Hillary Clinton is a Socialist by her own admission. In a speech back in June 2004, Hillary said, "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." And in June 2007, she said, "(We).....can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people. ... We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own ... in order to create this common ground."
In that same speech, Ms Clinton displayed her Marxism-inspired economic ignorance with the inane statement: "I certainly think the free-market has failed."
I suppose we should not be surprised that Hillary Clinton has nothing but disdain for the free market system. She has no idea what it is. She has never had to participate in it. And while she's been indoctrinated with the economic misconceptions in Das Capital, she's never read Wealth Of Nations. She thinks the "invisible hand" is hers – in the public till.
When in May 2007, Hillary said, "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few ... And to replace it with shared responsibility, for shared prosperity," she was touting Socialism, but she was inadvertently describing the free market system.
By "shared responsibility for shared prosperity," Ms Clinton meant government confiscation of wealth from what she called in 2005 " the most profitable sector in (the) economy" for distribution to the least productive sector. Actually, of course, it's the shared responsibility to provide a product and to make a profit in a free and active market that shares the prosperity of capitalism with the workers and with the consumers.
It is the inherent wealth distribution of capitalism that bootstrapped humanity up from feudalism to the universal prosperity of industrialism. Socialism cannot even create wealth, let alone "share" it. Socialism, in fact, won't even work in a civilized society.
First of all, socialism won't work because it runs counter to human nature. Man is not a social animal. He is a rabidly individualistic and competitive creature who can survive in a social environment only with the restraints of laws and law enforcement. He is simply not constructed to be able to exist in an utopian state of harmony with his fellows. It's not the Socialistic bugaboo of wealth that causes dissension in human societies – it's human greed. And egalitarian fantasies will not eliminate it.
Secondly, even if we could eliminate the natural tendency for humans to compete with each other, we wouldn't want to. Heraclites said, "Palemos pater panton" – "strife is the father of everything." It is precisely the conflict of competition that has enabled man to evolve from a nomadic hunter-gatherer to the first animal from this planet to walk on the moon.
Hillary Clinton is on the wrong side of history. She's pushing a system that was obsoleted 10,000 years ago when man invented agriculture, which in turn necessitated the invention of civilization. Socialism – the equal sharing of all wealth within the group – can exist only at the family-tribe level, where familial affections and responsibilities override natural human aggressiveness and selfishness. When Hillary Clinton speaks of "moving into the future," she's actually talking about a return to the past – a regression to the atavistic social structure of the Neanderthals.
"I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched." – Hillary Clinton, 2 September 2005