Gregory Ip: Occupy Wall Street Not Coddled Enough

This Sunday morning, I turned on the television and tuned in C-Span channel. There, during a call-in show, I heard Gregory Ip, a prognosticator from The Economist, say the most amazing things.

First, he astounded me by making the claim that “underwater” homeowners were largely there by absolute happenstance and through no fault of their own. Specifically, he blamed low wages as the catalyst. By accepting such paltry wages, these homeowners were “forced” (this he actually says) to take out mortgages far beyond their capability to repay in order to keep up their standard of living. Being somewhat involved in another activity, I turned to the television screen and uttered, “What?” but there was no response other than Ip continuing on. He thereupon added that not only were these new mortgages forced but they were of the most “exotic” type. By now my eyes were bugged out of my head. Let me get this straight – a certain expected standard of living could not be supported by low wages and therefore we blame the wage and not the expectation? It was to me a slap in the face that the C-Span host did not interject such a retort. Let me reiterate this for clarity: Ip conveyed to a national audience that human beings have no responsibility to live in reality, and that essentially we ought to blame the business-owner for the plight of his worker. I will now state the obvious: (1) no one forced that worker to take that job for that wage, (2) no one forced that worker to remain at that job for that wage, (3) no one forced that worker to buy a home based on future expectations of wage growth or climbing home value, (4) no one forced that worker to remain in that home when it became apparent that wages were not going to rise, (5) no one forced that worker to take a second or third mortgage, and certainly not of any “exotic” variety. I am of all things livid at the use of the word “exotic” because it places in the mind an image of a very haughty and mean-spirited banker coercing into bankruptcy a helpless mortgagee.

Ip’s ideology is worse than misguided, for it enables the shirking of personal responsibility. Up to this day I cannot recall any person saying that the worker/homeowner did not share at least some of the blame for his or her actions. This begins a new paradigm of which I predict you will see more televised, and you will be angered and appalled that many “underwater” homeowners will begin protesting their own actions but placing the onus and blame on mortgagors. Is it now the fault of others for actions we as free will beings take? Was it not under the worker’s power to find a better job? No? Then was it not under the worker’s power to find a smaller home? No? Then was it not under the worker’s power to find individuals in like situations and to band together for a concerted financial power? If the answer is No here, it indicates only one thing: that these workers/homeowners expect to maintain a certain standard of living without the commensurate wage, and that is not a demand but a pipedream.

This leads to the next step, which is Marxism. Notice that Ip has tapped into the “grievance,” the heart of Marxist power. How many workers have wages too low for their expectations? How many homeowners believe they were tricked into signing “exotic” paperwork? Since the answer is “Many, many,” the Marxist has his power bloc of aggrieved Victims. The Oppressor class is expanded from merely bankers now to business owners, which fits the Marxist template. If you will recall from our previous Synopses, it is the superstructure of capitalism which forces the worker to accept wages too low for the production he provides. Capitalism is therefore slavery. The final piece of the puzzle, the Savior, is provided in anti-capitalism, that is, socialism, the economic arm and power of communism.

Ip is therefore in this respect a pure Marxist.

Second, Ip turned to Occupy Wall Street and made the obvious topical connection: that these “folks” (protesters) were angry that they had borrowed tens of thousands of dollars for an education which they now find to be useless in their current endeavor to secure work. A few things here: (1) keen competition for scarce jobs will cause anyone, even without a college education, to become frustrated, (2) the proliferation of non-technical degrees (such as “classical studies”) causes an overabundance of wrongly-skilled college graduates in the work marketplace, (3) didn’t Ip say only moments before that wages were anyway not going to meet current standard of living expectations?

I am not here going to comment on the factual economic “bubble” as a cause of frustration. It is in many ways tangential to the argument in that (1) the “magical thinking” caused by such bubbles is not normally a universal phenomenon, and (2) magical thinking is normally cured by bubbles bursting. We currently have a burst bubble and yet the magical thinking continues! Where is the necessary brass-tacks thinking necessary to survive this economic phase?

It seems to me that even sensible leadership in the political and business arenas are in this respect being ignored. Those who are pushing for personal responsibility and belt-tightening as a commonsense attitude for the present situation are being mocked. In fact, they are being vilified for having the temerity to remain successful while others have no such outlook. What should these leaders do – surrender their wealth so that the mob will not tear them to pieces? Apparently that is not only the attitude of various manic crowds, including Occupy Wall Street, but also of certain pseudo-intellectuals, such as Gregory Ip, who have decided to turn the anger of the mob towards anything which smells of stability. The motivations of those who misdirect in this fashion is not certain but seems to boil down to three: (1) ignorance of mob mentality and the dangers thereof, (2) use of mob mentality as a method of revenge against ideological enemies (whether that means against capitalists or simply competitors in the marketplace, it makes no difference to the bloody outcome), and (3) use of mob mentality as a method of diversion. Of this third type, one might count as a member Barack Obama, who with great problems of his own seeks to deflect attention away from his administration’s blunders and intentional missteps; or one might cite Roseanne Barr, who has called for guillotines in the streets while she herself is a multi-millionaire with a great mansion in Hawaii.

But perhaps the most jaw-dropping of Ip’s conclusions is that since both the standard of living and the educational dreams of college students are (currently) beyond their grasp, their sin of envy must be immediately forgiven, even as atrocities stemming from such sin are daily being committed. In other words, those of us cozy in our homes watching our society’s fabric being undone should not judge the actions of any OWS protester at any time because their anger is justified. Is it? I submit that their expectations far exceed their money-making abilities, both for the economic environment and their educational choices, not to mention their lack of competitive fire. Furthermore, they choose not camaraderie, not even commiseration, in their morass but a socialized environment where those capitalist attitudes which just months ago were fire in the belly have now turned to putrid elements to be purged, and in vile, non-constructive ways.

Ip is the worst of the lot. He does not actually join their protest. He possibly laughs behind their back. Yet he uses them as a backdrop for his economic precepts which have no value in the real world, thus exacerbating the frustrations of the protester. His ideas about fairness in matters of wages and home prices are entirely communist and thus antithetical to so-called fair demands (they are not) against greedy capitalists (they are not). Ip is the Trojan inside the Trojan horse; a moldy prize inside a long-expired box of Cracker Jacks. He is the communist behind the uninitiated. He is a puppeteer.

We should not, however, dismiss Ip as a dolt. His message is well-structured and well-delivered to a group long receptive. Our counter-message has been poisoned by his kind. Our promise of liberty has been tainted by his accusation of unfairness. Our Tea Party has been called racist while theirs has not been called rapist. I am sorry to report that they are winning the message war with their propaganda. This means our youth, in some cases our own children and grandchildren, blame us directly for their problems. They take no personal responsibility, are easily led to Oppressors, and seek desperately for a Savior.

We must provide them with one, and not Karl Marx or of his disciples.