Huey Long: The Redistribution of Wealth

Editor’s Note: Since progressive liberals have embraced “equity” and have identified the term with critical race theory to demonize the White working class on racial grounds, we would like to offer an alterative populist program to advance “equity.” It is called the “Share Our Wealth” amendment.

Equity?

I will show you equity.

“Redistribution of Wealth” Speech

Delivered by U.S. SENATOR HUEY P. LONG of Louisiana

Over the network of radio stations of the National Broadcasting Co. from Washington, DC. Wednesday, January 9, 1935.

Note: This ad is currently running on Axios.

About Hunter Wallace 11443 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

31 Comments

  1. Better yet,

    Implement NSDAP policies to elevate everyone,
    provide meaningful productive labor for everyone,
    free education to all that have aptitude,
    free housing with social and financial incentives to large WHITE families,
    social services to connect younger people wi the elderly, so both can benefit.
    group activities so people can feel a strong social bond to their folk.

  2. HW,

    You have fallen into the judeo-liberal-commie trap of,
    In order for some to have it must be taken from others.
    Instead,
    All can have more, by greater productivity, industry and efficiencies.

    • In my view, you have fallen into the trap of assuming that we can live under an oligarchy with a Gilded Age skew in the distribution of wealth and have assumed that somehow it will all work out and that it won’t lead to the total corruption of our political system. In reality, we have billionaires buying our foreign policy, buying our trade policy, buying our immigration policy, etc. How on earth is the system that we have today where billionaires can buy the politicians working out for us?

    • You have fallen into the Neoliberal propaganda trap that makes you believe capitalism brings maximum prosperity and socialism brings poverty especially for the majority. In reality, socialism is the system in which there is maximum liberty for the greatest number, not just those who can afford it, and it is also the only system that maximizes prosperity, health and welfare for all, not just a few.

      What you said is true – that “All can have more, by greater productivity, industry and efficiencies” – ONLY IF those who produce are not being exploited but own equal shares of the productivity, and only if the products being produced are rational, fulfilling real human needs, instead of largely unnecessary, wasteful or harmful sales inventory designed for private profit.

      • Capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive. The two can exist side by side in varying degrees of mixture. Several countries in Northern Europe have a vibrant mixture of both, as did NSDAP Germany.

        Henry Ford was one of the greatest capitalists of the 20th century, he introduced the 5 dollar day, when most workers couldn’t even make 2 dollars a day. He is not unique, others have been very generous to workers, that’s what we need to cultivate.

        • “Capitalism and socialism are not mutually exclusive”:

          They ARE (mutually exclusive) but sometimes, in the short run, apparently not. For example, China’s current “capitalist road to a socialist destination” may be called “vibrant” and seems to be working but it is NOT necessary. It is extremely perilous, putting the nation in danger of losing sight of its “destination.”

    • Arrian: American workers are more productive now than ever before, even though they are being paid less in terms of real dollars adjusted for inflation. They are also working longer hours for fewer benefits and less job security. Haven’t they been exploited enough?

      • @ Spahn

        Our current measure of productivity is just measured in dollars. By that metric, the parasites at Goldman Sachs are the most productive in the world. I am talking about true productivity of goods and substance, not kleptomanic paper shuffling.

        Much of our productivity is siphoned off to parasites, via zog.

  3. By itself, Hitler’s concept of the Breitspurbahn would employ millions, be super efficient and save resources, making the nation more prosperous.

    America copied the autobahn system, why not copy the other efficient ideas of the NSDAP ?
    Multiple ideas, like that, would make any nation super prosperous and fully employed.

    • Hitler was a populist, at least until he was ready to re-arm the Reich. That’s when he began appealing to the bankers and industrialists instead.

  4. NO, I don’t believe in an oligarchy!

    I also don’t believe in taking wealth from honest producers.
    I know the trajectory of unjust wealth confiscation, it’s objective starts at the super rich and quickly devolves to taking from the working class to support parasites, as it did in communist countries.
    Everyone can have greater prosperity, with no one suffering want, but not with a racial stew of muds.

    The (((billionaires))) that are causing so much trouble would be troublesome even if they were a janitorial class.

  5. “Everyone can have greater prosperity, with no one suffering want, but not with a racial stew”:

    Correct. Good communal government is difficult or impossible in a cosmopolitan, ethnically diverse, mixed and rootless population. On the other hand, capitalist/imperialist exploitation is facilitated by multi-ethnicity, inter-ethnic hybridization, and atomization.

