Skip to comments.Joe Stack's "manifesto" ends by bashing Capitalism and quoting Marx!
Posted on 02/18/2010 9:25:45 PM PST by ETL
"but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer," the note continued. " ...
The communist creed:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
The capitalist creed:
From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed."
The posting, dated Feb. 18, was signed "Joe Stack (1956-2010)."
Troubling Portrait Emerges of Pilot Who Crashed Into Texas Building:
Obama Espoused Radical Views in College
(advocated communist revolution!)
Steve Malzberg - WOR News Talk Radio 710 ^ | February 12, 2010 | Ronald Kessler
Posted on Friday, February 12, 2010 7:33:56 PM by ETL
Dr. John C. Drew, a grant writing consultant in Laguna Niguel, Calif., tells Newsmax he met Obama in 1980 when Obama was a sophomore at Occidental College in Los Angeles. Drew had just graduated from Occidental and was attending graduate school at Cornell University.
During Christmas break, Drew says he was at Grauman-Boss home in Palo Alto when Obama came over with Mohammed Hasan Chandoo, his roommate from Pakistan.
Barack [Obama] and Hasan showed up at the house in a BMW, and then we went to a restaurant together, Drew says. We had a nice meal, and then we came back to the house and smoked cigarettes and drank and argued politics.
For the next several hours, they discussed Marxism.
He [Obama] was arguing a straightforward Marxist-Leninist class-struggle point of view, which anticipated that there would be a revolution of the working class, led by revolutionaries, who would overthrow the capitalist system and institute a new socialist government that would redistribute the wealth, says Drew, who says he himself was then a Marxist.
The idea was basically that wealthy people were exploiting others, Drew says. That this was the secret of their wealth, that they werent paying others enough for their work, and they were using and taking advantage of other people. He was convinced that a revolution would take place, and it would be a good thing.
Drew concluded that Obama thought of himself as part of an intelligent, radical vanguard that was leading the way towards this revolution and towards this new society. ..."
Referring to Obamas quote from Dreams of My Father that he associated with Marxist professors, Drew says, What hes not saying is that he was in 100 percent total agreement with those Marxist professors. When you understand that, Obamas later associations and policies make more sense, including why he was taken in by Rev. Wrights ideology.
Pelosi already accused him of being a teabagger terrorist.
Pelosie is not going to hide her crimes behind these things very long. This bodes very ill.
It’s all communist protection agencies at the hands of government from here on out, all influenced by criminalist lawyers like Pelosie.
And yet TIME magazine is trying to make him sound like a Tea Party activist!
This guy is straight out of the Hopey Changey Delusionaries.
He was rambling. I didn’t read it as bashing capitalism — just bashing the pseudo-capitalism that our increasingly socialist-Marxist government is imposing on us.
Why, of all things, did he choose the following to conclude his "manifesto"? The first one is a quote from Karl Marx. The second is a slap in the face to Capitalism. When are we going to stop making excuses for the blatantly obvious?
The communist creed:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
The capitalist creed:
From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.
The posting, dated Feb. 18, was signed "Joe Stack (1956-2010)."
Businessmen have existed for thousands of years, and old civilizations have dealt with them and quantified their characteristics before Karl Marx and Adam Smith wrote about them and the GOP/Dem established philosophies in dealing with them.
My favorite is from the Far East, ancient Chinese/Korean kings would advise their crown princes the following - “Merchant class is important to a kingdom because they produce significant wealth for the realm. However merchants are capable of being wicked and greedy. They can corrupt officials and cheat the people. A wise ruler always keep an eye on them. If they are caught, a ruler must find a way to punish the guilty ones without destroying the rest of the merchants’ abilities to make money.”
In other words, Dems tend to punish all businessmen for the misbehavior of the few, while the GOP tend to trust and protect all businessmen including the wicked ones. Neither approach is good for this country.
Yep. He went on & on about crony capitalism, i.e. capitalism corrupted by big government control & collusion, which is what we have now. In addition, he was pretty much anti-everything. Very negative. Only positive thing in there was the unmodified Communist creed. Hard to categorize, but a 60s-reject, counter-culture, commie sympathizer with anarchist tendencies IMHO.
He was also very anti-religion.
Isn't that from some Michael Douglas movie? This guy was warped by Hollywood I think.
He was a disenchanted liberal who didn't hang on long enough to become a conservative. His mostly valid anger at the outrages of the system got tangled up with his expectations of the system serving people in a liberal fashion, rather than a limited government fashion. And hell hath no fury as a liberal scorned.
