Instead of welcoming free debate, collectivists engage in character assassination.
I have devoted most of my life to understanding the principles that
enable people to improve their lives. It is those principles—the
principles of a free society—that have shaped my life, my family, our
company and America itself.
Unfortunately, the fundamental
concepts of dignity, respect, equality before the law and personal
freedom are under attack by the nation's own government. That's why, if
we want to restore a free society and create greater well-being and
opportunity for all Americans, we have no choice but to fight for those
principles. I have been doing so for more than 50 years, primarily
through educational efforts. It was only in the past decade that I
realized the need to also engage in the political process.
A truly free society is based on a vision of respect for people and what they value. In a truly free society, any business that disrespects its customers will fail, and deserves to do so. The same should be true of any government that disrespects its citizens. The central belief and fatal conceit of the current administration is that you are incapable of running your own life, but those in power are capable of running it for you. This is the essence of big government and collectivism.
More than 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson warned that this could happen. "The natural progress of things," Jefferson wrote, "is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." He knew that no government could possibly run citizens' lives for the better. The more government tries to control, the greater the disaster, as shown by the current health-care debacle. Collectivists (those who stand for government control of the means of production and how people live their lives) promise heaven but deliver hell. For them, the promised end justifies the means.
Instead of encouraging free and open debate, collectivists strive to discredit and intimidate opponents. They engage in character assassination. (I should know, as the almost daily target of their attacks.) This is the approach that Arthur Schopenhauer described in the 19th century, that Saul Alinsky famously advocated in the 20th, and that so many despots have infamously practiced. Such tactics are the antithesis of what is required for a free society—and a telltale sign that the collectivists do not have good answers.
Rather than try to understand my vision for a free society or accurately report the facts about ( ) Industries, our critics would have you believe we're "un-American" and trying to "rig the system," that we're against "environmental protection" or eager to "end workplace safety standards." These falsehoods remind me of the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan's observation, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Here are some facts about my philosophy and our company:
( ) companies employ 60,000 Americans, who make many thousands of products that Americans want and need. According to government figures, our employees and the 143,000 additional American jobs they support generate nearly $11.7 billion in compensation and benefits. About one-third of our U.S.-based employees are union members.
( ) employees have earned well over 700 awards for environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many of them from the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials have commended us for our "commitment to a cleaner environment" and called us "a model for other companies."
Our refineries have consistently ranked among the best in the nation for low per-barrel emissions. In 2012, our Total Case Incident Rate (an important safety measure) was 67% better than a Bureau of Labor Statistics average for peer industries. Even so, we have never rested on our laurels. We believe there is always room for innovation and improvement.
Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.
( ) Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers—many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol.
Instead of fostering a system that enables people to help themselves, America is now saddled with a system that destroys value, raises costs, hinders innovation and relegates millions of citizens to a life of poverty, dependency and hopelessness. This is what happens when elected officials believe that people's lives are better run by politicians and regulators than by the people themselves. Those in power fail to see that more government means less liberty, and liberty is the essence of what it means to be American. Love of liberty is the American ideal.
If more businesses (and elected officials) were to embrace a vision of creating real value for people in a principled way, our nation would be far better off—not just today, but for generations to come. I'm dedicated to fighting for that vision. I'm convinced most Americans believe it's worth fighting for, too.
Mr. Koch is chairman and CEO of Koch Industries.
http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303978304579475860515021286?mobile=y
A truly free society is based on a vision of respect for people and what they value. In a truly free society, any business that disrespects its customers will fail, and deserves to do so. The same should be true of any government that disrespects its citizens. The central belief and fatal conceit of the current administration is that you are incapable of running your own life, but those in power are capable of running it for you. This is the essence of big government and collectivism.
More than 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson warned that this could happen. "The natural progress of things," Jefferson wrote, "is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." He knew that no government could possibly run citizens' lives for the better. The more government tries to control, the greater the disaster, as shown by the current health-care debacle. Collectivists (those who stand for government control of the means of production and how people live their lives) promise heaven but deliver hell. For them, the promised end justifies the means.
