Sen. Bernie Sanders built a political career on the backs of the 1 percent. Turns out, he’s a card-carrying member of that much-maligned club.

Primarily due to sales of his successful book, Bernie and his wife reported income of over $1 million in 2016 and 2017. According to IRS data, Bernie’s earnings put him right smack in the 1 percent.

Awkward.

It seems the man who constantly rails against “millionaires and billionaires” needs to take a good hard look in the mirror.

I don’t begrudge Bernie his book income. Good for him! But I do resent his constant moralizing about the evils of inequality, and his quest to impose policies that will take other people’s money away from them by force in order to fund his political programs, even as he enjoys the benefits of “inequality.”

Some might call it hypocritical.

But fellow lefty Paul Krugman managed to spin Bernie’s wealth into a moral pedestal and then leaped right up on top of it.

In a column supporting Sanders, Krugman noted that some publications did indeed make an issue out of Bernie’s income. He called the line of attack, “deeply stupid.”

“Politicians who support policies that would raise their own taxes and strengthen a social safety net they’re unlikely to need aren’t being hypocrites; if anything, they’re demonstrating their civic virtue.”

This argument seems plausible except for the fact the Bernie’s “civic virtue” didn’t seem to motivate him to do much to ease the burden of the hoi polloi in the 99 percent.

Last year, Bernie reported total income of $566, 421. He donated $18,950 or a paltry 3.35 percent to charity. In 2017, his income was $1.1 million. He gave away $36,300. That equates to 3.15 percent. The year before that, he cleared more than $1 million and donated $10,600 — less than 1 percent.

What Bernie does with his money is his business. But let’s not run around trumpeting his “civic virtue” when he keeps most of his money for himself. If he really has such deep concern about inequality, helping the poor, and contributing to a “social safety net he won’t likely need,” he can give his money away voluntarily. He doesn’t need to wait for a tax hike. Heck, he can even make voluntary gifts to the U.S. Treasury.

It seems to me Krugman, Sanders, et al., want to impose civic virtue on me. How about this: how about you boys lead by example?

Or do you need armed government agents to point guns at your heads first?

Krugman stumbles on an ugly truth about lefty politicians. They want to help fix the world, but they want to do it with other people’s money. (Right-wing statists have their own issues, but that’s not the subject of this article.)

Krugman’s talk about “civic virtue” is typical left-wing moralizing. He thinks he can claim the moral high ground because he and Bernie care about the poor and downtrodden. But hitting people and taking their stuff isn’t virtue – civic or otherwise. In fact, their proposed policies are decidedly immoral, unethical and unvirtuous. While Sanders, Krugman and company may seek noble ends, they root their means in violence, force and coercion.

You will be virtuous! Or else we’ll lock you in a cage, citizen!

Jesus teaches us to be charitable. Jesus teaches us to give freely. Jesus teaches us to take care of the poor, the orphans and widows. He does not teach us to point guns at other people and force them to live up to our standards of benevolence.

Loving your neighbor as yourself precludes forcing your neighbor to do things using the threat of  deadly violence – even things we deem “good.”

Bernie doesn’t preach virtue. If he truly cared about virtue, we would see it in his lifestyle.

Bernie preaches politics.

He preaches power.

And he wants to wield it.

Don’t be fooled by flowery speeches about the “poor and the downtrodden.” Don’t be snookered by moralizing and virtue-signaling. Behind the grandfatherly facade and political platitudes stand men with guns ready to lock dissenters in cages.

One should never mistake violence for civic virtue. And at its core, politics is violence.

Photo by DonkeyHotey