What if 1

 These questions are in our minds.. But we put them down here not to invite answers (though if any readers do answer them, we’ll be glad), but because they are worth asking and worth thinking about. We expect Time to provide answers in due course. 

Some Republicans murmur that they ‘want President Obama to succeed’. But to succeed at what, to what end?


1. Many who voted for Obama dismissed Republican fears that he intended to turn the US into a socialist country like the fading European states. But what if he does? Would they then regret voting him into power?

Why were they so sure that he could not have any such intention, when he himself said that he wanted to redistribute wealth? The forcible redistribution of wealth by a government IS socialism.

What if his Party, now dominant in Congress, selected him as its presidential candidate because they wanted a leader to take them to the goal of West-European-type Socialism? There are plenty of indications that the ‘progessives’, as they now like to call themselves, find nothing abhorrent about such governments; and in their pursuit of ‘social justice’ seem positively to approve of them.

2. What if his ultimate aim is even more of a change in that he intends to bring about a radical Marxist revolution? Not by violent means, let’s say, but by using the constitutional powers he and his party now have?  The ‘long march through the institutions’ is now completed by his reaching the pinnacle of power.  All the marchers have to do now, under his leadership, is change the economy and the form of government to the Marxist model.

His political education was entirely Marxist. His father was a Communist. His mother involved herself in the New Left movement of the late 1960s.The mentor chosen for him in his adolescence by his grandfather was Frank Marshall Davis, a ‘card-carrying Communist’. He became a ‘community organizer’, a profession invented by Saul Alinsky, the radical Communist teacher of practical subversion and Marxist revolution-by-stealth. He was launched into his political career by William Ayers, a violent Communist revolutionary. At university, by his own admission, he sought the company and instruction of Marxists.  Is it then not likely that he IS a Marxist, or that he might desire to establish a Communist regime?

3. Does Obama hold any of these opinions that are common in the international Left?

i) Israel has no right to exist and should be eliminated.  

ii) The demands of Islam should be met, whatever they are.

iii) All nation states should come as soon as possible under a world government to be developed out of the United Nations.   

iv) the world’s wealth should be evenly distributed amongst all populations.

v) Every person should be made to work , and his wage should be set by the state.

vi) Living accommodation should be rationed and shared.

vii) Public transport should replace private cars.

viii) Food should be limited in choice and rationed. 

ix) Medical services should be provided and rationed by the (national at first, later international) government, and only the government.

x) Education should be provided and regulated by the government and only the government. 

xi) Only one Party can put up candidates for election.

xii) The supreme head of government shall rule for his lifetime. 

xiii) Dissidents should be re-educated or, if they prove unreformable, eliminated. 


We are not convinced that Obama has any ideas at all, or if he has, that he thinks them through to the point where he can see the dangers in them.

We suspect he may be a thing of air and paper (hot air and newspaper), trying to fly like a kite above trouble, but destined to be torn apart by the first strong wind that hits him.

But if he is an empty man, trying to float above the tumult of decision-making and letting others take the blame for everything that goes wrong, he will be easily manipulated by those in his Party who do have strong beliefs and intentions.

He is still at present a cipher.  We wait to know more.

But what if he is an unreconstructed Alinsky-ite, and these are his aims?

And what if he succeeds in achieving them?

Is it what the majority of those who elected him actually want? Surely not! So would they regret electing him? And if they do, won’t it be too late? 

Posted under Commentary by Jillian Becker on Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Tagged with , , ,

This post has 1 comment.

  • roger in florida

    There are some things we definitely do know about him:

    1. He is entirely sympathetic to the Marxist view of capitalism; that it is an exploitative system where profits are actually only unpaid wages to workers (Marx’s theory of surplus value). We know this because in his campaign he spoke of the profits of oil companies belonging to his crowd of supporters, who responded to this promise of riches for no effort with huge cheers. He clearly has no respect whatsoever for private property rights, rather he sees national wealth as a shared resource to be collected and distributed by govt. as they see fit. That has always meant to be distributed according to the political benfits of the ruling party. This is why the “stimulus” bill included $4.9Bn for ACORN.

    2. We know he supports redistribution of wealth from advanced economies to “developing” ones through the mechanism of taxes on the populations of the AE, distributed through the UN to 3rd world countries, He has sponsored such legislation in the Senate. Thus we can deduce that he does not see economic progress occurring as a result of enforced contract laws, equality before the law, property rights, etc. Further we can infer that he believes (as his father probably told him) that western progress is a result of 3rd world poverty.

    As to whether that is what the people who voted for him wanted, I actually believe it is. Florida swung decisively democratic so that pensioners could continue to receive payments from the SS system. Union workers voted for him because they largely agree with him on 1. above. Blacks voted for him because of the promise of a renewed welfare system, now called tax cuts, and of course his implied promise of reparations; “apologies are nice but we need to see actions”. What is happening is a clear breakdown of national unity into a balkanised society jealously guarding “theirs” and greedily regarding their neighbors wealth as someting unfairly attained, and to be grabbed. I have said if you want to see the future of America, study Argentina from 1945 to 1975, you will see exact parallels, and the result will be the same. I prophesy that we will have a military govt. in the USA before 2020.