselves, necessitate further inroads upon the old social order, and are unavoidable as a means of entirely revolutionising the mode of production.
These measures will of course be different in different countries.
Nevertheless in the most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

  1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
  2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
  3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
  4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
  5. Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
  6. Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
  7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
  8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
  9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
  10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc., etc.

When, in the course of development, class distinctions have disappeared, and all production has been concentrated in the hands of a vast association of the whole nation, the public power will lose its political character. Political power, properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat during its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the force of circumstances, to organise itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away by force the old conditions of production, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of classes generally, and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.
In place of the old bourgeois society, with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.

the ruling classThat’s a direct quote from The Communist Manifesto, written by Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx. Before you dismiss this out of hand as a relic from long-dead history, his ideas still beguile people who should know better, including a Senior Economic Adviser at UBS Investment Bank.
Communism, Marxism, Maoism, Trotskyism, socialism, progressivism … all are geared toward increasing the power and size of central government and decreasing the liberty of individuals. They all seek to subordinate the individual to the needs of the collective. Those needs, of course, are determined by a “benign” elite that knows what’s best for us and will force us into compliance. The only differences between them are matters of degree. The grey bureaucrats simply tweak the speed of the transformation, the force applied to implement it, and the marketing used to sugarcoat it, all of it done merely to suit the personal preferences of the ruling class. What doesn’t change is the ultimate goal.
Progressives, your ideology is nothing more than repackaged Low-Cal Communism Lite™ with a smiley face on the label.

2 comments

  1. Brain Shavings

    The non-recovery recovery

    That red line is the Pelosi-Obama-Reid Recession. This is what you get when you look to federal government spending stimulus “jobs bills” and regulation to rescue the economy from a recession that the federal government…

  2. Brain Shavings

    McCain’s endorsement of Romney

    There are many things I don’t get. Here’s one. Mitt Romney is Obama’s dream opponent. He’s a moderate, a squish, a watered-down statist, a Democrat Lite™. So why would voters elect an imitation leftist when…