Instead of encouraging free and open debate, collectivists strive to discredit and intimidate opponents. They engage in character assassination. (I should know, as the almost daily target of their attacks.) This is the approach that Arthur Schopenhauer described in the 19th century, that Saul Alinsky famously advocated in the 20th, and that so many despots have infamously practiced. Such tactics are the antithesis of what is required for a free society—and a telltale sign that the collectivists do not have good answers.
Rather than try to understand my vision for a free society or accurately report the facts about ( ) Industries, our critics would have you believe we're "un-American" and trying to "rig the system," that we're against "environmental protection" or eager to "end workplace safety standards." These falsehoods remind me of the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan's observation, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Here are some facts about my philosophy and our company:
( ) companies employ 60,000 Americans, who make many thousands of products that Americans want and need. According to government figures, our employees and the 143,000 additional American jobs they support generate nearly $11.7 billion in compensation and benefits. About one-third of our U.S.-based employees are union members.
( ) employees have earned well over 700 awards for environmental, health and safety excellence since 2009, many of them from the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. EPA officials have commended us for our "commitment to a cleaner environment" and called us "a model for other companies."
Our refineries have consistently ranked among the best in the nation for low per-barrel emissions. In 2012, our Total Case Incident Rate (an important safety measure) was 67% better than a Bureau of Labor Statistics average for peer industries. Even so, we have never rested on our laurels. We believe there is always room for innovation and improvement.
Far from trying to rig the system, I have spent decades opposing cronyism and all political favors, including mandates, subsidies and protective tariffs—even when we benefit from them. I believe that cronyism is nothing more than welfare for the rich and powerful, and should be abolished.
( ) Industries was the only major producer in the ethanol industry to argue for the demise of the ethanol tax credit in 2011. That government handout (which cost taxpayers billions) needlessly drove up food and fuel prices as well as other costs for consumers—many of whom were poor or otherwise disadvantaged. Now the mandate needs to go, so that consumers and the marketplace are the ones who decide the future of ethanol.
Instead of fostering a system that enables people to help themselves, America is now saddled with a system that destroys value, raises costs, hinders innovation and relegates millions of citizens to a life of poverty, dependency and hopelessness. This is what happens when elected officials believe that people's lives are better run by politicians and regulators than by the people themselves. Those in power fail to see that more government means less liberty, and liberty is the essence of what it means to be American. Love of liberty is the American ideal.
If more businesses (and elected officials) were to embrace a vision of creating real value for people in a principled way, our nation would be far better off—not just today, but for generations to come. I'm dedicated to fighting for that vision. I'm convinced most Americans believe it's worth fighting for, too.
Mr. Koch is chairman and CEO of Koch Industries.
http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303978304579475860515021286?mobile=y
I don't disapprove of the Koch brothers because of their politics or because of their "vision for America". I disapprove of them, and others like them, because they use their money to determine who shall get the nominations, which removes the ordinary non-billionaire voters from the election process. Anyone who believes that Congress isn't bought by the ultra wealthy for their own advantage is not paying attention.
ReplyDeleteIt would be funny to watch the alleged conservatives on this site react if Soros posted a similar letter. That Koch is actually publishing something like this shows that the pushback is actually getting to him. Of course, putting in the WSJ is like Thurston Howel running to his wife and yelling, "Luvy, they just don't get how much I do for them!"
ReplyDeleteWe have now gone full circle to what the founding fathers intended. They wanted to desegregate power away from the crown, but only down one level or so to the owners of capital, land and business. The government represents many (or used to anyway), Koch represents......Koch. He wants the concept of one man/one vote to be replaced by one man with many dollars = many votes or similar influence. The supremes agree.
William, Dylan wrote a song for folks like you a long time ago http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xpoc8r_only-a-pawn-in-their-game-bob-dylan_music
I don’t disagree in principle with the decisions of the Supreme Court.. after all, free speech is free speech and monies spent on promoting a political view is hardly shouting fire in a theatre. The decision doesn’t pass the smell test but neither does the argument.
