How Obama Thinks
Dinesh D'Souza, 09.27.10, 12:00 AM ET  
Barack Obama is the most antibusiness president in a generation, perhaps in 
 American history. Thanks to him the era of big government is back. Obama 
runs up  taxpayer debt not in the billions but in the trillions. He has 
expanded the  federal government's control over home mortgages, investment 
banking, health  care, autos and energy. The Weekly Standard summarizes Obama's 
approach  as omnipotence at home, impotence abroad. 
The President's actions are so bizarre that they mystify his critics and  
supporters alike. Consider this headline from the Aug. 18, 2009 issue of the  
Wall Street Journal: "Obama Underwrites Offshore Drilling." Did you read  
that correctly? You did. The Administration supports offshore drilling--but  
drilling off the shores of Brazil. With Obama's backing, the U.S. 
Export-Import  Bank offered $2 billion in loans and guarantees to Brazil's 
state-owned 
oil  company Petrobras to finance exploration in the Santos Basin near Rio 
de  Janeiro--not so the oil ends up in the U.S. He is funding Brazilian 
exploration  so that the oil can stay in Brazil. 
More strange behavior: Obama's June 15, 2010 speech in response to the Gulf 
 oil spill focused not on cleanup strategies but rather on the fact that  
Americans "consume more than 20% of the world's oil but have less than 2% of 
the  world's resources." Obama railed on about "America's century-long 
addiction to  fossil fuels." What does any of this have to do with the oil 
spill? 
Would the  calamity have been less of a problem if America consumed a mere 
10% of the  world's resources? 
The oddities go on and on. Obama's Administration has declared that even  
banks that want to repay their bailout money may be refused permission to do 
so.  Only after the Obama team cleared a bank through the Fed's "stress 
test" was it  eligible to give taxpayers their money back. Even then, declared 
Treasury  Secretary Tim Geithner, the Administration might force banks to 
keep the  money. 
The President continues to push for stimulus even though hundreds of 
billions  of dollars in such funds seem to have done little. The unemployment 
rate 
when  Obama took office in January 2009 was 7.7%; now it is 9.5%. Yet he 
wants to  spend even more and is determined to foist the entire bill on 
Americans making  $250,000 a year or more. The rich, Obama insists, aren't 
paying 
their "fair  share." This by itself seems odd given that the top 1% of 
Americans pay 40% of  all federal income taxes; the next 9% of income earners 
pay 
another 30%. So the  top 10% pays 70% of the taxes; the bottom 40% pays 
close to nothing. This does  indeed seem unfair--to the rich. 
Obama's foreign policy is no less strange. He supports a $100 million 
mosque  scheduled to be built near the site where terrorists in the name of 
Islam 
 brought down the World Trade Center. Obama's rationale, that "our 
commitment to  religious freedom must be unshakable," seems utterly irrelevant 
to 
the issue of  why the proposed Cordoba House should be constructed at Ground 
Zero. 
Recently the London Times reported that the Obama Administration  supported 
the conditional release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie  bomber 
convicted in connection with the deaths of 270 people, mostly Americans.  This 
was an eye-opener because when Scotland released Megrahi from prison and  
sent him home to Libya in August 2009, the Obama Administration publicly and  
appropriately complained. The Times, however, obtained a letter the Obama  
Administration sent to Scotland a week before the event in which it said 
that  releasing Megrahi on "compassionate grounds" was acceptable as long as he 
was  kept in Scotland and would be "far preferable" to sending him back to 
Libya.  Scottish officials interpreted this to mean that U.S. objections to 
Megrahi's  release were "half-hearted." They released him to his home 
country, where he  lives today as a free man. 
