Liberté, égalité, fraternité

I am stealing a bit from a post over at Ed's place. I am not sure this is really where he was going with his post, but as I think further about it, I see the end game for the progressive movement.

In recent years the political conversation has moved steadily to one of "need" . Obama and his cronies are always talking about our needs (I am going to dispense with the quotation marks around "need" as I find it tiresome). Early in his Presidency Obama told us we do not need to keep our houses so warm in the winter and so cool in the summer. he said American use way more energy than they should (read 'need'). We are told that at some point you do not need all of that money you are making.  You are advised that some people have better health insurance than they need, so 'Cadillac Policies" are taxed under ObamaCare.

Much of the current gun control debate centers on what you need.  You hear Feinstein and other gun-grabbers postulate that you do not need a scary black plastic semi-automatic rifle. After all, it is not good for hunting. It is not a big jump to argue you do not need more than one gun. You see, the notion that the scary black semi-automatic rifles are rarely used in crimes is irrelevant, it is about confiscation of firearms.

Back in the day you heard Sierra Club types complain that people did not need a Hummer. Now as far as I know every single owner of the Hummer in its various forms bought and paid for the vehicle and gas themselves, so for me, who cares what they drive? But rest assured Obama and your typical liberal looks at your pickup and your SUV/crossover and wonders why you need such a big gas hog. You are not in the farm or construction industry.  You do not haul big loads. Trust me, before the next President is elected the question of why you need a big car will be in the national discussion.

We must do all we can to discourage the conversation turning to one of discussing needs. Every time a liberal starts a sentence with "You do not need..." we must respond with "Need has nothing to do with it". Rights have nothing whatsoever to do with need. Capitalism is not based in need.

 I do not need a three car garage. I do not need a an SUV. I do not need a 'fridge in my garage. I do not need a humidor filled with imported cigars rolled between the thighs of luscious maidens in some far-off Caribbean Island or Central American country.  I don't need a smart phone or computer or big screen TV. I do not need some bureaucrat or governmental flunkies making life decisions for me and my family.

Is there and endgame to moving the conversation to one of need? Progressives like to discuss needs, because that is how they think.  Capitalism is fueled by greed in their mind. It caters to wants. For your typical liberal, there should not be profit in basic necessities. Food, shelter, health care should be free for everyone. No one should have better or best. I do not need to be eating a steak when you are munching on a generic brand hot dog.

Once the conversation becomes one of needs, then we are finally closer to the real goal: a society based on working to one's ability and receiving according to one's needs.