The political Left in America are experts at linguistic jujitsu; they would happily sell Americans poison while convincing nearly half the population it is nectar. Herein lies the branding of themselves as “Progressives” and their efforts such as Obamacare as the “Affordable Care Act.”
Thinking takes far more effort than most people believe. The Left recognizes this and understands that many Americans are not just too lazy to think concepts through, but also the allure of using the coercive power of government to take from their neighbors is all too tempting.
The remedy to this problem is to beat the Left at their own game. The pool of presidential candidates in the Democrat Party, as well as leftist Republicans, can no longer be branded as they wish to be branded. The reality is that they are all corporatists, the quintessential term that will, in the long run, expose the Left as what they really are, but with only months before the 2020 presidential election, the brand of “monopolist” is far more easily communicated and nearly as effective.
Simply contrast the debacle and front runners of the Iowa Caucus; Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg:
Bernie Sanders is clearly a monopolist. A quick glance at Sanders’ “Issues” page on his website, one sees he advocates for everything from Medicare for All, College for All, Housing for All, to of course the Green New Deal. All initiatives in which a government enforced monopoly is firmly established.
Medicare for All
The very first bullet point on this page makes Sanders’ desire to force a politically imposed monopoly on nearly 18% of America’s economy crystal clear:
“Create a Medicare for All, single-payer, national health insurance program to provide everyone in America with comprehensive health care coverage, free at the point of service.”
Consider this statement. Single payer is the very definition of a monopoly. “National” means no choice, one cannot even move to avoid it, and “free” is obviously a lie. The only way anything is free is if no one is paid for their effort, which is the very definition of slavery.
So either Sanders is advocating for outright slavery, or he intends to implement one buyer in which the result is a monopoly or at best a politically imposed oligopoly. Both of which only benefits those in power and that business (or few businesses) that the one buyer chooses . . . and that buyer is a handful of politicians who at one point or another, everyone will resent.
College for All
Although this initiative is not initially monopolistic, the result is clearly a monopoly. Consider again the first bullet point made by Sanders in support of this effort:
“Guarantee tuition and debt-free public colleges, universities, HBCUs, Minority Serving Institutions and trade-schools to all.”
It is common sense that in any marketplace, if one (or again, a politically chosen few) participants are guaranteed funding by forced collection of money from every man, woman, and child in the country, those institutions that do not gain enough political favor will perish. It is simply impossible to compete on such an uneven playing field.
Housing for All
This effort is straight out of the Agenda 21/UN Sustainable Development initiatives. Reading as if it was copied and pasted out of UN documentation, and not on its face appearing to be monopolistic, it most certainly is. Consider all the bullet points under this initiative on Sanders’ website:
- End the housing crisis by investing $2.5 trillion to build nearly 10 million permanently affordable housing units.
- Protect tenants by implementing a national rent control standard, a “just-cause” requirement for evictions, and ensuring the right to counsel in housing disputes.
- Make rent affordable by making Section 8 vouchers available to all eligible families without a waitlist and strengthening the Fair Housing Act.
- Combat gentrification, exclusionary zoning, segregation, and speculation.
- End homelessness and ensure fair housing for all
- Revitalize public housing by investing $70 billion to repair, decarbonize, and build new public housing.
Yes, that is TRILLIONS with a “T” plus BILLIONS with a “B” . . . The term “affordable housing” is another brilliant use of linguistic jujitsu.
What makes housing affordable? Subsidization.
The only way government can “invest” 2.5 trillion dollars into housing, implement national rent control, force Section 8 housing, combat “exclusionary” zoning, end homelessness, and invest $70 billion in new public housing is to completely destroy zoning laws and increase property taxes to the level in which only the extremely wealthy, such as Sanders, can afford their own home.
Finally, the ever so subtle but extremely dangerous push to combat “speculation” in housing is a direct assault on the right to take risks in the housing market by private entities. The “solution” to speculation by Sanders, of course, is the left’s daft, relentless, and assumed guaranteed option in which politicians make such risks with taxpayer money, as opposed to private investors taking risks with their own money.
A clear push to corporatization and a joke on its face.
This in the long run is, without question, a politically imposed government monopoly on housing.
“Provide free college for those who need it”
Buttigieg states on his website that he “will make public tuition free for 80% of American families.”
Again, the same logical conclusion in relation to Sanders’ plans is perfectly applicable to Buttigieg’s. There is simply no way a competitive market can exist when a politically chosen provider (or a small handful of providers) is guaranteed the earnings of the entire population of taxpayers while all other participants in a market must compete for scraps. Clearly and inevitably, a monopoly or, at best, an oligopoly will form.
“Medicare for All Who Want It.”
Regarding health care, Buttigieg again takes a softer but still solidly monopolistic approach than Sanders. Also playing on the lack of critical thinking and laziness of a large portion of the American public, Buttigieg states the same concept as Sanders, only in a softer tone. Herein lies the better linguistic jujitsu of Buttigieg when he adds the caveat of “who wants it” to his “Medicare for All” deception.
Who doesn’t want health care in which someone else pays the vast majority of their costs? . . . Everyone except for those people with the moral fortitude to understand the immoral premise of the plan.
Again, Democrats and all other Leftists in America know that they do not have to advocate for a monopoly, they simply need a plan that necessitates, as quickly as possible, the same result. And they know, correctly, that the adult children of America will accept it.
Buttigieg on Housing
Regarding housing, yet again Buttigieg takes a softer, although perfectly aligned position as Sanders. On his website, Buttigieg states he will “dramatically increase the supply of affordable housing by building or restoring over 2 million units for the lowest-income Americans, as well as work to reform local zoning laws to make it easier to build housing for working and middle-class families.”
Buttigieg and Sanders both understand that as soon as local zoning power is taken from a population, a national political solution will take over. And when that happens, local control over communities will end forever and a wholly political solution will ensue.
Both Sanders and Buttigieg of course support the Green New Deal which brings all the corporatists, monopolist policies under one umbrella. The coup d’etat of monopolist strategy.
The two platforms described above involving Buttigieg and Sanders are only a matter of timing, not a difference in result or morality, and this same rationalization is clearly found in every other Democrat presidential candidates’ platform.
The Establishment understands that in relation to the current state of intelligence and direction of the moral compass of most Americans today, Sanders cannot win. But, the softer more incremental approach of Buttigieg, Bush, Clinton, Romney and so many others, will.
Correctly, in the Establishment’s eyes, Sanders must be defeated in the Democrat primary because too much sunlight on their ultimate plans will kill them. Only the softer light of the policies advocated by people such as Buttigieg will work to achieve the Establishment’s goals.
Much like the concept of corporatism, associating the manipulative and evil implications of a monopoly to the current set of Democrat presidential candidates is not only truthful, but also breaks the barriers erected by left of center voters who would otherwise favor a Democrat candidate.
The implementation of this strategy is simple. Take this concept and apply it everywhere and in every discussion or debate.
If you appreciate the unique perspective this article offers and would like to encourage the author to continue to produce the reasoning America requires to make a better future for generations to come, please subscribe to our updates and donate dollars, Bitcoin, or Bitcoin Cash today.