Serving "public" interests or "private" interests

© 2016 Jim Spence - Arthur Schlesinger wrote a book entitled, “The Cycles of American History.” The book was published thirty years ago. Unfortunately, Schlesinger had a problem with basic logic. It began almost immediately in the book when he made the same bogus assumption most Democrats make. He assumed that Democrats serve the “public” interests, while Republicans more selfishly serve, “private interests.”
In the book Schlesinger attempts to build a flimsy case of “cycles,” wherein American voters alter course fairly regularly between leaning towards favoring "public" and then "private" interests.
I posed a couple of questions to the Democrat who recommended this book to me a few decades ago. The same two questions continue to go unanswered to this day.
Question 1: John D. Rockefeller built his Standard Oil empire after the Civil War. In doing so he facilitated quantum leaps forward in living standards and also saved whales from extinction (whales were hunted for their oil). Rockefeller became fabulously wealthy. So here is the question: In the aggregate, did Rockefeller serve the public interests or private interests?
Since most Democrats are reflexively envious and/or suspicious of wealth, they quickly answer – Rockefeller served PRIVATE interests, without any reservations.
Question 2: Rockefeller donated more than 95% of his accumulated wealth to charities before his death. He also established the University of Chicago and contributed generously to many other institutions. He bequeathed untold millions to the Rockefeller Foundation, which has funded some of the most important medical breakthroughs in history. Rockefeller left a small fraction of his wealth to his heirs. Today the Rockefeller heirs are mostly limousine riding Democrats who rail at Standard Oil’s successor (Exxon Mobil), as if it is some sort of public pariah. Again this begs the question: did Rockefeller with all he did for living standards all around the world, medical science etc. serve the “public” or “private” interests? 
This is usually when the silence sets in and the subject changing process begins.
The election of Donald Trump is nothing if not instructive about what types of people might best serve the public interests. Watching Democrats writhe in anguish and bathe deeply in their hypocrisy is profoundly illuminating. Democrats pretend that anyone pursuing business interests is cloaked in a degree of selfishness that all squeaky clean government employed bureaucrats are somehow immune from. This is delusional and here is why.
We are to forget the bureaucrats who thought it was a great idea to piss away billions of other people's dollars on bankrupt alternative energy companies because they bundled campaign funds for Mr. Obama in 2008 and again in 2012. We are to forget the hordes of crony capitalists who have been slurping at the public troughs under Mr. Obama’s watch. We are to forget about hundreds of highly paid individuals working at the V.A. who seem unwilling to manage that government system so that returning vets can get the health care they earned while trying to dodge bullets and bombs overseas. We should also forget the thousands of highly compensated Pentagon bureaucrats living luxurious lifestyles in Virginia and Maryland who refuse to reform their resource management incompetence because it might affect next year’s budget allocation.
According to Schlesinger and the Democrats, all people who cash government paychecks are, dedicated “public” servants, and all business people are by default, prone to be influenced by dangerous conflicts of interest.
You can understand what is going on with the news media and higher education and their false narratives on public and private interests in the wake of last month’s election. We are now to believe that because Donald Trump continues to own stakes in hundreds of businesses, these overwhelming conflicts actually disqualify him from serving any “public” interests. This is the most convenient self-serving argument yet for institutionalizing incompetence, lethargy, and sloth. The idea that business people are disqualified from serving after winning elections, by virtue of their selfish ways, is the essence of the Democrat's absurd delusions.
If you talk politics with Democrats you will get a sense of the moral superiority they believe they possess when compared to all business people. They are morally superior by virtue of the fact that they are not business people. The condescension is subtle sometimes, but quite overt most of the time. The only way a business person can get a moral pass from a Democrat is if they embrace the notion that more government power over everyone is always the solution to every problem.
So here we are in December of 2016. A businessman is preparing to take the oath of office next month. He has the backing of pro-business majorities in both the House and the Senate. America has turned away from government worship. As this process unfolds, Democrats are continuing to make some of the most inane assertions ever uttered. They don’t simply want Trump to put his vast holdings in a blind trust, which is not required by law, they want him to sell every business interest he owns immediately. Check out this enormous list of his holdings in a recent filing.
A forced sale of his holdings would fetch what all forced sales fetch......very low prices for everything he has built.
Just how absolutely absurd the idea of forcing the sale of everything in a short period of time is, would never occur to most Democrats. They simply can’t grasp the absurdity because they have lived lives as anti-business zealots. The idea of building things is foreign to them, let alone throwing these things away after they have been built. Ooops, I forgot, Mr. Obama made the assertion that business people didn’t build their businesses, the village did. Democrats lap up this kind of tripe every day.
In a speech in North Carolina last night Trump said America is going to become a wealthy nation again. He smiled and said this will be good. It is a sign of the times that Trump felt it necessary to remind America that being wealthy is good. Most Democrats are very much like the Rockefeller heirs. They think they came into existence to spend someone else’s wealth. They feel they have no duty whatsoever to learn where wealth comes from or how it gets created. Accordingly, they can’t understand why having someone leading the country who does know these things, is a very good idea.
Share/Bookmark