One more anomaly: A few months ago nasa Chief Charles Bolden announced that 
 from now on the primary mission of America's space agency would be to 
improve  relations with the Muslim world. Come again? Bolden said he got the 
word  directly from the President. "He wanted me to find a way to reach out to 
the  Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to 
help them  feel good about their historic contribution to science and math and  
engineering." Bolden added that the International Space Station was a model 
for  nasa's future, since it was not just a U.S. operation but included the 
Russians  and the Chinese. Obama's redirection of the agency caused 
consternation among  former astronauts like Neil Armstrong and John Glenn, and 
even 
among the  President's supporters: Most people think of nasa's job as one 
of landing on the  moon and Mars and exploring other faraway destinations. 
Sure, we are for Islamic  self-esteem, but what on earth was Obama up to here? 
Theories abound to explain the President's goals and actions. Critics in 
the  business community--including some Obama voters who now have buyer's  
remorse--tend to focus on two main themes. The first is that Obama is clueless  
about business. The second is that Obama is a socialist--not an out-and-out 
 Marxist, but something of a European-style socialist, with a penchant for  
leveling and government redistribution.  
____________________________________
  
These theories aren't wrong so much as they are inadequate. Even if they  
could account for Obama's domestic policy, they cannot explain his foreign  
policy. The real problem with Obama is worse--much worse. But we have been  
blinded to his real agenda because, across the political spectrum, we all 
seek  to fit him into some version of American history. In the process, we 
ignore  Obama's own history. Here is a man who spent his formative years--the 
first 17  years of his life--off the American mainland, in Hawaii, Indonesia 
and Pakistan,  with multiple subsequent journeys to Africa. 
A good way to discern what motivates Obama is to ask a simple question: 
What  is his dream? Is it the American dream? Is it Martin Luther King's dream? 
Or  something else? 
It is certainly not the American dream as conceived by the founders. They  
believed the nation was a "new order for the ages." A half-century later 
Alexis  de Tocqueville wrote of America as creating "a distinct species of 
mankind."  This is known as American exceptionalism. But when asked at a 2009 
press  conference whether he believed in this ideal, Obama said no. America, 
he  suggested, is no more unique or exceptional than Britain or Greece or any 
other  country. 
Perhaps, then, Obama shares Martin Luther King's dream of a color-blind  
society. The President has benefited from that dream; he campaigned as a  
nonracial candidate, and many Americans voted for him because he represents the 
 
color-blind ideal. Even so, King's dream is not Obama's: The President 
never  champions the idea of color-blindness or race-neutrality. This inaction 
is not  merely tactical; the race issue simply isn't what drives Obama. 
What then is Obama's dream? We don't have to speculate because the 
President  tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. 
According  
to Obama, his dream is his father's dream. Notice that his title is not  
Dreams of My Father but rather Dreams from My Father. Obama isn't  writing 
about his father's dreams; he is writing about the dreams he received  from his 
father. 
So who was Barack Obama Sr.? He was a Luo tribesman who grew up in Kenya 
and  studied at Harvard. He was a polygamist who had, over the course of his  
lifetime, four wives and eight children. One of his sons, Mark Obama, has  
accused him of abuse and wife-beating. He was also a regular drunk driver who 
 got into numerous accidents, killing a man in one and causing his own legs 
to be  amputated due to injury in another. In 1982 he got drunk at a bar in 
Nairobi and  drove into a tree, killing himself. 
An odd choice, certainly, as an inspirational hero. But to his son, the 
elder  Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. 
Obama  Sr. grew up during Africa's struggle to be free of European rule, 
and he was one  of the early generation of Africans chosen to study in America 
and then to shape  his country's future. 
I know a great deal about anticolonialism, because I am a native of Mumbai, 
 India. I am part of the first Indian generation to be born after my 
country's  independence from the British. Anticolonialism was the rallying cry 
of 
Third  World politics for much of the second half of the 20th century. To 
most  Americans, however, anticolonialism is an unfamiliar idea, so let me 
explain  it. 
Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by 
 invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South  
America. As one of Obama's acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz 
Fanon,  wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, "The well-being and progress of  
Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, 
 Indians and the yellow races."  
