Most of us are wrong about ObamaAugust 28, 2011
A lot of conservative pundits, commentators, talking heads, and any other thing you would like to call them have spent a lot of time talking about President Obama’s motivation. His behaviors seem to be inconsistent, at least with the template for a far-left liberal.
That doesn’t mean that sometimes he behaves as a conservative, or even some kind of Clintonesque pseudo-centrist. He’s just not predictable, so all kinds of theories have popped up: he’s being given his marching orders by George Soros, he really has no idea what he’s doing, he’s motivated by racial issues, he’s following the Saul Alinsky plan, etc.
Maybe none of those are correct. Dinesh D’Souza, conservative writer and President of King’s College in New York, wrote a piece in Forbes last September in which he analyzed the President’s decisions based on his father’s legacy.
By studying Obama’s book, “Dreams From My Father,” and writings by Barak Obama Sr., he has put together a pretty logical argument that Obama Junior may be the “last anti-colonialist.”
He discusses how the senior Obama, an economist, defined socialism differently than we would here in the US. He used it in the context of, as D’Souza puts it, “the state appropriation of wealth as a means to achieve the anticolonial objective of taking resources away from the foreign looters and restoring them to the people of Africa.”
In fact, Obama’s father advocated the state confiscation of private lands and the idea that taxes could be raised with no upper limit, “as long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed.” (The quote is from a 1965 article in the East Africa Journal authored by the senior Obama.)
Theoretically, the logical extension of this could mean taxing at 100% if all benefits are received from the government, which is more like our usual definition of socialism.
Obama’s father was working to separate Africa from the neocolonial influences of Europe in the 1950s. The younger Obama does not operate in that environment. Instead, he is in charge of what he considers to be the last colonialist power on Earth – the United States. By extension, and by following his father’s beliefs, he does what he can to “level the playing field” for other countries, hence some of his bizarre decisions. For example, the promotion of NASA as a way to help Muslim nations feel good about themselves, or to deliberately cripple our oil industry while allowing, or even promoting, the oil industries of other countries over our own.
It’s an interesting idea. I can’t vouch for its validity; I’ve not even read Obama’s book. I’ve not tried to verify his examples or anything. D’Souza grew up in India, another country that struggled with the neocolonialist influences, so his viewpoint is far different from mine and makes him more suited to draw such conclusions. (One could say it makes him more likely to draw such conclusions, but I don’t if that is true or not.)
Read the article. Apparently he’s working on a book. Perhaps D’Souza will be the one to really understand and explain this President, who has, time and time again, confounded his friends and enemies alike.