Obama official Rick Bookstaber cites Karl Marx in defense of 'class warfare'

Obama Advisers of the World, Unite
Washington Free Beacon Staff - May 7, 2012 11:45 am

Well now we have an Obama Administration official actually quoting Karl Marx !!

Rick Bookstaber currently serves on the Financial Stability Oversight Council.

The Financial Stability Oversight Council was "created" by the Dodd-Frank Act.

He apparently over reacted to a conservative commentator making comments about class warfare.

His quoting Marx seems like a gross symptom of that familiar icy cold feeling from the waist down that many Left Wing "supporters" get when confronted with exposure.

A senior Obama administration official defended the efficacy of “class warfare” on his personal blog Monday by quoting the political philosopher and communist theorist Karl Marx.

Rick Bookstaber, who currently serves on the Financial Stability Oversight Council, the federal body established under the Dodd-Frank Act to “ensure the stability of our nation’s financial system,” took issue with conservative commentator Tucker Carlson’s accusations that liberals were engaging in “class warfare” by seeking to blame the nation’s fiscal problems on a small number of wealthy individuals.

“There is little that matches the artfulness of the rich in waving off criticism of the widening income gap as ‘class warfare,’” Bookstaber wrote. “And there is little that matches the gullibility of the rest in following along.”

"Get" this Wisdom ..

“I am not picking sides in this war,” he added, “but I believe such a war is justifiable, and indeed ultimately inevitable.”

The "quote"

Bookstaber explained further, citing Marx:

During the industrial revolution class warfare centered on the length of the working day. A tightly defined working day only appeared with the advent of the industrial revolution. Before then laborers worked when they needed money, and then quit for a time once they fulfilled their needs. But regimentation and a dependable workforce became necessary once there was machinery to run and capital invested, and so with industrialization came the an enforced workday. So it is not surprising that Marx stated the central battle of class warfare at the time in terms of the working day:

The capitalist maintains his rights as a purchaser when he tries to make the working-day as long as possible, and to make, whenever possible, two working-days out of one. On the other hand, the peculiar nature of the commodity sold implies a limit to its consumption by the purchaser, and the laborer maintains his right as seller when he wishes to reduce the working-day to one of definite normal duration. There is here, therefore, an antinomy, right against right, both equally bearing the seal of the law of exchanges. Between equal rights force decides. Hence is it that in the history of capitalist production, the determination of what is a working-day, presents itself as the result of a struggle, a struggle between collective capital, i.e., the class of capitalists, and collective labour, i.e., the working-class. – Marx, Das Kapital

Marx’s work was widely appropriated throughout the 20th century by countries such as China and the former Soviet Union. Tens of millions of people were slaughtered under those regimes.

Rick Bookstaber site
(note that he has big ties to big financial firms)

Does this help Obama ? or hurt !

p.s. -- the Las Vegas over/under on resignation is: -- one week

What are you trying to say? That if a guy quotes Marx he is a commie? That seems pretty alarmist and McCarthyist.

Are you trying to say that Democrats are commies?

Edit-

“There is little that matches the artfulness of the rich in waving off criticism of the widening income gap as ‘class warfare,’” Bookstaber wrote. “And there is little that matches the gullibility of the rest in following along.”

And I disagree with what he says about how "artful" it is to wave off criticism of the widening income gap by crying "class warfare". I dont find your thread title artful. I find it tired. I do agree with what he says about how gullible people are that repeat this "class warfare" nonsense.

Originally posted by Germanicus
What are you trying to say? That if a guy quotes Marx he is a commie? That seems pretty alarmist and McCarthyist.

Are you trying to say that Democrats are commies?

It seems to me that the gentleman is speaking quite clearly for himself.

read his entire blog link. He wrote it !!

he has some very interesting views.

Marx was bankrolled by his uber rich buddy Engles. Without Freddy's $$$, he would not have had the strength to lift a pencil. By the way Che Guaverga was a murderer and did not understand the schism between the Russian and Chinese styles of communism.
He was naive.
Idealistic but naive.
I am afraid naïveté is rampant in DC. Communist politics was my major in college. The people espousing this type of governance are ill informed. Forgive them for they know not what they do.

Originally posted by xuenchen

Originally posted by Germanicus
What are you trying to say? That if a guy quotes Marx he is a commie? That seems pretty alarmist and McCarthyist.

Are you trying to say that Democrats are commies?

