JOIN THE TEA PARTY : BE PATRIOTIC--AND IT'S MORE FUN THAN YOU THINK

LET FREEDOM RING

By : Mr. H. Henry Patrick, Esq., Former State Legislator (Virginia); Real Estate Owner (1400 Acres in several Virginia counties); Former Chair, Citizens for the Abolition of the Income Tax (1982-1997); Outdoorsman; Contributing Editor, Breathe Free Magazine (2004-present); Author, Government, Get Your Goddamn Stinking Hands off my Hard-Earned Keep, And Stop Poisoning My Children : I'll Spend my Money Any Way I Please, Thank You Very Much (a Pamphlet published by Freedom Press)(forthcoming 2010); Winner, West Virginia Sport Shooters Remington versus Doe Contest (1999); Volunteer Fireman.

In 2008, Barack Obama took the White House promising "change we can believe in." But in the months that followed, Obama did something terrifying: He expanded the government. He began policing banks, stealing private property, handing out cash to unemployed luggards and awarding free health care.

Now, government threatens everything we hold dear. It threatens to seize our property, tax our children and kill our grandparents by condemning them to wait in grimy clinics for necessary care. Government threatens to spy on our wives, monitor our whereabouts and punish us for defending liberty. Put simply, government is suppressing freedom in a way never before seen in the United States. And we're all paying for it.

Barack Obama may have thought government could solve our problems. But to quote Ronald Reagan, government is the problem. And if we don't act soon, we will live in a gulag in which our daughters will be forced to wear red bandanas and sing workers' hymns.

Smart Americans recognized Obama's shtick for what it was: Socialist snake oil. That is why they banded together to form the Tea Party. We are committed to resisting Obama at every turn. We are committed to protecting our children from government propaganda. We are committed to the ideal that every American deserves to own his own property without governmental interference. We are committed to keeping every penny in our paychecks.

Obama believes exactly the opposite. He believes that government has a right to take away property and give it to people without property. That is why we resist him. We refuse to surrender our property so that some black beggar in New York can get a free heart transplant. We refuse to give up our rifles to government agents. We refuse to pay a single nickel so that lazy unemployed people can get a free meal. After all, free meals are un-American.

In the Tea Party we believe in a simple virtue: Responsibility. Sadly, that virtue does not carry much weight in Obama's America. Yet responsibility made America great. Our forebears did not wait around for government checks. They cut down trees, built homes and warded off Indian raids. They did not whine about being poor. They started wholesale companies, sold wheat and made their own fortunes. Or they died trying. That is the American way: Make money, ask no one for help, or go down like a man. In this country, you need to fight hard to survive. We aren't softies. We're toughies. We pass by dying people in the street without a second thought.

Government used to know its place in America. Our forebears established government in this country not to feed the poor, but to protect their property. They did not establish government to handicap their economic affairs. Rather, they established government to keep order so that they could attend to business in a responsible way. Furthermore, our forebears hated taxes. They revolted from England because they did not like paying taxes on their hard-earned labor. After all, who would want to work knowing the government could just come in and take away all his profit? That is why our forebears broke from England.

And that is also why we began the Tea Party: To resist tyrannical government and to protect private property from government seizure.

We believe that every American should join the Tea Party. If you are sick and tired of paying away your honest paycheck to the government, you should join us. If you don't like the idea that you slave away at a horrible office job so a toothless homeless man can get a free hospital stay, you should join us. If you don't like the idea that your children read propaganda praising the Kennedys in public schools, you should join us. And if you can't stand the idea that government can steal your land, you should definitely join the Tea Party.

Americans are all about freedom. So are we.

In the Tea Party, freedom is not just an abstract principle. It is an impetus for action. We have work to do before we achieve freedom. We will not be truly free in this country until we cast off the terrible burden that government has thrown upon us. We will not achieve freedom until government removes its filthy tentacles from our bank accounts, mutual funds, paychecks and corporate treasuries. We will not be free until we drive government tax collectors off our property and drive our automobiles without government licenses. Nor will we achieve freedom until we remove our children from pernicious public schools. In a word, we have a battle to fight. And words alone will not win it.

To realize the dream of freedom through the Tea Party in America, we must rise up against tyranny. We must declare that We are the People. We made this government; and that means we can un-make it, too. When government disrespects our property, then turns around to give free meals and diabetes treatment to black people, it must be abolished. We have a right to overthrow tyrannical regimes. Obama is a tyrant. He disrespects private property. Unless we act against his government today, he will plunge our country into a new dark age in which every American can obtain low-cost health care and unemployment insurance. What's more, unless we act against him today, we will drown in taxes. And our children will not be safe from schools that observe Black History Month and Gay Awareness Week.