Someone should dig up his voting record and political registration over the years - I'd bet he was a lifelong registered democrat. And that fact, once established, should be shoved in Pelosi's ugly face very publically.
Voter registration records are public information, so that should not be hard to do.
Intensely negotiated actors in Hellywood should talk!
Anyhow, it can’t be to anybody “according to his greed” unless he has something to sell that somebody else will buy, and both in sufficient quantity.
Sounds Like Obama should have been this Guy Stacks Co-Pilot
He was a liberal who, apparently, didn't realize he was one of the dreaded, evil rich.
Probably by this afternoon you can find them in the same file as a particular birth certificate many of us have been trying to find...
Joe Stack apparently suffered from a catastrophe of faith.
His faith in government collapsed. This paints him as a progressive.
A hard core statist who in the end discovered the fraud in statism.
He was certainly a loony leftist.
Given the fact that he was so articulate in his writing, and apparently well educated, and CONCLUDES his "manifesto" by quoting Karl Marx while slapping Capitalism, I'd say he had a pretty well established political philosophy.
I interpreted the couplet at the end as pointing out the similarity between the Marxist system and the corrupt pseudo-capitalist system that has been imposed on our country. Not praising Marxism (because certainly nothing else in the letter did that), but pointing out that corrupt pseudo-capitalism doesn’t offer any more freedom than Marxism.
I think his point (poorly articulated) was that government is enabling "capitalist" greed that takes advantage of hard-working citizens. And it's true -- government forces us to buy things we don't want, and certain "capitalist" allies of government profit immensely as a result. I don't want to buy free medical care for drug addicts, lazy bums, and illegal immigrants, but the government confiscates my money to buy those things, and it creates a huge windfall for pharmaceutical and medical supply companies, among others. I also don't want to buy housing subsidies for low and modest income people to acquire huge homes with swimming pools, etc, and yet I was forced to buy this, with the government artificially creating mountains of cheap money for people to borrow to do this, and artificially incentivizing people to do this through tax deductions for home mortgages, and then forcing me to buy more of this when the financial house of cards collapsed and the government provided huge bailouts to the companies that financed all this (while their original executives had long since run off with millions in profits).
The Last Flight of Joe Stack
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Joseph Stack, frustrated American, flew his airplane into an Austin, Texas, office building. He was one of the 79 per cent of Americans who have given up on their government.
The latest Rasmussen Poll indicates that the vast majority of Americans are convinced that their government is totally unresponsive to them, their concerns, and their needs. Rasmussen found that only 21 per cent of the American population agree that the U.S. government has the consent of the governed, and that 21 per cent is comprised of the political class itself and liberals. Rasmussen concludes that the gap between the American population and the politicians who rule them may be as big today as the gap between the colonies and England during the 18th century.
Indications are that Joseph Stack was sane. Like Palestinians faced with Israeli jet fighters, helicopter gunships, tanks, missiles and poison gas, Stack realized that he was powerless. A suicide attack was the only weapon left to him.
Stack targeted the IRS, the federal agency that had gratuitously ruined him. He flew his airplane into an office building occupied by 200 members of the IRS. This deliberate plan and the written explanation he left behind segregate him from deranged people who randomly shoot up a Post Office or university campus.
The government and its propaganda ministry do not want to call Stack a terrorist. Terrorist is a term the government reserves for Muslims who do not like what Israel does to Palestinians and the U.S. government does to Muslim countries.
But Stack experienced the same frustrations and emotions as Muslims who cant take it any longer and strap on a suicide vest.
Violence, Stack wrote, not only is the answer, it is the only answer. Stack concluded that nothing short of violence will get the attention of a government that has turned its back on the American people.
Anger is building up. People are beginning to do unusual things. Terry Hoskins bulldozed his house rather than allow a bank to foreclose on it. The local TV station conducted an online survey and found that 79 per cent of respondents agreed with Hoskins action.
Perhaps the turning point was the federal governments bailout of the investment banks whose reckless misbehavior diminished Americans retirement savings for the second time in eight years. Now a former head of the most culpable bank is campaigning to cut Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits in order to pay for the bailout. President Obama has obliged him by creating a deficit commission.
The deficit commission will be used to gut Social Security, just as the private insurance health plan is paid for by cutting $500 billion out of Medicare.
It could not be more clear that government represents the interest groups that finance the election campaigns.
Conservatives used to say that Washingtons power should be curtailed in behalf of state and local governments that are closer to the people. But of course state and local governments are also controlled by interest groups.
