Unionism and Collectivism

Q: “But what about giving the govt in excess of what you are suppose to owe for taxes, y’know, to support the war on poverty and the like”

A: “Ya know, I would if I believed the war on poverty was designed to eliminate poverty rather than punish the impoverished. So whatever extra I have goes to direct action.”

These are genuine quotes. The question I posed to an individual who identifies as a liberal, supports Bernie Sanders and believes that the federal government can be a force for good. But yet, he criticizes the government’s help of the impoverished, the administration that he vouches for.

But is it a matter of government or who gets the credit? There are factions within both political parties thatdon’t want the other factions to be the dominate force and drive the goals of the government. For these factions the government can only be a force for good as long as they are in control and get the credit.

The union faction wants to become the sole arbitrator of american life in perpetuity where everyone serves the needs of the union and it’s executives become a intellectual elite. It would be the “worker’s paradise” but only if the union let you be a member. It would be much like what Soviet Russia was about, an elite of a limited number controlling the masses and all the resources to enrich themselves while providing the minimum necessary to feed, clothe and shelter the workers.

This isn’t communism, it’s totalitarianism by any name that people will buy into and can be used to enslave people. Another example is the pre-Civil War plantation system, except this time everybody are the niggers to union massa’s

Call it what it truly is, collectivism, to enrich a few at the expense of the many. It is the anti-populism