Do not hesitate to do the right thing. Do not hesitate to be a patriot. But joining the Tea Party is not as grave as you think. It is also very fun. It is fun to angrily carry torches through the streets and chant slogans like: "Down with the income tax!" It is fun to break windows and smash down doors. It is fun to participate in anti-tax riots. It is fun to tar-and-feather IRS officials. It is fun to throw half-clad judges from third-floor chambers. And it is very fun to burn down courthouses. What's more, it is simply exhilarating to exchange smalls arms fire with Federal officers. And it is even more thrilling to blow up police cars. In this light, Tea Party membership is not just about boring policy speeches. It is also about having a great time actively rebelling against the government: And that means fighting, shooting, burning, breaking, smashing and blowing things up. Everyone loves that.

There's a place for everyone in the Tea Party. You don't need to own land to join us. We need everyone. We need young people to storm State houses and string up legislators. We need sociopaths to set fire to government buildings and kill tax collectors. We need children to stop going to school. We need hardened gun owners to give us muscle to match our spirit. And we need educated people--like Sarah Palin--to direct our loyal followers. In a word, we need everyone--and we need you now.

It is time to send government a message it will never forget. It is time for freedom. It is time to stop paying taxes. It is time to own your own property again. It is time to pay your laborers whatever you want, not what the government tells you to pay them. It is time to spend your money as you please, not to pay for unfair entitlement programs and free medical care for lazy people. You want to hold on to your own money, don't you? If you make $10 an hour, you don't want $241.97 for working 40 hours, do you? Well, if you want a fair-and-square $400 for 40 hours at $10 an hour, the Tea Party is the party for you.

Americans want freedom. They want a life without government interference. They are sick and tired of tax returns, excises, duties, imposts and liens. They are sick and tired of Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and affirmative action. They are sick and tired of public schools and government propaganda. They are sick and tired of jury duty and ineffective courts. They don't want their sons and daughters learning about cultural perversions. And they want the liberty to hire whomever they please. Put simply, Americans have this to say: "Government, hands off my goddamn money and kids!"

So be patriotic. Stand up for freedom. Tell Obama that he'll get your money and kids--in hell. And have fun doing it. Open your drawer and take out that pistol. Take the shotgun off the mantle. Grab a rock. Light up a torch. Then take to the streets. Start shouting about liberty. Prowl for fire stations and police outposts. Hunt down crossing guards and public school teachers. Get together with your friends, fill up a few Molotov cocktails and toss them into your nearest courthouse. Vandalize police vans. Tear things down. Spit on a town councilman. If the police try to arrest you, fight back against government tyranny until your last breath. Yell out to them: "You may take my life. But you'll never take my freedom!"

Join the fun. Join the Tea Party. Stand up for a full paycheck. And tell Obama that you refuse to allow America to sink into the new dark age of free health care and financial industry regulation.

Over our dead bodies. And Mr. Taxman, you'd better run, because the Tea Party is about to begin.

So to all you aggrieved Americans out there, we have just one thing to say: Lock and load. We're taking this mother down.

DEMOCRACY : AN AMERICAN MYTH

AN ESSAY

Americans learn to revere the word "democracy." In public school, they learn that the American government is "democratic." They take pride in "democracy" because "democracy" is a "free" form of government that is "better" than other governments. After all, when students learn about the American Revolution, they inevitably hear that our Framers established a "democracy." And "democracy" is "better" than the unjust "monarchy" that led them to revolt. Applying these indoctrinated ideals, Americans claim that they never believe in "family distinctions," "aristocracy" or other "elitism" based on inherited titles.

I venture that this is all nonsense. The United States is not--and certainly never was--a democracy. And Americans believe in aristocracy far more than they like to publicly admit: The truth is that both democracy and equality are American myths.

I first doubted the rhetoric about American democracy when I read history books about ancient Greece. In those books, I learned that pure "democracy" imposed no limitation on a person's participation in government. Every voice was equal. Everyone could vote and every decision required majority approval by all. There was no "representative body" that made decisions "in the people's name." No, in pure democracy, the people rule--literally. Everyone has an equal say in policy, from the richest landowner to the lowliest beggar.