ReplyDeleteI, like you Max intensely dislike the separation between the people and their ability to elect worthy individuals from a grass roots movement and I dislike the way the distribution of power in this country has eroded to an almost purely national top down hierarchy. The founders themselves recognized the dangers of political faction but even they succumbed to its inevitability, in my opinion, over one issue in particular.... The strength, size and reach of the national government. Almost all fighting has been about that and is probably the biggest reason parties have seemed to morph from one party into another. The absorption of southern democrats into the Republican Party had little to do with racism, although this is the advertised reason, but with states’ rights and the further concentration of power in Washington.
Of course I find the wailing of democrats over the relatively recent entry of the Koch brothers into the world of big money politics rather humorous. Firstly, as money goes, they are bit players in an otherwise well established big boys game and campaign reform has been a topic long before the Koch’s had the money to play. Soros is the biggest single player as his money spreads influence in every western country in the world.
I find it interesting that democrats hold out labor unions as something ‘of the people’ but constantly criticize the NRA as a lobbyist of corporations... I know lots of members.. my father was a life time member... I’m a still a member. Labor unions, like insurance companies, have used the organization of people to their advantage and that organization has not, certainly in recent years, been to the long term advantage of its members. If you want real reform then limit individual contributions and get rid of bundlers and bundler organizations.
As far as the Koch brothers explaining themselves, I would say in the world of influence peddling, they like Ron Paul, are having their influence squashed by much bigger money... you do what you can to get your message out. In my opinion every liberal organization both big and small has taken aim at them, not because of the money, because it is miniscule in comparison but because of the message. Freedom and liberty is not the message that liberals want their voters... particularly the more impressionable ones to hear.
wow! The Scott you all say we are the ignorant uninformed part of the electorate. Some historical facts for you. The Koch Brothers are hardly new comers to the political arena. Their support for Conservative candidates actually started in 1977 and intensified during the 80's with support for the Cato Institute, and the Citizens for a sound economy which today we know as Freedomworks the back bone and financial arm of the Tea Party. George Soros on the other hand is the newcomer. He never gave apeny to politics until the 2004 campaign, this because of his hatred of the policies of George W Bush.
ReplyDeleteThere are also other major differences. Soros is a true philanthropist. Yes he supports political candidates but even more he supports many fine organizations that support people worldwide in their struggles for freedom and economic equality.
Soros thus far this year has spent a couple of million dollars on politics. The Institute for New Economic Thinking is the only group that he controls.
On the other hand the Koch brothers fund and control various political organizations and super PAC's.
Cato Institute, Freedomworks, Americans for Prosperity, the Heritage Foundation, Freedom Partners, which gave 236 million to tea party groups and the Tea Party Patriots just since 2009 to fight Obamacare and the Competitive Enterprise Group which opposes Union involvement in American elections. They also have funded Willie Soon and other projects to denounce climate change .
You know it seems that every issue that is espoused by the right seems to have a Koch Brothers controlled or funded group in the fight. The Koch's kicked in about 86 million to defeat Obama in his reelection campaign through personal donations and donations from known groups controlled by the Kochs.
Here in my state they are active in the fight to unseat Senator Kay Hagan the one person that they have pinned the "deciding vote" for Obamacare on. The have given over 7 million dollars through Americans for Prosperity to unseat Hagan. Funny how they believe it and the whole tea party movement believes that Hagan was the "deciding vote."
Americans for prosperity has spent 3 million to convince younger Americans not to sign up for Obamacare.
Soros doesn't have nearly that kind of influence. He is just your scapegoat because he gives to Progressive causes.
Scott you talk of the disconnect between the people and government and the top down hierarchy of our government today. Yet in the same piece you defend one of the biggest causes of big money political gain. Certainly you can't really believe that the Koch's are "bit players" in a big boys game. My friend they are way out front and everyone else is scrambling to catch up. They are the biggest influence peddlers in American politics today. Talk about sheeple, they have the biggest flock in America.
