What’s the difference in principle between physically preventing your citizens from leaving, taking hostages to keep them around, and robbing them blind to give them second thoughts?
Next thing you know we’ll be needing papers to travel.
-
Search
-
Recent Entries
- Is Debbie Wasserman Schultz Right?11.30
- Citizens Can See What the Press Can’t11.1
- The Same Old Medicine for Detroit?10.27
- Caesar’s Messiah10.13
- Used Car Salesmen Wouldn’t Try to Sell This9.22
- Obama’s Whimsical Foreign Policy9.11
- Liberals for Gun Rights?6.24
- Evading the Premises in Detroit3.27
- Towards an Unfrozen Politics1.25
- The Dunces Who Would Control Us1.3
- Visit the archives for more!
-
Fatal error: Call to undefined method WP_Error::get_item_quantity() in /home/bill_brown/newclarion.com/wp-content/themes/cutline/sidebar.php on line 23
2 responses so far ↓
1 c andrew // May 17, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Didn’t the old Soviet Union charge their “refuseniks” for their education and made them pay up before they would let them emigrate? And weren’t the particular targets Russian Jews trying to get to Israel?
Gee Chucky Schumer. Looks like you really have learned the lessons of history – you Schmuck.
2 North Bridge // May 20, 2012 at 1:07 pm
The point is not to prevent wealthy people from leaving. I don’t think the Left would care if every capitalist were gone, so long as all their wealth is expropriated on the way out.
The goal is not to keep them here. It is not to reap continued benefits from their work. It is not to ensure a growing economy. It is not even to feed the poor. The only goal here is expropriation, as an end-in-itself — to show those bastards who’s in charge.