Democracy sounds like a wonderful idea. After all, don't we all want to be equal to one another? Should we not all have an equal right to decide on important public questions? Isn't it somehow reassuring to know that the government works for you, and that you have a real chance to influence it? Of course it sounds great. Democracy is idealistic. It lends itself to myths. And like all myths, it does not really exist.

Lately, I've been re-reading Aristotle's Politics. As the world's first real political scientist, he presaged almost every significant political debate that came after him. By categorizing governmental forms, he created the vocabulary of modern political discussion. And Aristotle's text gives me immense support for my contention that the United States is no democracy--not even close. Rather, the United States is an oligarchy.

In criticizing Plato's Laws, Aristotle makes some cogent observations about voting. Americans learn that "democracy" is all about voting. They learn that "going to the polls" proves that "everybody means something" in our political system. There is a theme in American voting rhetoric about equality and dignity. Because we all can supposedly vote, that makes us all equally powerful and worthy. But Aristotle says: "The practice of selection by lot from a number chosen by election is common to both oligarchy and democracy; but to impose upon the richer citizens, and upon them only, the obligation to be members of the Assembly, to vote for office-bearers and do any other duty that falls upon a citizen--that is oligarchical." The Politics, Book II, ch. vi, § 1266a5.

In early America, only white men with sufficient landholdings could vote for representatives. In other words, the "obligation to be members of the Assembly" and "vote for office-bearers" fell solely upon the "richer citizens." Women, slaves and the vast majority of white men had no say whatsoever in government. They could not even go to the polls. Although voting restrictions have certainly diminished over time, it is still no easy thing to vote in the United States. State laws impose numerous handicaps on citizens' right to vote. And in a good year, we're lucky if 50% of the eligible voters actually show up to cast their ballots. Other State laws completely disable people from voting. For example, if you commit a felony--even a relatively minor one, like writing a bad check--you might lose the right to vote for the rest of your life.

In this light, America has historically been far more "oligarchical" than "democratic." If this were a true democracy, everyone would have been able to actively participate in government from the outset. We know this is not the case. Americans have never actively participated in their government. Rather, they elect "particularly distinguished people" from "particular social strata" to rule for them. This, too, is oligarchical. Think about where the Representatives and Senators come from. They are all generally wealthy, white and well-educated. They do not represent a fair cross-section of American society. If anything, they resemble the "richer citizens" Aristotle mentions in The Politics. Just look at Congress. These are not typical Americans: They are 535 people who are far more powerful and wealthy than the people who elected them. And for over a century in this country, they were exclusively landed white males.

Aristotle provides further support for the conclusion that the United States has been--and in many ways, still is--an oligarchy. Concerning oligarchy, he writes: "So also is the attempt to secure that a majority of the office-holders should come from among the wealthy, and that highest offices should be filled by those from the highest property-classes." The Politics, Book II, ch. vi § 1266a5.

What a striking insight. It is as if Aristotle predicted what the United States government would look like 2000 years later. Think about the "majority of the office-holders" in American government. What social class do they represent? You guessed it: They largely come from the "highest property-classes," or at least act like they do. Even President Obama made quite a bit of money as a lawyer and law professor before diving into politics. The fact that there are only two political parties reinforces the oligarchical nature of American government. Unlike European parliamentary systems, Americans have only two choices: Liberal rich guy #1 (the Democrat) or Conservative rich guy #2 (the Republican). There are no "Greens," "Socialists," "Labor Men," "Women for Animals' Rights" or "Christian Theologues." In the American system, every "high office holder" is basically the same: A wealthy believer in free market capitalism who owns significant amounts of property. That is oligarchy.

In the final analysis, it is clear that people from the "highest property-classes" run the American government. They always have, and they always will. Let's just be honest about our terminology: This is an oligarchy, not a democracy. It is simply false to call our system a "democracy," no matter how many people can technically vote. Despite this, it works in the government's favor to identify itself as a "democracy." After all, "democracy" has a magical ring to it. It conjures all kinds of hopeful ideals. It also fools the people into believing that they actually have a say in policy. History shows that people revolt when they feel they are powerless. But when they think their government actually speaks for them, they refrain from revolution. In that sense, calling America a "democracy" maintains social control, even if it is untrue. Calling America a "democracy" keeps things quiet. And that's just how oligarchs like it: It lets them continue to hold all the power.