Consider Florida, for example. In 2004 the storm surge from Hurricane Ivan did considerable damage to the Gulf Coast of the Florida panhandle. At Inlet Beach in Walton County, the surge claimed two beachfront homes and washed away enough of the high ground as to leave other homes vulnerable to the next storm.
People wanted to armor their homes with some form of sea wall. When the county gave the go ahead, two houses on the West end hired engineers who constructed a barrier made of rows of tubes 60 feet long filled with sand, each weighing about 70 tons. The sand-colored tubes were buried under many tons of white sand trucked in, and sea oats were planted. It was a perfect solution, and an expensive one—$250,000.
Just east of the two homes, Ivan washed away a section of beach front road and left three houses built on pilings sitting on the beach. Last year government with FEMA money rebuilt the section of washed away beachfront road and armored it and two adjacent houses. The government used interlocking iron or steel panels that it drove down into the sand, leaving six to seven feet of the rusty metal above ground. Hundreds of truck loads of sand were brought in to cover the unsightly sea wall.
It didnt require a storm to wash away the loose sand and leave the ugly rusty metal exposed on the beach. The first high tide did the trick. Residents and vacationers are left with an eyesore on a beach ranked as the third most beautiful in the world.
The ugly rusty barrier built by government is still there. But the intelligent approach taken by the private homeowners has been condemned to death. As I write heavy equipment is on the beach slashing open the tubes and piling up the sand to be carried away. The homes will be left standing on the edge and will be undermined by the next hurricane.
Why did this happen? The official reason given by Floridas Department of Environmental Policy is that the county could only issue a temporary permit. Only DEP can issue a permanent permit, and as the homeowners dont have DEPs permanent permit, out goes the expensive, carefully engineered and unobtrusive sea wall.
This is the way government works for ordinary citizens. For the vast majority of people, government exists as a persecution mechanism that takes great pleasure in ruining their lives and pocketbooks. The DEP has inflicted heavy stress on the homeowners, now elderly, and could bring on a heart attack or stroke.
The real explanation for DEPs merciless treatment of citizens is that the agency is powerless against developers. It cannot stop them from destroying the Everglades, from destroying wetlands, from polluting rivers, or from building in front of the coastal setback line. As the state politicians protect developers from the DEP, the only people against whom the DEP can use its authority are unrepresented citizens. Frustrated itself, the DEP lashes out at powerless citizens.
In the small settlement of Inlet Beach, there are numerous examples of developers getting what they want. Over the years hurricanes have eaten away the beach and the dunes. As this occurs the setback line for construction moves inland. Back when the real estate bubble was being created by Alan Greenspans irresponsibly low interest rate policy, small beach front lots were going for one million dollars. In the midst of this frenzy, a well connected developer bought a beach front lot for $30,000.
The lot was not recognizable as such. It sits on flat land on the beach. Decades ago it was a lot, but as the Gulf ate away the coast, the lot is now positioned in front of the setback line. The developer got the lot for the low price, because no one had been able to get a building permit for years.
But the developer got a permit. According to the head of the neighborhood association at the time, the developer went to a DEP official, whose jurisdiction was another part of the state and who was a former employee of the developer, and was issued a permit. Because of its exposure, during the real estate boom the house sat unsold for years. The community, which had opposed the project, concluded that the developer just wanted to show that he was more powerful than the law.
Currently, on six acres next to a state park on the East end of Inlet Beach another well connected developer has obtained DEP permission to compromise Walton Countys highest and last remaining sand dunes held in place with native vegetation in order to build 20 houses. To protect the houses, DEP has issued a permit for the construction of a fifteen foot high man-made sand wall, a marketing device that will offer little protection.
According to information sent to me, nine of the houses will be seaward of the Coastal Construction Control line. Apparently this was a result of the developer being represented by a former county attorney, who convinced the commissioners to allow the developer to plan on the basis of the 1996 FEMA flood plain maps instead of using the current 2007 maps. Since 1996 there have been a number of hurricanes, such as Dennis and Ivan, and the set back line has moved inward.
When state and local governments allow developers to set aside the rules governing flood-plain development, they create insurance losses that drive up the insurance premiums for everyone in the community. The disturbance of the natural dunes could result in a breach through which storm surge can damage nearby properties. Instead of protecting people, government is allowing a developer to impose costs of his project on others.
Joseph Stack, Terry Hoskins, and 79 per cent of the American population came to the realization that government does not represent them. Government represents monied interests for whom it bends the rules designed to protect the public, thus creating a legally privileged class.
In contrast, as at the West end of Inlet Beach, ordinary citizens are being driven into the ground.
This is what we call freedom and democracy.
Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury during the Reagan administration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.