It seems to me that the gentleman is speaking quite clearly for himself.

read his entire blog link. He wrote it !!

he has some very interesting views.

edit on May-09-2012 by xuenchen because: (no reason given)

I agree. I like the guy. And all I can see is that he is talking about the genuine problem of the widening income gap. I hardly think that makes him a commie.

Marx's observation were made in Manchester England in the textile mills owned by his benefactor 's family. While some might claim this to be a microcosm of an entire system, ie capitalism, it was hardly complete. Certainly not sufficient upon which to base an entire system of governance across a much wider spectrum than one city.

reply to post by xuenchen


Is Karl Marx supposed to be some sort of boogey man? I don't get it.

“if you want to shine like sun first you have to burn like it.” - Adolf Hitler

Am I a nazi now?

reply to post by xuenchen


First Anita Dunn and her affinity for Mao, then Van Jones and now this. Is it any wonder why people doubt Obama and his motivations? I'll throw Sunstein in their somewhere in the middle too!

Birds of of a feather flock together...

What Marx promulgated and what Jacob Schiff the banker who ordered the assassination of the czar and his whole family, and who bankrolled the bolshevic revolution for a profitable return are NOT mutually compatible

reply to post by xuenchen


I went to his blog as you linked and read the qoute IN CONTEXT.

He was speaking of the history of "class warfare" and the industrial revolution and qouted Marx - who was the philosophical force arguing against unchecked capitalism at the time.

It was not an endorsement of Marx, but as an explanation of how the Marx viewed class warfare at the time, in particular, the length of the working day for labor.

If we are to follow the logic of disregarding context...he qouted Marx, thus he is a Marxist...THEN..

YOU qouted Marx in your OP in this thread...THUS...you are a MARXIST

Then we can move on to declaring anyone who qoutes Hitler for any particular purpose as being a Nazi...lots of historians must be Nazi's...and we can do the same for every other nefarious figure in history and those that dare to qoute them when discussing history.

He was.framing the term "Class Warfare" in the historical context of the Industrial Revolution.

Dishonest, propagandist, an insult to folks intelligence. This type of utter BS is not "spin" it is propaganda.

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by xuenchen

 

First Anita Dunn and her affinity for Mao, then Van Jones and now this. Is it any wonder why people doubt Obama and his motivations? I'll throw Sunstein in their somewhere in the middle too!

Birds of of a feather flock together...

Why not skip the conspiracy and peruse some facts???

Like how President G.W. Bush recommended that Karl Rove read one of his favorite books..Mao's biography??

Don't believe me? Here is an OP ED by Rove explaining the same..

We recommended volumes to each other (for example, he encouraged me to read a Mao biography

online.wsj.com...

I guess that means Pres. Bush was a Maoist? And by extension his Chief of Staff, Karl Rove?

Oh..and Karl Rove now heads "Restore our Future" which is the principle funder of Mitt Romney's campaign...Mitt Romney must be a disciple of Chairman Mao?

reply to post by Indigo5


Nah, they don't have weird names so they're all American good ol boys.

reply to post by Indigo5

We recommended volumes to each other (for example, he encouraged me to read a Mao biography; I suggested a book on Reconstruction's unhappy end). We discussed the books and wrote thank-you notes to some authors.

Reading a Bio vs citing Mao as your favorite philosopher are two different things. I read Obama's "Dreams..." but he is certainly not one of my favorite Presidents. I've also read Mien Kampf but Hitler is not one of my favorite dictators or authors. It was an interesting history lesson.

Mr. Bush's 2006 reading list shows his literary tastes. The nonfiction ran from biographies of Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Carnegie, Mark Twain, Babe Ruth, King Leopold, William Jennings Bryan, Huey Long, LBJ and Genghis Khan to Andrew Roberts's "A History of the English Speaking Peoples Since 1900," James L. Swanson's "Manhunt," and Nathaniel Philbrick's "Mayflower." Besides eight Travis McGee novels by John D. MacDonald, Mr. Bush tackled Michael Crichton's "Next," Vince Flynn's "Executive Power," Stephen Hunter's "Point of Impact," and Albert Camus's "The Stranger," among others.

Bush likes history and non fiction books. Just like me.
online.wsj.com...

Originally posted by jibeho

Reading a Bio vs citing Mao as your favorite philosopher are two different things. I read Obama's "Dreams..." but he is certainly not one of my favorite Presidents. I've also read Mien Kampf but Hitler is not one of my favorite dictators or authors. It was an interesting history lesson.