Oligarchy proceeds on the premise that only a few hold political power. It implies inequality. Democracy, on the other hand, proceeds on the premise that everyone holds political power. It implies equality. Yet a quick look at inequalities in the American political system beginning in 1787 reveals just how absurd it is to call the United States a "democracy." And a quick look at the "kind of people" who have held high office in the United States over the years--Presidents, Senators, Supreme Court justices--merely confirms Aristotle's analysis: These guys (well, almost all guys) all came from the "highest property-classes."

In this light, it is simply disingenuous to delude our children into thinking that they live in a democracy. If they do not come from "high property-classes," they stand a much lower chance to ever influence government. That does not mean that they cannot rise into a "high property-class." It simply means that they must first obtain wealth before even thinking about politics. After all, it wouldn't be an oligarchy if poor folks suddenly held all the high government jobs.

In truth, no country can ever be fully democratic. Could a country in good faith entrust its most pressing concerns to half-fed beggars, idiots and wage laborers? Certainly not. It is reasonable to put political power into "competent" hands. And generally the wealthy are those most competent to administer the State. I simply believe we must be honest in the way we think about our government. That means dropping all aspirations to "equality" and "dignity." The sad fact is that perfect equality is a very bad idea when it comes to government. It would be better if we simply acknowledged that and stopped perpetuating myths that "everyone is equal" in American society. That is not the goal, nor can it ever be. Yet even the oligarchs in power circulate meaningless rhetoric about democratic opportunity and equality for all in America.

We are oligarchs; why not just admit it? Let's at least stop lying to our children about democracy.

HEALTH CARE REVOLUTION : MY LONG-TERM PLAN

A REFLECTION

I’ve been doing some promoting lately. Whenever I meet people, I try to get a feel for their social leanings. If I think they might like my blog, I tell them about it. I’m even thinking about advertising in some newspapers. But I know everyone won’t like it. In fact, I like that idea.

When I talk to people who have spent some time reading my catalogue, I hear familiar refrains: “Do you plan on writing anything for mass consumption? Do you plan to write a novel? A play? A book?” In truth, I have never wanted to be popular. I don’t want to be John Grisham. I don’t want to compromise my ideas in order to write something that is “conventionally pleasing.” I don’t want anyone to transform my writing into Hollywood adaptations, and I don’t care if Oprah Winfrey finds my essays compelling. She’s welcome to enjoy my essays; I just don’t thirst for her recognition. That’s all I mean. She’s welcome to like my writing. But nothing will make me write a lighthearted romantic comedy, like the New York Fire Department Captain who wrote a feel-good novel in his spare time. I just can’t do it. It’s hard for me to be frivolous. It makes me sick, actually.

Still, I have larger designs. For one, I want to compile all my satires into a “pamphlet.” I think my satires all dwell on consistent themes. They all mock powerful people and their pretentious, condescending arguments. I plan on editing my satires and organizing them in such a way that they could be read as a “book.” My essays travel over more varied ground, but I think they, too, could be organized into a relatively consistent format. In this sense, I think my blog already qualifies as a “book.” I just need to hash the ideas together and bind it up.

Second, I want to write a longer piece. I really like novels. But I don’t like English and American novels (with some exceptions, of course). I like German and Russian novels. There is an immense difference. German and Russian novels generally have loose, skeletal plots that merely provide a framework for dark, philosophical expositions. English and American novels generally go heavy on plot and light on philosophy. I’ve written before that I don’t like plot. If I want plot, I’ll read a newspaper or police report. When it comes to literature, I want something more, something challenging and daring. Sappy love stories don’t interest me, nor do swashbuckling commercial success stories. These are conventional stories. When I talk about love and commercial success, I’m usually mocking them. Dostoevsky and Kafka did, too.

So what kind of novel will I write? For two years, I’ve been mulling a novel about a new American revolution. What better way to make mordant observations about society than through a fictional revolution? I’ve said before that revolutions excite me because they represent times during which old orders collapse and the law fails. They spark radical changes in values. They make powerful people scurry and run. They force people to rethink their lives. That’s exciting. By the same token, I’ve written that revolution will not happen in America because too many people are “relatively pleased” with their lives; they don’t want to think differently. After all, enough people have homes, cars and televisions to risk everything for a shot at “something better.” So they let existing power structures persist, no matter how subtly pernicious.

