Wal-Mart: Convert to Economic Fascism ("A Government Big Enough To Give You Everythig You Want Is Big Enough...........")

We have to define "economic fascism" again, because people hear "fascism" and think Hitler. "Economic fascims" is defined as a central planning "partnership" between Big Goveenment and Big Business to control the economy--which means basically to CONTROL every aspect of your life. Think "energy audit" by a Federal Government employee befor you can sell your home. Think of the fascists at IBM using computers to tell you when you can turn on oyr lights, or otherwise control the way you use electricity in your own home. Anoter definition (by someone else) of "economic fascism": "Socialism with a capitalist veneer".


It does not have anything to do with Hitler's "Final Solution", but it is true that this kind of central plainning, Big Government control inevitably leads to a LOSS OF FREEDOM. Central planners need to CONTROL. Control is the essence of central planning See, again, Orwell's "1984", which shows you exactly where this leads. To complete the quote in the title (from Thomas Jefferson, I think, although there is a--gold!!!!--commercial out there attributing it to that great thinker, Gerald Ford); A government big benough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."


Yep. Wal-Mart is the latest convert to economic fascism. One of those stories last week was that Wal-Mart had come out in favor of MANDATORY (on a Federal level) employer health insurance. It is difficult for me to shop at another store (no car, and Wal-Mart in walking distance), but I feel like saying: BOYCOTT WAL-MART. As you know, I have already told you to BOYCOTT IBM, and later "global warming" events have altready proven I was right to declare IBM lost to economic fascism.


Why did Wal-Mart, which has not been a model of providing great benefits for employees and has fought unionization, come out for ECONMIC FASCISM? Easy. Wal-Mart knows it is in the cross-hairs, and wants to USE the government to "save" itself. Wal-Mart is BIG. If EVERY employer is required to have expensive health insurance, does that help or hurt Wal-Mart? It HELPS Wal-Mart, because Wal-Mart can better afford it than its comeptitors. Further, it HELPS Wal-Mart avoid unionization, while the mere advocacy of this Big Brother approach to killing our economy enables Wal-Mart (with crocodile tears) to claim "concern" for employees. If the GOVERNMENT is FORCING employers to provide a certain kind of helath care, why do employees need UNIONS?


I got this informatiion abut Wal-Mart from Paul Gigot on Fox this past Saturday. Paul Gigot's reaction: "Conservatives are dluded if they consider big business as their natural ally."


Exactly right. Business empire people BELIEVE IN CENTRAL PLANNING. They just want to be part of the POWER GROUP, and to control the central planning in the way they want. To them, "economic fascism" is extremly, irresistably seductive.


But conservatives, INCLUDING THE WALL STREET "CONSERVATIVES" AT THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, where Gigot works, fail to take the next step. The reason is obvious, in the case of people at the Wall Street Journal, because that is a "special interest" paper which considers its "job" as representing Wall Street (mostly fascist, these days). It is not so clear why other conservatives are so blind.


Yep. This Wal-Mart story, and Gigot's correct reaction, is yet more proof of what this blog has told you for years: Big Business empires, especially those caused by MERGER, are the worst threat faced by conservatism. They not only contradict free market theory, but the business empires are then USED by leftists to impose Big Government on us. Look what has happened! Not only has "too big to fail" resulted in the present vast expansion of government, but the Obama Administration is now directly USING Big Business as a central planning partner. It does not matter that big business will regret it. The damage will be done.

Now Wal-Mart is a little different than most big American corporations. It basically became big by efficiency, rather than Big Mergers. That does not change that big mergers are a DISASTER for conserastives, and for the country. "Too big to fail" has PROVEN that. It does not matter, however, that Wal-Mart became big by operating efficiently. It now wants to STAY BIG, and get bigger, by USING government--by embracing this economic fascism whereby Big Government and Big Business become PARTNERS. If that does not scare you to death, you do not know what is going on.


Why do Wall Street, and the Wall Street Journal, like big mergers? You know the answer to that one. In the short run (if you think this is true in the long run, consider "too big to fail" again, and the FAILURE of big business central planning), mergers HELP stock prices. Further, mergers generate BIG FEES for invetment bankers/brokerage houses. That is why Paul Gigot refuses to take the logical step of condeming big mergers, and acknowledging the pubic policy idiocy of alowing big mergers to occur. Big Drug and Big Oil have been CREATED by big mergers, and it has been a DISASTR for conservatism. Why conservatives outside of Wall Strett do not see this is beyond me, other than they have a knee jerk reaction to government "interference". Note that stopping big mergers does not represent government interference in ANY BUSINESS. It merely protects the free market from destruction. In other words, that type of "interference" represents ony interferene with Wall Street, and corporate empire builders who do not believe in free markets, rather than "interfernce" in the freem markets themselves.


Until conservatives realize that bug business empires, especailly those created by merger, have the same central planning defects as Big Government, conservatism has a big problem. As Paul Gigot says, the Big Government and Big Business are "natural allies", until (like Hitler and Stalin) they eventually fall out and government dominates. That combination is presently KILLING consrvatism, and yet conservatives refuse to come to the logical conclusion that big businesss is the enemy of conservatism.


It is not the enemy the way leftists perceive big business to be the "enemy"--an "exploiter" of workers and other people that needs to be NCONTROLLED as part of an overall central planning empire. Big Business is the enemy of conservatism simply because it is so very SIMILAR to Big Gvovernment, and inevitably leads to Big Government (to address "too big to fail" and all of the rest).