  6. Now that you have joined me on the Huey Was Right Express, how about further joining commenter Boomer X and myself on the Sovereign Wealth Fund(ed) Universal Basic Income Train? You know the drill: Congress passes legislation instructing the Federal Reserve to purchase a non-controlling 50% share of every for-profit organization in America, using Milton Friedman’s helicopter money (i.e., quantitative easing, so-called monetary finance), with the feds then taking their yearly 50% share of the earnings to pay out a $25,000 UBI to all legal citizens 18 and older (abolishing social security as redundant).
    The points made by some commenters concerning your Share the Wealth constitutional amendment as giving the creative class a disincentive to create new wealth are correct: the world is made better not by the average or below average 90%, or even the 9% who work for the 1%, but by the people with a Great Idea, translated into a product or service desired by the masses. That is how assets are brought into being: Relying on the masses to make breakthroughs is a fools errand. That is why pure collectivist societies like the old Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba, and other worker paradises fail: the men with ideas withdraw their brilliance, as it literally does not pay off.
    The SWF/UBI overcomes this problem by allowing the Capitalist/Investor class to keep a stake in the assets they create, but requires a 50/50 split in the output of collective productive action, between Capital and Labor, which is what strangers feel is fair. And in doing so, the Capitalist will grow more wealthy over time, as the money provided to employees will be spent almost 100% in the output of the capitalist, and both are given greater security in jobs, wages, earnings, and markets. Win-Win.
    I have of course written extensively on this subject here at OD, and once or twice at the Unz Review, so anyone wanting additional explanation can Google my name and SWF/UBI, Huey Long, etc. for the details. The point is we must not just critique Senile Joe or the Establishment and its minions, but offer constructive suggestions for moving from point A to a better tomorrow at point B. So what do you think about this idea for generating a real populism that works for all citizens? If not this, or your Share the Wealth Amendment, any other suggestions? Other OD commenters, you are welcome to reply as well. But please, no catchphrases like Free Markets are Best or Death to the the Petty Bourgeoisie, as a certain Mr. Anon likes to spout. You can’t wish away the other side of the Game of Life. Think. What can be sold to both philosophies of life effectively, if anything?

  7. NO to UBI !

    No able bodied person should be paid for just breathing.

    Maybe works projects, planting parks, building rec centers, teraforming hills and forests.

    ” do not endow idleness “….Voltaire

  8. The nation’s biggest bank, JPMorgan Chase, says it will allocate $30 billion over the next five years to help address economic disparities due to racism and systemic inequality.

    Who runs JP Morgan……….. a baptist, a mormon, an Eskimo, a methodist…..hmmm?

  9. Arian thinks national socialism is a viable solution in the 21st century while UBI is “socialism” so he’s a joke not to be taken seriously.

    To Hunter Wallace – would you be happy with returning to the social spending, robust industry, and top income tax bracket of 70-94% in the FDR to Carter years? Or will you settle for nothing less than full Longism?

  10. No, I don’t reject UBI on that basis.
    I reject UBI because it is non-productive.

    If ppl are given money, get them to do something productive.

    • “reject UBI because it is non-productive”:

      Then we should also reject the insurance industry, the legal and financial services and real estate industries, and other things because they are non-productive. At least UBI is not DESTRU-ctive, like the military (legal murder) industry that is subsidized with a trillion a year. UBI is very cheap and harmless.

      Re: “get them to do something productive”:

      Stop them from doing things that are destructive. Non-productive occupations such as lawyer-ing and salesmanship (especially commercial advertising) should be banned immediately. Break up all large land-holdings (Bill Gates is now the world’s largest owner of farm land) and let people use common land at no charge, and live in agrarian villages of self-built homes, and regain their natural “roots in the soil.”

      • ” let people use common land at no charge, and live in agrarian villages”

        OK Mao, it’s been tried, 10s of millions died.

        Non-farmers have silly ideas about farming.
        Have you ever seen an electric, propane, or diesel bill for a viable farm ?

        • “it’s been tried, 10s of millions died”:

          The famine toll is greatly exaggerated (like the “Holdomor” myth in Russia) by the Western powers who want to destroy or subvert Chinese socialism to subdue and re-colonize China. The proletarian cultural revolution was the foundation for the China’s take-off since then. It broke the cycle of drug addiction and the capitalist mindset of greed and re-established Confucian ethics without which China could not be democratic, prosperous and independent today. But the three gangs (the “Triad”) in cahoots with Talmudism and the U.S. (CIA) continued to operate out of Hong Kong even after it was given up by Britain, and continue to de-moral-ize Chinese people through the Macao sin city that is bigger than Las Vegas.

          “Have you ever seen an electric, propane, or diesel bill for a viable farm?”

          Coming from, being in, a line of good farmers I have a very clear understanding and experience of agriculture. Your term “viable” indicates you probably believe in the agribusiness “model” versus “outmoded” traditional family farming.

  11. “should also reject the insurance industry, the legal and financial services ”

    Those are essential to commerce. Gears in the transmission of production.

    Who would finance a ship without insurance ?
    Who would sign a contract without legal recourse ?

Comments are closed.