But this broaches a question: What would push Americans over the edge? What would make Americans risk everything to reshape their society? What kinds of pressures and injustices would spur significant numbers to risk armed revolt against the old order? And how would the old order respond to those revolts? I always thought health care would be a good metaphor here. I envisioned an America—maybe forty years from now—in which wealth and power disparities grew to intolerable levels. In this unequal society, some people have access to miraculous medical treatments, while others die on the streets. I thought injustices involving health care would provide a good literary vehicle for a “fictional revolution.” Eerily, I thought these things long before the current “health care crisis” and the irrational debate it has unleashed in recent months.

My novel will pursue familiar, satirical themes. I often write about health care on my blog because it is a proxy for numerous subsidiary themes, including inequality, fairness, justice, death, money, commerce, profit, American life, hypocrisy and compassion. It touches upon life, yet it intertwines with money and profit. It touches upon our deepest humanity, yet it is also a commodity. No matter how you slice the health care issue, some people live and die because they can’t pay. That provides plentiful opportunities for commentary. Emotions run high in the health care debate because people worry about getting sick and dying. They become irrational when they think government might impede their access to a doctor, or because government tolerates a system in which they cannot afford to ever see one. I can envision emotions running so high over this issue, in fact, that revolution could ensue. We just need the right internal and external circumstances to make enough people angry and desperate. My novel will describe those circumstances.

I don’t think my novel will be gloomy. I often worry that readers find my writing too bitter and too scathing. Yet every time I try to make it less biting, I find I do not fully address the issue. I write satire because I see hypocrisy and injustice everywhere. You can’t take down injustice and hypocrisy with kid gloves. My writing might appear bleak because it reflects a bleak world. I don’t intend to depress when I write; I follow the old Russian tradition in this regard: I laugh through tears. I find so many injustices perversely funny. Maybe I’m unusual for thinking that. I don’t know. But I know I don’t intend to be gloomy. I can control my intentions, and every time I write a satire, I intend to provoke laughter about something that is really quite abominable about our society. When I write my novel about “the American revolution of 2048” it will aim to provoke laughter as much as it provokes a good, hard look at our society.

Anyway, these are my long-term plans. In the meantime, I plan to continue posting on the blog as I always do. This blog is my laboratory. Here new ideas spring forth and bubble up to the surface. Sometimes they are rough and undeveloped. Other times they pick up where an earlier one left off. No matter what, they are insights into my mind. I am proud that I have created this testament. I have reduced so many thoughts to writing over the past year. If I hadn’t, who knows how many thoughts would simply have vanished into time? Thoughts tend to do that. If you don’t seize them and develop them, they escape you. My blog helps me rein them in and keep them. After all, life is one immense distraction. It can blow you off course before you even know what’s happening to you.

Thanks to everyone who tunes in to read my latest stuff.

VIVE LA FRANCE!

OESTERHOUDT STRIKES

I am in a rush this morning. But I have enough time to say that I do not like the television show "NYC Prep." It is about six ultra-rich white Upper East Side prep school students who talk incessantly about clothes, advantages and money. They cannot reveal their names or their parents' names for fear that they might be abducted. It is as if they know that their wealth and lifestyles immediately inspire resentment in viewers.

Wealth divides Americans as much as it divides citizens in any other civilization. While we can talk about theoretical inequality all day, it is something else to see the way really privileged people live. It evokes true populist nausea. Most people struggle from paycheck to paycheck their whole lives. They never seem to get anywhere. Their parents had nothing to give and they didn't know anyone who could get them a job that actually could lead someplace. Yet the children on NYC Prep worry about whether they will receive a Mercedes or BMW on their 16th Birthday. How could a wage-earner or debtor not feel outrage when they hear about such blatant excesses?

As I watched these children move through luxurious apartments laughing, texting and planning European excursions, I thought to myself: "This is the kind of stuff that started the French Revolution." And my thoughts led me further: "Wouldn't it be satisfying to guillotine these little assholes along with their absurdly wealthy parents?" That would finally put some fear in them, wouldn't it?

Class inequality starts trouble when enough people realize how bad it really is. Class inequality touches both an emotional and a philosophical nerve. In America, wealthy people do a good job concealing their lives and lifestyles from public scrutiny. But when they come to light, outrage is swift and almost bloodthirsty. Human beings have an innate intuition about fairness. When they see some people with everything, while they struggle for nothing, they cannot help feeling that unfairness is afoot. When these emotions reach a critical mass, revolutions happen. Anger about unfairness topples governments. That's what happened in France in 1789. That was a bad year to be rich.

