Thursday, September 9, 2010

Dinesh D'Souza: "How Obama Thinks"

This is a really great read. D'Souza's theory seems to fit Obama really well, and explains why he doesn't pursue the goals of a pure Socialist, but is rather using the tactics of Socialism and big government liberalism to fulfill an anti-colonialist agenda inherited from his father. Here is an excerpt:

Rejecting the socialist formula, Obama has shown no intention to nationalize the investment banks or the health sector. Rather, he seeks to decolonize these institutions, and this means bringing them under the government's leash. That's why Obama retains the right to refuse bailout paybacks--so that he can maintain his control. For Obama, health insurance companies on their own are oppressive racketeers, but once they submitted to federal oversight he was happy to do business with them. He even promised them expanded business as a result of his law forcing every American to buy health insurance.

If Obama shares his father's anti-colonial crusade, that would explain why he wants people who are already paying close to 50% of their income in overall taxes to pay even more. The anti-colonialist believes that since the rich have prospered at the expense of others, their wealth doesn't really belong to them; therefore whatever can be extracted from them is automatically just. Recall what Obama Sr. said in his 1965 paper: There is no tax rate too high, and even a 100% rate is justified under certain circumstances.

And he goes on to explain the support for the Ground Zero Mosque and the NASA/Muslim outreach absurdity. It's hard for us as normal Americans to see some of this stuff since we don't think in terms of "taking things over" via our accomplishments. I don't look at the Moon and say, "Yeah, that's ours, baby. American-owned & operated!" But as D'Souza points out, many people in other countries saw the moon landing as "one giant leap for the USA", not for mankind.

D'Souzas' theory also explains the recent revelations about the Obama regimes support of off-shore drilling as long as it's a different country doing it and not the USA. It all has to do with payback and achieving some sort of "fairness" in the distribution of goods. Fairness as defined and arbitrated by Obama, of course.

At the end, D'Souza explains why all of Obama's fiddling is so destructive and pointless, and the conclusion is pretty dark:

Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial. Emerging market economies such as China, India, Chile and Indonesia have solved the problem of backwardness; they are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment.

But instead of readying us for the challenge, our President is trapped in his father's time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation's agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father's dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.

6 comments:

  1. I forwarded this article to Baldilocks, with a hat tip to you. Would be interesting to see her take on it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What makes this more amusing is that D'Souza, born in India and raised catholic, is a living refutation of Obama's obsessions about colonialism. He does Western thought better than most Westerners.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good point, Kathleen. At the end of the day, Obama and left are deniers of the obvious fact that men have minds--they are more than what they inherit plus what they absorb from their environment.

    ReplyDelete
  4. what is this about D'Souza not being catholic anymore? have you heard this?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Reading this, it sounds like he isn't a practicing Catholic anymore. That is surprising to me. His rambling, vague explanation of exactly whether or not he's Catholic lacks the usual D'Souza incisiveness.

    ReplyDelete
  6. yes, very evasive. This sort of thing is built in when one decides to marry a non-catholic, I guess.

    ReplyDelete