Now that Barney Frank is retiring, we need another Democrat in Congress who will take his place and speak the truth with no holds barred. We used to have an excellent spokesman in the person of Alan Grayson (D-FL). In 2010, he was the most targeted Democrat and criminal corporations, like Koch Industries, spent millions unseating him. We need him back. He wrote the following article.
During my two years in Congress, I heard an awful lot of speeches. Some of them were delivered by some of the finest public speakers in America today — like Barack Obama, Neil Abercrombie, John Lewis, Anthony Weiner and Alcee Hastings. But none of them was as profound and poignant as the one that I’m about to share with you. It was delivered to a joint session of Congress by President Abraham Lincoln, exactly 150 years ago today. The focus of the President’s speech was, of course, the Civil War. But President Lincoln took a short detour, and with a few bare sentences, he summed up an issue that remains with us to this day.
This is what President Lincoln said to Congress, to America, and to us:
It is not needed, nor fitting here [in discussing the Civil War] that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions; but there is one point, with its connections, not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effect to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor, in the structure of government. It is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital; that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow by the use of it induces him to labor. This assumed, it is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them, and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded thus far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers or what we call slaves. And further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer is fixed in that condition for life.
Now, there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them are groundless.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights.
If I were still in Congress, I would have repeated President Lincoln’s speech on the floor of the House this week, in the same spot where he rendered it 150 years ago. "Labor is the superior of capital." And we must not "place capital… above labor in the structure of government." Thank you, Mr. Lincoln. If I had to sum up my job as a congressman in 25 words or less, that would do it… [emphasis original]
Inserted from <Huffington Post>
Labor is the superior of capital. What a magnificent concept! Labor is performed by people. Corporations are financial constructs of capital. Capital is not people. Therefore corporations are not people. Therefore labor is therefore also the superior of corporations.
If Abe could see what his party has become, he would insist that his head in the Lincoln Memorial be covered with a paper bag.
I encourage you all to get behind Alan Grayson’s campaign.
14 Responses to “Labor is the Superior of Capital”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Yes, Abraham Lincoln would certainly have covered his head with a paper bag if he were still alive today.
Thanks!
This man needs to be returned to Washington– the sooner the better !
Amen!
Should we send this quote to WI? Should we send it to the Supreme Court? Seems a lot of people need to relearn the constructs of our “democracy” – I guess history really does have a propensity to repeat itself, and the same lessons must be reiterated! In a sense much of the occupy movement is about just this, do we want to return to the same game of Monopoly that got us into this mess, or should we ask Parker Bros. for something new? I have so many questions.
Sadly truth fails to penetrate to those who have plugged their own ears.
Great minds think alike. 😉 Anyone who thinks money is made without the help of the laborers is a fool. Even money that makes money has to be maintained by someone.
Good point, Blue!
None other than Albert Einstein, writing In his article “Why Socialism” that was published in the Monthly Review, described capitalism as a source of evil to be overcome, as the “Predatory phase of human development”. So if it comes down to agreeing with Albert Einstein or Scalia/Thomas/et al – well, I’ll stand with Albert.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein's_political_views
Dang! Before you know it, he’ll think up e=mc2. 😉
Alan Grayson — “Labor is the superior of capital.” And we must not “place capital… above labor in the structure of government.”
In thinking about this, Bill Gates came to mind as an example. Of course, as most of us know, Gates is one of the richest people in the world with an estimated net worth of $54 billion. But this was not always the case. Although not poor, Gates demonstrates that labour comes before capital. Gates transformed his innate mathematical abilities and ideas into a marketable product. This from Wikipedia:
At 13 he enrolled in the Lakeside School, an exclusive preparatory school. When he was in the eighth grade, the Mothers Club at the school used proceeds from Lakeside School’s rummage sale to buy an Teletype Model 33 ASR terminal and a block of computer time on a General Electric (GE) computer for the school’s students. Gates took an interest in programming the GE system in BASIC, and was excused from math classes to pursue his interest. He wrote his first computer program on this machine: an implementation of tic-tac-toe that allowed users to play games against the computer.
What Gates did with his own labours was to, over time, transform them into product which he was then able to transform into capital. Once this cycle was started, it replicated itself over and over. Not all labour will follow the exact same path, but what is clear to me is that labour is the superior of capital. Labour begets product begets capital. (I didn’t think I’d see the ‘begets’ here!)
And what are the words from the Gettysburg address — “. . . that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Nowhere in these words do I see capital.
I do not know Alan Grayson, but if he is “in league” with Abe Lincoln, I dare say he must be okay. And if the voters didn’t have the foresight to keep him in office, perhaps they do not understand the fundamentals of their own government, built up since the founding fathers.
Lynn, I hate to burst your bubble, but Gates didn’t write the original PC-DOS. He bought it for $50 and sold it to IBM. Then his partner re-engineered it as MS-DOS, screwing IBM and making clones possible. Early in the day, Micro-slimed was a term every computer junkie knew.
Oh blast! Well now you know I’m not a computer junkie! But the premise still works. The idea of some one, anyone, taking their ideas and talents and developing them into a product which fills a need, and then generates capital still holds.
I agree, and if it makes you feel better, this a quote from me when Gates first started marketing: “Stick with CP/M. That little twerp Gates and his buggy PC-DOS will never go anywhere!” OOPS! 🙁