Revolutions excite me. I love studying them because I love reading about times during which old orders break down and the law fails. In pre-Revolutionary France, for instance, the law supported the wealthy. By law, they maintained their status, property and unequal privileges. But that did not give them right. In fact, the people smashed the law and killed those who violated right. The same thing happened in Russia in 1917. Revolutions obliterate unfair legal systems and the unequal social structures they support. Yet in both France and Russia, there was a spark that ignited smoldering resentments. Both France and Russia experienced international turmoil prior to their revolutions that weakened the law's grip. Thus, a historical pattern emerges: Revolutions happen when two things are present: (1) Massive popular resentment caused by social inequality and wealth disparity; and (2) A destabilizing event at home or abroad that compromises the law's power to restrain dissent.

In America, we have not fulfilled either prerequisite for revolution. While there is enormous social inequality and wealth disparity in America, there is a substantial counterbalance. Namely, there are millions of middle-class people who are sufficiently content with their economic lot that they are not prepared to risk comfort for something better. Additionally, America has never faced the kind of truly devastating "destabilizing event" that weakens faith in government altogether. America has not faced crippling wars in which millions of civilians die. Nor has its currency ever gone worthless, as it did in Germany in the 1920s. Put simply, America is quite stable. And that stability enables the law to control resentment engendered by social inequality. Unfairness, in other words, can survive in peaceful times when enough people really don't give a damn. This is the case in America today.

But resentment lives. You can feel it the minute you tune into NYC Prep and wonder how it is possible that some people have it so easy. And you'll have to forgive yourself for your intuitive desire to dethrone these modern-day nobles. Revolution or not, we can still dream about how gratifying it would be to humble these petulant bon vivants. After all, it's in our nature to recoil from intuitive unfairness.

SOLVING THE FINANCIAL CRISIS : GERMAN-STYLE

By : Chancellor Otto von Bismarck (deceased 1898; resurrected 2009), Imperial German Parliamentary Leader; Inventor of Modern-Day Pension Fund System; Statesman; Critic of Weak and Vacillating Political Action

I am here at the request of the so-called “American Treasury Secretary” named Geithner. According to my preliminary briefing, I understand that your Nation faces a financial crisis. I am informed that your securities markets collapsed following a widespread public credit deterioration (weitverbreitetes öffentliches Kreditverderben). Please forgive me if I sometimes use German constructions to explain myself. Your weak and insubstantial English at times does not possess the conceptual clarity to correctly analyze the problem. In such situations I will also write in German to express my true meaning.

Let me say first that I am glad to be here. I promise to bring effective German solutions to your American crisis. We will overcome this crisis with discipline, sweat, toil, strength and determination. I will not stand for anything other than total victory (Endsieg). In Germany, I united a Nation and forged the greatest economy ever seen in Europe. I have encountered worse problems than yours. I will restore your Nation to prosperity. And I will punish the falsifiers (Verfälscher), rogues (Schurken) and banker terrorists (Bankier-Terroristen) who brought this calamity upon you. None shall escape my justice.

I understand that your financial markets collapsed because you extended too much credit. Your Geithner tells me that any peasant could obtain a loan to buy a mansion or a plasma screen television. Then your banks were surprised that these peasants could not pay back their loans. Why? Your banks should have known that these people could not pay their loans. In Germany, the Staatskasse does not give loans to people who cannot pay them back. If a German cannot afford a television, the Staatskasse does not give him money to buy it. Your American banks did not have discipline. They loaned money so they could boost their stock values and conceal their liabilities. They acted like banker terrorists and scoundrels (Lumpe). In Germany, I made sure that banker terrorists did not rule our people. I firmly brought them under my control. Under my plan, I will carefully monitor banks to ensure that they are honest. I will create a Bank Supervisory Committee (Bankaufsichtsvorstand) to carefully check their books every month. I will tolerate no fraud or misrepresentation. If I suspect that a bank is loaning money to boost its own accounts despite a borrower’s poor financial health, I will call that bank before the Bank Discipline Board (Bankdisziplinaufsichtsrat). I will impose fines on these scoundrels and publicly declare them Banker Terrorists. Borrowers do not deserve to suffer for the machinations of Banker Terrorists. Under my regime, aggrieved borrowers will have a right to cancel unfair mortgages with Banker Terrorists.

