Occupy What?

Maybe this is too political for some, but I want to say something that is on my heart.

I'm reading a biography about Mao, you know the Chinese Communist tyrant who is said to be responsible for the killing (a euphemism for murder) of about 70,000,000 people, outside of war. His story is interesting, to say the least, but the early years of communism in China reminds me of some things I see today that many will say is unrelated and harmless. 

The Russians (Stalin in particular) were the bankroll and the military/political support behind the birth and spread of Communism in China. Mao was a fringy player at first who made a name for himself by being power-hungry, self-centered, elusive, resilient and very brutal. Since I'm still reading the book, I can't say much more about him until I'm finished.

In short, the communist Russians sought to spread their revolution, using anyone they could to foment discord in the masses of people around the world. Their technique was quite simple, make villains of anyone who owned anything, call out people who were "wealthy" as dangerous, hunt down and confiscate their wealth so it could be redistributed to the poor, and create systems of dependency in the masses, giving false hope in order to gradually gain complete control over literally everyone. All the while, the revolutionary leaders lived in luxury themselves.

I don't know but that all sounds familiar to me today. Isn't Occupy Wall Street a movement designed to convince the masses (99%) that they are victims and that they deserve a bigger piece of the pie? Call anyone who has achieved wealth (1%) a villain. Find ways to make them pay more of their filthy money to support the millions (40%) who pay no income taxes at all.  Restructure  and socially engineer society so that the government controls wealth and determines who gets what share. Create dependencies on the government's elite, all of whom live like kings and queens, so they can keep their power at the ballot box. Finally, look for ways to erode the Constitution so that it becomes more helpful to those on the dole, all the while demonizing capitalism as the reason for all our woes.     


Occupy Wall Street? Same tactics. Same rhetoric. Same goal?


I recently read something that strikes home for me. In the wild, we are told not to feed wild animals lest we create a dependency in them. They need to learn to eat by their own efforts, ideally, they forage for their own food and survival, allowing the system of natural selection to work.

While everyone agrees that's a good system, why don't we do the same for people who have greater capacities than animals. We are now creating a dependency on government that actually discourages capable people from making their own way. Should I find a job or collect food stamps and unemployment for another year? Given the choice, I'm not sure what I would do, but I suspect it would include asking for as little help as possible. (Actually, when I was set out to pasture five years ago,  I didn't apply for unemployment. We cut the budget and continued to seek ways every day to improve our situation.) Helping the indigent is good, necessary and critical to many, so it's not hard-hearted conservatism that makes me wonder about the hundreds of millions of able-bodied people who opt out of the work force to collect what they deserve from the government and those damn rich people.

For me, this is not about compassion or a perceived lack thereof,  but it's about finding a balance for the long-term good for our society, not short term fixes that allow politicians to keep their cushy life style while keeping us divided and at each other's throats.

If wisdom reigned, not expedience, we would all feel better about the future than we do.