Where Did These Guys Come From?

by Victor Davis Hanson - December 23rd, 2009 - Pajamas Media

The Origins of Obamism

I do not think it will be easy to delay Obamism. It is not just that both houses of Congress are under liberal leadership with ample majorities, with a White House and captive media egging them on. The problem is that now the entire engine of the federal government is harnessed in the most unapologetic way to pushing through a far left agenda. There is no shame, no hesitancy in using the full powers of the state.

How does that work out? Without qualification (remember we are in a new age of transparency and ethical reform) votes are bought with hundred-million-dollar earmarks; the attorney general predicates judicial action on the political ramifications of indicting or not indicting; federal bureaucracies (watch the EPA if cap and trade stalls) are devoted to the new Caesar rather than the letter of the law.

Such a strange scenario we have found ourselves in—a clear majority of Americans is opposed to almost everything Obama has to offer; congressional representatives know they are acting against the will of the people, but know too that they are offered all sorts of borrowed money for their districts to compensate for their unpopular actions. And a charismatic commander in chief believes that he can charm even the angriest of critics, and that anything he promises (Iran’s deadlines, closing of Guantanamo, new transparency, no more lobbyists, etc) means zilch and can be contextualized by another “let me be perfectly clear” speech spiced with a couple of the usual “it would have been impossible for someone as unlikely as me to have become President just (fill in the blanks) years ago”

No, I would not count Obama out. So what drives his agenda? What are its origins?

I am usually impressed with whatever Victor Davis Hanson writes. An historian, his logic does not mock what has happened in the past as so many writers seem to do. He also gives a unique and different take on what is happening that is helpful to understanding important aspects of our public dialog.

Hanson is not the first to note that Obama is an Alinsky acolyte who follows the global socialist dogma. However he has usefully updated the specific criticism of Obama to note the emphasis on redistribution of wealth as the key element of that movement's focus.

Hanson has also refocused the belief in immigration as an element in the destruction of our culture. Obama is not just dedicated to larazanism, but has a broader love for any form of multiculturalism that weakens our culture. That has resulted in an emphasis by Obama on the concept of white exploitation that many have rejected as nonsense. It is being resold as if it is a new concept under Obama - making the rejection premature.

Finally, Hanson sees how much of his implementation methodology Obama has taken from the Chicago style of government corruption, replacing bribes that go directly into the politician's pocket with bribes that indirectly benefit those who support the politician. Our courts have essentially gutted any attempt to hold politicians accountable for these second hand bribes.

In short, we have a traditional statist bent on redistribution (Obama’s words, not mine), updated with the postmodern belief that race/class/gender oppressions require government affirmative reactions (which also abroad explains why we reach out to enemies and shun allies), all energized by an ends justify the means Chicago bare-knuckles apparat.

Hanson has given us an incredibly accurate summation of Obama and one that everyone who opposes the Obama agenda needs to have memorized.