I will take swift action. Your so-called “Congress” takes far too long to act. I will immediately discipline the banking industry. We do not have time to debate. We must advance all along the line. We will not retreat. You rapacious Bank Terrorists (Ihr raubenslustigen Bank-Terroristen)! You deserve to be disciplined. How could you let your greed blind you to the good of this Nation? Didn’t you see that the People could not afford the homes you sold them? Instead, you thought about yourselves. Yes, the government now gives you bailout money. But you will not get away so easily under me. You will publicly appear before the People on national television and beg forgiveness for your greed. I will personally reprimand you for being undisciplined rogues and have you whipped for insolence. We will not solve this crisis unless you Americans change your greedy ways. I will make an example out of these greedy Banker Terrorists and ruthless Money Pirates (willkürliche Geldpiraten).

In Germany, I invigorated the economy by intertwining government aid with economic enterprise. I knew that I could not allow private labor barons (Arbeitsbarone) to do what they wanted all the time. That is why I instituted rigorous government oversight in business. I imposed minimum wage and child labor laws. I permitted collective bargaining and I even provided State health insurance because I knew that private business would not. I created a government pension fund in 1884 so that old people would not go into poverty. The Imperial German government understood that it represents the People; and we had an obligation to care for the people. Yet here the government does not do enough to care for the people. You let businesses run free and let workers go without medical care. You merciless industry captains (Ihr unbarmherzigen Industriehauptmänner)! You wonder why the Nation is in crisis. I will tell you: Because you only thought about yourselves! You have no discipline. You did not consider how your actions would affect the People. You have no sense of honor or shame. Yes, the government needs you. But you also have obligations to the government and the People. Under my regime, I will scrutinize you. No longer will you be concerned solely with profit. Now you must publicly account for yourselves. If you do not, I will have you paraded shirtless in front of your workers and flogged. That will put some discipline into you, you greedy scoundrel (Du gieriger Lump)!

Recently your government agreed to pay $782 billion to help floundering banks and companies. You also allocated funds to provide for increased government health care and unemployment insurance. This is a good step, but you must do more. If you had been more disciplined in the beginning, you would not have been in this position. But there is no use debating the past. Today we confront a Depression and we have no time to bicker. We will overcome this mess with blood and iron. That means we must stand up to the problem and bravely fight it. That means the government must spend money in order to save the People from ruin. What good will your government be if the People are destitute? They will overthrow you unless you do something now.

Your Republicans do not seem to understand that. Are you mad? You do not want the government to take action to confront this economic crisis? You do not want to spend any money? How do you propose that we rescue banks and employers? By sitting around and talking about tax cuts? You cowards! I do not like spending money, either. But in these circumstances we do not have the luxury to fantasize about unbridled free market virtues. Yes, it would be nice to cut taxes to allow more enterprise. Yet if we do that now, the People would starve. I believe in reason. Reason dictates that we take immediate, reassuring action to help the People. The People must believe in their government again. You, on the other hand, want the government to do nothing to ease the People’s plight. Rather, you want to send a philosophical message that spending is bad and tax cuts are good. You idiots, this is no time for abstract philosophizing! We must act. I did not philosophize in the War with Austria or France. I did what was necessary. Furthermore, I understand that at times we must spend money even if we do not wish to spend money. This is no time to advocate small government. Small government allowed these Banker Terrorists and Money Pirates to ruin your economy. Surely you do not advocate allowing them to do it again? Step aside, you unreasonable cowards. I have a Nation to save.

I have a conservative reputation. You Republicans probably cannot believe that I am siding with your President Obama on these matters. I may be a conservative, but I am not stupid. In fact, I believe that your President must go further to clean up this wretched free market mess (unverschämte Freimarktschweinerei). In Germany, I created a large, activist government. I introduced government spending programs that would make your conservative blood boil. I did this because I understood that government does not rise and fall with the wealthy; it rises and falls with the entire population. Not everyone can succeed in a free market economy. That is why the government must provide a safety net to protect those who fall through. If the government does not care for its People, Depressions like this will shake popular support. Why do you think I allowed for pension funds, health care, unemployment insurance and welfare? I hated to spend money, but I did not want a revolution on my hands. Capitalism is a good system, but unless you mix some socialism in with it, your government will fall with the stock market. By caring for the People, you can immunize your government from popular dissent. And why is the government here if not to represent and defend the People? Don’t you Americans believe that? I will force you to start acting like you do.

I will restore public faith in the government through discipline and strength. You summoned me to help save you. I will root out the Banker Terrorists and greedy Money Pirates who advanced themselves at your expense. I will harshly discipline dogs like Bernard Madoff who destroyed your faith in the stock market. Put simply, I will bring order to your lawless financial markets. You have seen what happens when you allow Banker Terrorists to police themselves. Never again. Under my regime, I will swiftly bring these pirates to justice. With discipline, you soon will be able to borrow money without fear. You will again be able to shop for items you can afford. You will be able to pay your rent and go to the doctor when you must. And through wise government intervention, you will have employment.