____________________________________
  
Anticolonialists hold that even when countries secure political 
independence  they remain economically dependent on their former captors. This 
dependence is  called neocolonialism, a term defined by the African statesman 
Kwame 
Nkrumah  (1909--72) in his book Neocolonialism: The Last Stage of 
Imperialism.  Nkrumah, Ghana's first president, writes that poor countries may 
be 
nominally  free, but they continue to be manipulated from abroad by powerful 
corporate and  plutocratic elites. These forces of neocolonialism oppress not 
only Third World  people but also citizens in their own countries. Obviously 
the solution is to  resist and overthrow the oppressors. This was the 
anticolonial ideology of  Barack Obama Sr. and many in his generation, 
including 
many of my own relatives  in India. 
Obama Sr. was an economist, and in 1965 he published an important article 
in  the East Africa Journal called "Problems Facing Our Socialism." Obama Sr. 
 wasn't a doctrinaire socialist; rather, he saw state appropriation of 
wealth as  a necessary means to achieve the anticolonial objective of taking 
resources away  from the foreign looters and restoring them to the people of 
Africa. For Obama  Sr. this was an issue of national autonomy. "Is it the 
African who owns this  country? If he does, then why should he not control the 
economic means of growth  in this country?" 
As he put it, "We need to eliminate power structures that have been built  
through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall 
control  a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now." The senior Obama 
proposed  that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper 
limit. In  fact, he insisted that "theoretically there is nothing that can 
stop the  government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get 
benefits from  the government commensurate with their income which is taxed." 
Remarkably, President Obama, who knows his father's history very well, has  
never mentioned his father's article. Even more remarkably, there has been  
virtually no reporting on a document that seems directly relevant to what 
the  junior Obama is doing in the White House. 
While the senior Obama called for Africa to free itself from the 
neocolonial  influence of Europe and specifically Britain, he knew when he came 
to 
America in  1959 that the global balance of power was shifting. Even then, he 
recognized  what has become a new tenet of anticolonialist ideology: Today's 
neocolonial  leader is not Europe but America. As the late Palestinian 
scholar Edward  Said--who was one of Obama's teachers at Columbia 
University--wrote in  Culture and Imperialism, "The United States has replaced 
the earlier  
great empires and is the dominant outside force." 
>From the anticolonial perspective, American imperialism is on a rampage. 
For  a while, U.S. power was checked by the Soviet Union, but since the end of 
the  Cold War, America has been the sole superpower. Moreover, 9/11 
provided the  occasion for America to invade and occupy two countries, Iraq and 
Afghanistan,  and also to seek political and economic domination in the same 
way the French  and the British empires once did. So in the anticolonial view, 
America is now  the rogue elephant that subjugates and tramples the people 
of the world. 
It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack  
Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That 
is  what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, 
Obama  learned to see America as a force for global domination and 
destruction. He came  to view America's military as an instrument of 
neocolonial 
occupation. He  adopted his father's position that capitalism and free markets 
are code words  for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an 
oppressive class, a  kind of neocolonial power within America. In his 
worldview, profits are a  measure of how effectively you have ripped off the 
rest 
of society, and  America's power in the world is a measure of how selfishly 
it consumes the  globe's resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and 
dominates the rest of the  planet. 
For Obama, the solutions are simple. He must work to wring the 
neocolonialism  out of America and the West. And here is where our anticolonial 
understanding of  Obama really takes off, because it provides a vital key to 
explaining not only  his major policy actions but also the little details that 
no 
other theory can  adequately account for. 
Why support oil drilling off the coast of Brazil but not in America? Obama  
believes that the West uses a disproportionate share of the world's energy  
resources, so he wants neocolonial America to have less and the former 
colonized  countries to have more. More broadly, his proposal for carbon taxes 
has little  to do with whether the planet is getting warmer or colder; it is 
simply a way to  penalize, and therefore reduce, America's carbon 
consumption. Both as a U.S.  Senator and in his speech, as President, to the 
United 
Nations, Obama has  proposed that the West massively subsidize energy 
production in the developing  world.  
