Rick Santelli’s Revolution and the White House’s Response
Posted by jemartynowski on February 25, 2009
By now I’m sure everyone in the country, at least those who care, have seen the video of Rick Santelli calling for a revolution by capitalists in the United States who are angry with the socialist, or even communist attitudes coming from the White House and Washington in general over this financial downturn. Santelli’s call for a “Chicago Tea Party” is based on the fact that the principals the United States of America were founded on are being completely thrown away with the bailouts, stimulus plans, or whatever you want to call them. No matter your political leaning, you have to admit, he’s right.
The fact that we have decided to subsidize people who are not succeeding in life is unfair in a free society. To subsidize these people and institutions means taking from people who have “enough” money. Doing this is laying claim to the fruits of someone else’slabor and redistributing it to others as an arbiter (in this case the government) sees fit. This is clearly wrong to any logical thinker because a person cannot be free if they do not own their labor. No person who’s wealth is redistributed by another is free, but is instead a slave. Whether it’s one tyrant or a group of elected officials, someone doing as they wish with somebody’s labor is enslavement.
What I just described is an expanded version of Santelli’s angry yelling from last week. It is also the difference between capitalism and socialism. There is no man who is happy with our government’s direction that does not like the idea of socialism, or else they are misinformed.
Now, the White House responded to this via press secretary Robert Gibbs. He said that Santelli, a man who’s been working in the markets for something like thirty years, “doesn’t know what he’s talking about.” He then invites Santelli to come to the White House and read the details of Obama’s plan. The problem here is not that Santelli believes everyone who gets money doesn’t “deserve” it, whatever that means. It’s that it is idealogically wrong.
Gibbs was willing to admit that many who don’t deserve a bailout are going to get one, but we need this blanket plan to save whoever can be saved. Even this is missing the point. Whether anyone is trying hard and just getting bad breaks or they are just people who bought a $300,000 house on a $50,000 salary, they shouldn’t get somebody else’s money. That is a hard line that we, as a nation, cannot cross lest we want to become a socialist nation.
Slavery was supposedly eliminated a long time ago, but we’re trying to bring it back. No man should be able to claim another’s labor. It’s the definition of slavery and we are so blind to it that we’re willing to vote for it. Maybe another “Tea Party” is just what we need, but I’m not sure we have the stones to rebel like we once did. Even in a peaceful manner.
This entry was posted on February 25, 2009 at 9:50 pm and is filed under Barack Obama, Capitalism and Politics, Socialism and Democrats. Tagged: Bailout, Chicago Tea Party, economic stimulus, Obama, Rick Santelli. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.