Glad we agree then...cuz Rick Bookstaber cited a qoute by Marx in explaining the historical context of "class warfare" and the industrial revolution.

Or do you only engage your logic center in defense of Pres. GW Bush?

reply to post by Indigo5


He quoted Marx to justify class warfare that has been instigated on this nation since January of 2009.

"“I am not picking sides in this war,” he added, “but I believe such a war is justifiable, and indeed ultimately inevitable.”

Inevitable?? Really? I guess it is for those hellbent on stirring it up.

Everybody wants to place the blame on rich people..banks..etc. but not one of them will look at Our Government and Politicians as the true culprits who enabled the current debacle

Yeah and O did launch his re-election campaign on Marx's birthday.

If it looks like a marixist sounds like a marxist quacks like a marixst its a marxist.

After all do tell where does class warfare come from?

Class conflict.

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Indigo5

 

He quoted Marx to justify class warfare that has been instigated on this nation since January of 2009.

No he didn't...he qouted Marx discussing the length of the workday because it was relevant to the historical discussion of class warfare, which certainly did not begin in 2009. You are beyond delusional is your are choosing to forget all history before President Obama's nomination.

It is hard to discuss class warfare without referring back to the industrial revolution. Then class warfare centered on the length of the working day.

Originally posted by jibeho
"“I am not picking sides in this war,” he added, “but I believe such a war is justifiable, and indeed ultimately inevitable.”

When one qoute is propagandized by stripping it of all relevant content...you defend the lie by doing the same with a second qoute?

Here is is full qoute concerning your particular BS..

There is little that matches the artfulness in waving off criticism of the widening income gap as “class warfare”.

And there is little that matches the gullibility of those who follow along.

There seems to be agreement all around that action to change the situation, for the poor to improve their lot at the expense of the rich, is an affront to civil society.

I am not picking sides in this, but I believe such a "war" can be justified, and indeed ultimately is inevitable.

Why is "Class Warfare" in qoutes? Because that is the term right wing idealouges have chosen...He defines it as "struggle"

The introduction of class warfare marks a radical departure from the tenets of contemporary economics because as far as economics goes, the terms “class”, “warfare”, and “struggle” are, well, radicalized.

Yet there has been an epic, historical struggle over the length of the working day writ large, extending to issues like retirement, the definition of the time worked, and the share of economic rents, and this is the struggle that is still with us. Clearly fundamental to our economic history and our capitalist system, this is ignored in our economic studies.

And here is how he sees "struggle" between the classes as "inevitable in a democracy

Even admitting to the term “class warfare” concedes a lot.

To warn against class warfare only makes sense if there are classes, and more than that, if there might be a reason to be answered for one of the classes to do battle.

(For otherwise there is the simpler course of pointing out that no differences exist).

There is only so much to go around, and the efforts of one group or the other to assert a claim to a larger share can be called class warfare.

It can be a war waged through changes in the taxes, in a restructuring of incentives and pay scales, an increase in the benefits given to the poor, or revolt.

The first three are legitimate battlegrounds in a democratic society such as ours, and it is really taking a good joke to far to suggest it is damaging to the body politic for members of society to look at the differences in income and take action to redistribute in their direction.

BOTTOM LINE...A struggle between the wealthiest and the rest of the population has always existed and that struggle...or "Class Warfare" as right wing idealouges choose to call it in hopes of dismissing it....has always been debated...AND SHOULD BE DEBATED in a democracy...Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Over-time wages, OSHA, Minimum wages, Taxes, CEO Pay, Bailouts, Financial regulation...all of these and much, much more are expressions of the same struggle...a struggle and debate that is LEGITMATE in a free democracy...AND all of those were topics of debate long before 2009.

reply to post by Indigo5


But it's all about Perception isn't it.

And the fact remains he Did quote Marx one way or the other.

People will take a negative view when they see their fears.
(justified or not)

Perhaps you should comment on his blog. Seriously. He needs help right about now !


Here is a quote from Rick himself:

Rick BookstaberMay 8, 2012 7:12 AM

I have received a number of comments that are diatribes and I will not be publishing them. Some are offended by this post and view it as being "communist propaganda" because it includes a quote from Marx. It is natural to refer to Marx when speaking of the industrial revolution. Marx was a notable, even preeminent, social philosopher of that time.

It's all about Perception !!

reply to post by xuenchen


If they take it in a negative way then that is the readers fault. It isn't the authors, he isn't to blame for people that do not have strong reading comprehension skills or a understanding of history.