____________________________________
  
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 anticolonial 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 anticolonialist 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. 
Obama supports the Ground Zero mosque because to him 9/11 is the event that 
 unleashed the American bogey and pushed us into Iraq and Afghanistan. He 
views  some of the Muslims who are fighting against America abroad as 
resisters of U.S.  imperialism. Certainly that is the way the Lockerbie bomber 
Abdel Baset  al-Megrahi portrayed himself at his trial. Obama's perception of 
him as an  anticolonial resister would explain why he gave tacit approval for 
this murderer  of hundreds of Americans to be released from captivity. 
Finally, nasa. No explanation other than anticolonialism makes sense of  
Obama's curious mandate to convert a space agency into a Muslim and  
international outreach. We can see how well our theory works by recalling the  
moon 
landing of Apollo 11 in 1969. "One small step for man," Neil Armstrong  said. 
"One giant leap for mankind." 
But that's not how the rest of the world saw it. I was 8 years old at the  
time and living in my native India. I remember my grandfather telling me 
about  the great race between America and Russia to put a man on the moon. 
Clearly  America had won, and this was one giant leap not for mankind but for 
the U.S. If  Obama shares this view, it's no wonder he wants to blunt nasa's 
space program,  to divert it from a symbol of American greatness into a more 
modest public  relations program. 
Clearly the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. goes a long way to  
explain the actions and policies of his son in the Oval Office. And we can be 
 doubly sure about his father's influence because those who know Obama well 
 testify to it. His "granny" Sarah Obama (not his real grandmother but one 
of his  grandfather's other wives) told Newsweek, "I look at him and I see 
all  the same things--he has taken everything from his father. The son is 
realizing  everything the father wanted. The dreams of the father are still 
alive in the  son." 
In his own writings Obama stresses the centrality of his father not only to 
 his beliefs and values but to his very identity. He calls his memoir "the 
record  of a personal, interior journey--a boy's search for his father and 
through that  search a workable meaning for his life as a black American." 
And again, "It was  into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that 
I'd packed all the  attributes I sought in myself." Even though his father 
was absent for virtually  all his life, Obama writes, "My father's voice had 
nevertheless remained  untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or 
withholding approval. You do not  work hard enough, Barry. You must help in 
your 
people's struggle. Wake up, black  man!" 
The climax of Obama's narrative is when he goes to Kenya and weeps at his  
father's grave. It is riveting: "When my tears were finally spent," he 
writes,  "I felt a calmness wash over me. I felt the circle finally close. I 
realized  that who I was, what I cared about, was no longer just a matter of 
intellect or  obligation, no longer a construct of words. I saw that my life in 
America--the  black life, the white life, the sense of abandonment I'd felt 
as a boy, the  frustration and hope I'd witnessed in Chicago--all of it was 
connected with this  small piece of earth an ocean away, connected by more 
than the accident of a  name or the color of my skin. The pain that I felt 
was my father's pain." 
In an eerie conclusion, Obama writes that "I sat at my father's grave and  
spoke to him through Africa's red soil." In a sense, through the earth 
itself,  he communes with his father and receives his father's spirit. Obama 
takes on his  father's struggle, not by recovering his body but by embracing 
his 
cause. He  decides that where Obama Sr. failed, he will succeed. Obama 
Sr.'s hatred of the  colonial system becomes Obama Jr.'s hatred; his botched 
attempt to set the world  right defines his son's objective. Through a kind of 
sacramental rite at the  family tomb, the father's struggle becomes the 
son's birthright.  
____________________________________
  
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. 
Dinesh D'Souza, the president of the King's College in New York City, is  
the author of the forthcoming book The Roots of Obama's Rage (Regnery  
Publishing). 



-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to