Fundamental Concepts - The Tao of Poo [Weirddave]

Every day, many of us look around and frankly wonder what's going on in this country of ours. It's obvious that President Obama has been a disaster for the country, but there is endless speculation as to the nature of the disaster, whether it's incidental or intentional. Is this all some malevolent plan, or simply the wages of unprecedented incompetence? Obama did promise to "fundamentally change" the US after all, but is this what he meant? You hear everything from grand, sweeping conspiracy theories ("If he was setting out to destroy the country, what would he do differently?") to despairing wails ("How could he not realize that *something bad* would happen if he did *something*"). My belief is that everyone is over thinking the issue. I'm a big believer in Occam's razor, and if you put two simple pieces of information together you get a very simple explanation for 7 years of insanity.

First of all, let's take Obama. What is he? By temperament and training, he is a community organizer. The thing is, that's one of those terms that sounds self explanatory but really it's not, in fact it means the opposite of what it seems to mean. The term "community organizer" was coined by Saul Alinsky to describe the people who he envisioned would destabilize society. The last thing an Alinskyite wants is for a community to be organized. An organized community is functioning smoothly, all of its parts meshing seamlessly. An organized community has no need for, nor desire for, an Alinskyite. No, the job of one of Alinsky's community organizers is to destabilize a community, to disorganize it. It is only when a community becomes disorganized that the politics of division can thrive and it is divided communities that are the end goal of Alinsky's disciples. Only when a community has been fatally divided against itself is it ripe for tearing down, to be replaced by a communal Utopia. Sowing this division is all Obama has done all his entire adult life. It is quite literally all he knows.

That's bad enough, but completing the toxic brew that we've been forced to quaff these past seven years is the fact that Obama as President is the de-facto head of the Democrat Party, and the Democrat party is absolutely dependent on the factionalization of society for its success. The Democrat Party is the party of identity politics, the party of conflict, the party of "us" against "them", and they survive by making people believe that they are the only chance "us" has to keep from being overwhelmed by whatever "them" is the boogyman of the week. The Democrat Party is the living embodiment of the most perfect quote regarding politics that I've ever heard. H.L. Mencken, the illustrious "Sage of Baltimore", once observed "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary". Now, that's not to say that the Republicans don't do the same thing, they do, but theoretically at least the Republican Party has some principles behind it. Yes, you can stop laughing now, I said theoretically. The Democrat Party, however, has no principles beyond an unbridled lust for power, and the way they achieve that power is by pitting groups against each other.

So now let's put those two together, shall we? Obama's training and temperament lead him to play factions off against each other. His party is absolutely dependent on that happening. I contend that the simplest explanation for all of the decisions made by Obama during his time as president. In every instance he's asked himself "What can I do that will further drive people apart?". I doubt that he's even doing it consciously. That doesn't mean that isn't doing it. I can't think of a single major incident in his presidency where this pattern hasn't held true, and on top of that, there are dozens of minor incidents that Obama has weighed in on, always divisively, that should be far below the level of presidential attention (Remember Professor Gates? That's a situation worthy of presidential intervention? In what universe?). 

The office of president is bestowed upon a person who is elected to lead ALL Americans for a single term, more if he can convince them to re-elect him. ALL Americans. However vicious an election may be, once elected, a president is supposed to represent everybody. Of course, presidents are human and this isn't fantasy land, so this remains an ideal, but it is an important ideal in a UNITED country, like the UNITED States. All 43 presidents before Barack Obama generally tried to observe this convention, or at least pay lip service to it; but with Obama, as we've seen, it's so far from his being that you might as well expect a plant to walk. I don't believe the man is capable of it, if you suggested that he act as his predecessors acted he'd look at you askance for even suggesting such a thing. It's literally beyond his ken.

I don't have to tell you how dangerous this is, we're living it, a real life version of the old "It's my nature" scorpion and frog joke, which is terrifying. The person responsible for oiling the gears of society is instead throwing sand into them, and has been for years. The only reason the social machine that is America hasn't ground to a halt yet is because of how robustly it was over engineered, but the bearings are smoking, the valves are knocking and the whole thing is groaning like an alligator in heat. It'll be a frickin' miracle if we live through it.

I honestly believe that that's it. There are other layers involved, of course. In this column I'm dealing with the micro, not the macro. For example, critical theory and the Frankfort school are still a thing and are culpable in most of this too, but that's big picture stuff. I'm focusing on one man, Obama, and discussing small picture stuff. The murder of Kate Steinle didn't lend itself to immediate division (very few people are going to willingly envision themselves on the same side as a 5 times deported psychotic criminal) so Obama limited himself to a weak call for gun control. On the other hand, after Dylann Roof did his despicable deed the people of Charleston did a remarkable thing (that shouldn't be remarkable at all). They came together as Americans, white and black, male and female, conservative and liberal, and absolutely rejected the politics of division. Al Sharpton headed south, as did DeRay, and the blood soaked gears or racial grievance machine started to grind....until it was SHUT DOWN! Shut down by the people of Charleston who remember who they were (Americans) and what that means. Shut down bay a community that was actually organized. Shut down by good people. The race baiters were sent scurrying with their tails between their legs. That's what the whole Confederate Battle Flag (Grrr! Naval Jack! The battle flag is SQUARE - pedantic historian Weirddave) flap has been about. The grievance machine rolled into Charleston expecting to foment another Baltimore or Ferguson riot, and it was rejected soundly. Americans acted like Americans, and that was a huge threat to the dividers. Almost everyone can see that the CBF outrage is beyond stupid, but we are being MADE to care about it because otherwise we might just remember that we all have much more in common than we do differences, and in that remembrance is the end of the Democrat Party and an utter rejection of everything Barack Obama really is. We can't have that, can we?

As to the title of this piece, well, anyone who would deliberately set out to destroy cohesiveness and sow division would pretty much be a real shit, wouldn't he? ;)

E.T.A. Twitter user Evi L Bloggerlady (@MsEBL) made a graphic for this post.

posted by Open Blogger at 10:30 AM

| Access Comments