The total political contributions from Koch Industries is 10 times larger than those from individuals to the same recipients. https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000186
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete
Deleterick0427April 5, 2014 at 3:14 PM
I am back Scott had to go to work this morning so now to finish, The absorption of the southern democrats into the Republican party has everything to do with civil rights. Lets just look at the history of the southern electorate. While the democrats were for slavery and Jim Crow the southern electorate was all about being democrats and or dixiecrats. Starting in 1968 the first Presidential election after the full integration of civil rights and the end of Jim Crow the solid south has switched colors. You say states rights I say bullshit. States rights that allow the bondage of another human? States rights that disenfranchised a certain population and treated them as lesser? Give me a break. Lets go back to the constitution in which it is stated by the founders that federal law trumps state law every time. No one took any rights from the southern states. The federal government after too long in the instance of slavery and jim crow, finally got the courage to right a wicked wrong, the one major black eye on the system they were attempting to build in1787- 1789, the equality and justice for all men. All people. Republicans are the first to want to send our soldiers to right some wrong in this world but consistently want to turn a blind eye to the problems that are right on the door step. You claim to come from a good patriotic back ground. If this is so you know that your statement that the voting change in the south has nothing to do with race is pure bullshit. The south continues to hide behind the states rights argument as it has since the founding of our nation. Constitutionally it's the people, the fed, the state. It always has been. Not one state legislature was allowed to vote on the ratification of the constitution. It was put into the hands of the people for a reason, and that reason was not states rights. In the south the democrats got the blame for a bi partisan action against the deprivations of the black man because a democrat and southerner, Lyndon Johnson was president. Well my friend civil rights would have never happened any other way. It had to be a southern president for it to be taken seriously and without a severe backlash. If a northern president was in office civil rights would have been seen as another issue being forced on the south by the north.
In the vote on the civil rights bill in 1964 only 1 southerner regardless of party voted in the affirmative. This total being of the senators that represented the states that formed the confederacy in 1860. The majority of votes to pass the bill were northern and they were democrat in both houses. To think the south didn't switch party allegiance over this very issue is the same as living with your head buried in the sand.
I was once a member of the NRA, when I used to do some hunting. I think it is evident that todays NRA is mainly a lobby for the arms manufacturers.
ReplyDeleteHey Mick, you finally figured it out? How long did it take you to realize that guns make money for The Smith and Wessons of the world?
DeleteIt doesn't matter how much money supports a bad idea. A bad idea is still a bad idea. Not one word has been mentioned here about the money spent by the legal profession to support progressive causes.
ReplyDeleteAny one who can argue the metrics of black life since the civil rights bill of 50 years ago can plainly see the problems. Out of wedlock births, number of blacks in prison, lack of representation as Democrats in the senate,,,the only black senator is republican,,failing ghetto cities controlled for generations by Democrats,,, cue
Detroit, Camden,,,,I can name six or eight more here in Jersey alone including our capital Trenton,,,
Thank you Lindon Johnson.
Two corrections,,My apologies to Lyndon Johnson for spelling his name wrong,,also we recently Elected an Ivy league black man here in NJ, Cory Booker,, a Democrat to fill the remaining year of Frank Laughtenbergs term in the senate.
DeleteFull disclosure, I made a donation to Bookers second campaign against Newark mayor Sharp James. I thought it was the right thing to do at the time.
DeleteI would compare Charles Koch with Robert Morris.
DeleteYou gonna support Booker for president in 2020? William what the hell are you talking about now. My comment was on the reason for the south switching party allegiances. No mention of money unless you feel that civil rights and the freedom of all people is a bad idea. Yes William many big cities are mired in problems but it is deeper then just the color of the citizens of the city or who is running it. There are some bad democratic mayors but there are some bad republican ones too. Our nearby city Raleigh has been run by democrats for years and it is one of the fastest growing and most successful cities going right now. Our little town of Clayton is run by a democrat and it is one of the top suburbs to live in in the area. It was ranked by BusinessWeek magazine a couple years ago as one of the top towns in which to live affordably and be assured your kids get a good education. The schools are in the top 95 percent in the country. All done under democratic leadership. It was also named one of the boomtowns for the next decade. All under democratic leadership.
Deletehttp://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2011/07/06/the-next-big-boom-towns-in-the-u-s/
http://activerain.com/blogsview/2413864/raleigh-nc-2-boom-town-forbes-com
http://images.businessweek.com/ss/09/09/0924_zip_codes_with_great_schools/11.htm
DeleteCharles Koch and Robert Morris have nothing in common except they both have/had enormous wealth. Robert Morris was highly involved in the founding and development of our country and our constitution. He used his money to further the cause of the country and help in it's development. Koch on the other hand is an outside agitator who uses his
Deletewealth to agitate and divide and then denies it when confronted. There was nothing secret about Robert Morris and his activities for the country. Koch has no kahunas and continues to hide behind his mistress organizations.
