Cries of fascism and dictatorship are often overblown. Not so in the case of Jesse Jackson, Jr.
Illinois Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. told The Daily Caller on Wednesday that congressional opposition to the American Jobs Act is akin to the Confederate “states in rebellion.”
Jackson called for full government employment of the 15 million unemployed and said that Obama should “declare a national emergency” and take “extra-constitutional” action “administratively” — without the approval of Congress — to tackle unemployment.
“I hope the president continues to exercise extraordinary constitutional means, based on the history of Congresses that have been in rebellion in the past,” Jackson said. “He’s looking administratively for ways to advance the causes of the American people, because this Congress is completely dysfunctional.”
Let’s put aside the disgustingly unconstitutional piece of advice for one second, and concentrate on Jackon’s economic plan. He actually wants to pay the unemployed – to do what exactly? – and at $40,000 per head. That comes out to $600,000,000,000 – that’s 600 Billion dollars. And that’s only if we go with the 15 million number for unemployed. That figure is undoubtedly a low-ball figure of the number of Americans actually unemployed. In reality we’d most likely have to double that figure and then some. So Jackson is suggesting that we simply pony up over a trillion dollars a year to guarantee full employment. And again, what are we employing these people to do?
The more important issue is that Jackson considers mere political opposition to a favored policy to be, in effect, treason. That’s right, anyone who dares disagree with the Obamamessiah is an active rebel against the United States government. And, since those people opposing Obama were elected to office – and, by the way, were elected more recently than Obama – isn’t Jackson implying that a majority of the people of the United States are in active rebellion? Good to know what Jackson thinks of his fellow countrymen.
In the end, Jackson wants to crush out dissent and utilize the machinery of the state to co-opt the marketplace and guarantee certain economic outcomes. Gee, if only there were a word to describe this kind of desired polity.
But remember, the tea partiers are extremists.
H/t: Creative Minority Report.
Whenever I see that someone has said something insanely stupid, I often check the source and try to dig deeper to make sure there’s not more to the story than meets the eyes. So I was initially skeptical when I heard that Governor Bev Purdue said the following:
“You have to have more ability from Congress, I think, to work together and to get over the partisan bickering and focus on fixing things. I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover. I really hope that someone can agree with me on that. The one good thing about Raleigh is that for so many years we worked across party lines. It’s a little bit more contentious now but it’s not impossible to try to do what’s right in this state. You want people who don’t worry about the next election.”
Surely she can’t be serious. A sitting governor could not possibly be advocating the suspension of elections, could she?
Well her team went into immediate spin mode and claimed that she was just exaggerating.
Later Tuesday afternoon, Perdue’s office clarified the remarks: “Come on,” said spokeswoman Chris Mackey in a statement. “Gov. Perdue was obviously using hyperbole to highlight what we can all agree is a serious problem: Washington politicians who focus on their own election instead of what’s best for the people they serve.”
The search for an economic and political “third way” has haunted intellectuals for over a hundred years in the Western nations. Many forget that fascism was at one time considered a viable “third way” between liberal capitalism and communism, preserving for the most part private ownership of the means of production for profit but subjecting it to near total control and regulation by the state. Many other models would follow, from the local and anarchistic to the national and statist, appearing under many different names.
I too was caught up in the desperate search for a “third way”, as are many Catholics who eventually find their way to Distributism. But it became quite obvious to me that what people who actually defined themselves as libertarians and capitalists were promoting and defending really wasn’t what I had always thought it was, nor was it anything I could possibly find objectionable.
Apparently, when Michael Iafrate accuses this blog of promoting ‘Christo-fascism’, the following response (in its entirety) is inappropriate:
I’ll simply repeat my long-standing objection to your use of the term fascism:
Michael is free, of course, to conduct his comment threads as he likes, but it seems self-evidently ridiculous (not to mention uncivil) to write a post calling people names, and then delete responses challenging that description. This is a shame, as it makes it very easy to dismiss even his legitimate criticisms. In any case, here is a link to the post which originally drew Michael’s ire.