Do not fear government intervention. I have the strength to do what must be done in this crisis. Unlike your slow-moving Congress, I will scrap ideas that do not work. Unlike your Republicans, I will not cling to free market aspirations because those aspirations almost sank the whole ship. If government must spend money to rescue the Nation, then I will spend money. This is not undisciplined; this is reasonable. I may be harsh, but I am fair. To business owners, bankers and commercial men, I say you have nothing to fear. You will still make your profits. I will simply closely watch you to make sure you do not pillage the People. Finally, if your Supreme Court tries to stand in my way, I will discipline each Justice by forcing them to stand before the Nation and individually explain why they are obstructing our recovery efforts. This is a life-or-death struggle; we do not have time to ruminate. We must act now without worrying about what some American jurist has to say about it.

I will not allow this Nation to disgrace itself. Rather, I will break it back into line like an unruly soldier. Americans, this financial crisis will not destroy you. With blood, iron and effort, I will establish a new financial order. This is no longer about petty profits and free market excess. This is about total victory for all (Endsieg für alle). Achtung! Ein neuer Tag dämmert auf! (A new day is dawning!). Are you ready for it? I am here to crush the Banker Terrorists and Money Pirates who ruined your lives. Rally behind me for discipline and German solutions that work. Would you rather suffer with half-measures, political bickering and vacillation? Certainly not. You want jobs, health care and a stable stock market. I will give them all to you—quickly. And I will punish all who threaten to undermine the new economic Reich.

Enough discussion. We must get to work now.

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

Think about today's "financial crisis" on Wall Street. Now consider this quote from a French workers' pamphlet dated November 1842:

"Are you not afraid that the poor man put into the dock for snatching a piece of bread from a baker's stall will not, one day, become so enraged that stone by stone he will demolish the Stock Exchange, a wild den where the treasure of the State and the fortune of families are stolen with impunity?"

Today, we are paying the price for tolerating the "wild den" of Wall Street. Yet it is doubtful that we will ever see the "wild animals" punished for their recklessness. Politicians and pundits will continue playing the blame game about the credit crunch. Some will blame the borrowers for "living beyond their means." Others will blame the bankers for "predatory lending." No matter where we point the finger, chances are our society will not take action against criminal bankers. It will take strong action against petty street thieves, but it will not dethrone the financial barons. There are two species of crime at work here, but the law will only address one.

From what I understand, the "bailout plan" essentially invokes the sentiments expressed in the 1842 quote. Those who populate the "wild den" of the Stock Exchange will get away scot free. Indeed, the Federal government is paying to cover their own foolish extravagance. But what about the common man who suffered from that extravagance? He is forgotten. It is "his responsibility" to deal with the crisis. He is not getting any bailout money. He will go homeless, and no one really cares.

There is a fundamental injustice at work in this crisis. Both rich and poor have erred, but only the poor will bear the consequences. Will that not inspire rage? Yes--I think it already has generated some genuine discontent. But will it be enough to cause people to "demolish the Stock Exchange stone for stone?" Probably not. It should, but probably not. Why?

There will be no armed revolts in this country for the same reason this country is safe from revolution: There are not enough truly dissatisfied people suffering truly unbearable circumstances. Just as important, there are enough sufficiently satisfied people who believe that, even though things are bad, they prefer the status quo and their material advantages to risking all for an uncertain new system. Revolutions only happen when a "critical mass" of people truly feel that their way of life is threatened. That has not happened yet.

Now, if more and more crises befall us and more and more people truly feel desperate, I might alter my prognosis. Still, without massive pressures such as invasion, war, pestilence or egregious State violence, armed revolt is unlikely. Historically, economic turmoil commonly accompanies revolutionary spirit, but it is rarely sufficient to bring about actual revolt. In Weimar Germany, the Depression was coupled with massive material and human loss from a devastating war, as well as fallout from an unfair peace treaty. In revolutionary France, economic hardship was coupled with grotesque governmental excesses and pressure from foreign interventions. In revolutionary Russia, economic ruin was coupled with mass starvation, invasion and millions of war dead.

We only face a temporary economic panic. We have not met the dramatic preconditions for rebellion. Too many people are still too satisfied with their lives.