William. Comparing Koch with Robert Morris could well lead you into danger! Posterity is the only opportunity to judge both and Koch is still very much alive. If Koch follows in the path of Morris for the rest of his life he will be hunted by bailiffs and imprisoned for debit. Dying a pauper was the fate of Morris; can you foresee the same fate awaiting Koch? Perhaps the comparison between the pair leads to the realization that money, although important is not everything in life. Morris is important from an historical standpoint in that he voted against independence at the Continental Congress but subsequently absented himself for the vote on the next sitting day, thus allowing the motion to pass. I wonder if Koch is simply using his money for political leverage, Morris did pretty much the same thing following his rejection of the offer to be the first Sec Treasury. By so doing, Morris permitted a great hero of mine, Alexander Hamilton to be the first occupant of that office.
DeleteCheers from Aussie
My comparison of Morris and Koch is in the context of those who will donate their fortunes to a deeply troubled cause. Morris stepped forward and supported Washingtons army at it's darkest moment. Today many of us think we are facing the collapse of our founders ideals due to overwhelming debt, lack of trust in our institutions, and progressive leaders who will lie straight in the face of the populace to retain and enhance their power.
DeleteMorris dedicated his fortune to the cause that all freedom loving people have realized. Koch has put his reputation and fortune in the path of progressive destruction and many of us can never begin to repay him.
As for Rick and his myopic perspective I simply relayed my former support for Booker over chronic democrat criminal Newark mayor Sharp James. And as for 2020 why not discuss Booker for a 2016 run? After all he qualifies as a former ivy league graduate, helped continued Newarks decline, and can raise loads of California donor campaign money. A perfect profile to lead our country.
Booker won't be ready by 2016.
DeleteWhat about a Clinton/Booker ticket in 2016?
DeleteThat would be a great ticket. Probably one that would destroy a Cruz/Paul ticket rather handily.
DeleteWilliam Martin. WOW! You actually voted for a :"black man" in the New Jersey election. I voted for a white guy once myself since there were no black guys running.
ReplyDeleteJersey, I didn't voter for Booker, I'm not a resident of Newark. I donated money to his campaign as I felt he was a better choice than criminal James for mayor of our largest city.
DeleteWhere ya been Jersey. I thought you were dead.
Disclosure, I voted for AFP's Steve Lonegan who ran against Booker for Lautenburgs vacated senate seat.
DeleteAmericans for Prosperity. Ha ha the Koch Brothers front for giving their millions of dollars. I guess this particular thread has come full circle hasn't it.
DeleteI'll bet that if you ever met Charles Koch you would like him. You buy into the left's propaganda so easily. You don't know anything about the man. Zero.
DeleteI know he uses his money to stir the shitpot and that I don't like. Would I like him? Maybe I would William. I like most people and try to find the good in the shadowy ones like Koch.
DeleteHell William I even kinda like you. I just think you're a wing nut that's all.
Delete"Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has led the charge against the Kochs since February, calling them “un-American…shadowy billionaires” who “pour unlimited money into our democracy to rig the system to benefit themselves and the wealthiest one percent.” Other Democratic Party groups have followed suit with their own attacks on the billionaire brothers who run Koch Industries, the largest privately owned company in the country. The Senate Majority PAC for instance, a Democratic group with ties to Reid, is currently running its own $3 million ad campaign that targets the Kochs."
Deletehttp://news.yahoo.com/the-koch-s--secret-bank--takes-another-step-out-of-the-shadows-031543616.html
The largest privately held corporation in the country is called “un-American…shadowy billionaires" by Harry Reid. Pure class warfare Harry. Nice job.
I have no problem with the Kochs and what they are worth. They need to quit buying elections especially ones that don't concern them. 7 million dollars they have poured into the NC Senate race. In NC they have 0 industrial interests. But what they are looking for is to open the state to fracking, so they support candidates that are on board with that.
Delete