clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Wall Street Journal endorses ideas behind tech mogul's ludicrous Nazi comparison

New, 122 comments
tom perkins flickr techcrunch
tom perkins flickr techcrunch

Tom Perkins has been blasted by everyone from The New York Times to executives in the venture capital firm he co-founded since comparing the "plight" of wealthy Americans to the persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany. Now The Wall Street Journal has given its two cents, with the editorial board penning a piece defending his sentiment about the unfair treatment of the super-rich. Perkins later apologized for his comparison after much backlash, but he did not apologize for his larger thought about what he calls the constant vilification of the one percent by liberals and the press.

The paper calls the Nazi comparison "unfortunate," but that Perkins was "onto something"

In the editorial entitled "Perkinsnacht," the WSJ interestingly only calls the Nazi comparison "unfortunate" while claiming Perkins' sentiment was on point and that he was possibly onto something about the "left's political method" of demonizing the rich. The piece goes on to bring up a handful of examples of how the Obama administration and the left always use policy and press to chastise the rich for simply being rich, and undeservingly so. It also referenced the Bloomberg Businessweek article about Perkins' "unhinged Nazi rant," but only quoted the title to prove its point that people should just stop picking on the rich. Bloomberg's op-ed actually used the controversy to hash out ideas that could make the gap between American's rich and poor less dramatic, in addition to calling out the ridiculousness of Perkins' Nazi parallel.

The WSJ also bashed critics for attacking the fact that Perkins "dared to question the politics of economic class warfare" — not the first time in history the wealthy have grown paranoid of the motives of the working class, as another Bloomberg Businessweek piece points out. The paper's broad defense of the venture capitalist's offensive bluster may come as a surprise — but considering the Journal's core demographic at the epicenter of the financial universe, it really isn't.