“You Didn’t Build That” = Marxism’s “Labor Is Theft”

As my dislike for the current occupant of the White House grows and festers, I see more and more of the clandestine socialist in him. His throwaway insult during the 2012 election about those who would claim ownership of, and credit for the businesses they built has a deeper meaning than merely his typical reflexive insult of anything remotely Republican, American and capitalist.

Classic Marxism sees the use of labor by the capitalist as theft, because the surplus value of labor is not returned to the worker. That of course is the basis for a market economy and capitalism, and without it we would be wallowing in filth and disease and living a “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” life, to expropriate Hobbes’ famous quotation.

In all likelihood Obama doesn’t understand the connection between his words and Marxism, but he doesn’t have to. The message is clear, if subtle, and he learned his lessons well, even though he is just parroting them.

3 comments on ““You Didn’t Build That” = Marxism’s “Labor Is Theft”
  1. Choom Boy, like a vast majority of his fellow Marxist/socialist liberals, considers himself worthy of enjoying “stolen” labor while denying same to the populace. He is the commissar, not the laborer.

    He is very much kin to religious leaders who exhort their flocks to live austere lives while residing in marble palaces. It is not hypocrisy; rather, they simply cannot see (and do not believe) that the rules apply to them as well.

    The Mocha Messiah “understands the connection” all too well. At heart, he is at least as greedy as Donald Trump, but has learned to cloak his self-centered grasping in worthless liberal platitudes. The despicable failure of a human being knows exactly what he is doing, and enjoys it.

  2. On reading Marx, I was shocked by the risible intellectual underpinnings of his system of political economy: the labor theory of value.

    This was the calculating engine that Marx relied upon. It posits that the economic value by labor added results from the time and effort expended by labor to produce the good.

    Why anyone takes any of this seriously is beyond understanding. So a worker filling a pothole with a teaspoon of asphalt at a time is adding more value than one using a skiploader of asphalt?

    It implicitly presupposes a crafts-type of economy, rather than a modern industrial one. In short, it’s ridiculous, and with it falls Marx’s entire edifice.

    • His public edifice. Marx knew that the romantic ideals of Marxism would be attractive to a certain portion of the population….the dumb-asses.

      The intelligent ones understand that Marxism is all about power and control, and has at its core the manipulation of the proletariat, not its freedom from wage slavery (whatever that is).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *