Obama claims to be a uniter, but the simplest empirical survey will show that he is the most explosive divider seen in this country in decades, since he has succeeded in splitting both the Democratic Party and the US population in general according to the classic fault lines of white against black, black against Hispanic, black against Asian, black against Jewish, men against women, old against young, rich against poor. Having seen Obama accomplish all of this in less than a year and a half on the campaign trail, we can confidently predict that an Obama presidency would in all probability put the United States well on its way to civil war. Giving Obama and his financier controllers the White House would represent an act of national suicide for this country, with the most catastrophic implications for the world as a whole. This analysis is corroborated by the fact that Obama, alone among all the protagonists of the 2008 presidential contest, possesses either a postmodern fascist mass movement, or a very plausible facsimile thereof. These are the lemming legions who are not supporting a program of measures that the government might take, but who are hysterically loyal to and obsessed with Obama as a fantasy figure and charismatic savior -- in other words, as an emerging fascist leader. As those who lived through Italy in 1922 and Germany in 1933 remind us in the writings they have left behind, there is simply no comparison between a normal, corrupt, bourgeois parliamentary regime and a fascist seizure of power. These are qualitatively distinct, and set Obama apart from all of his competitors in a way that we can only ignore at our own very great peril.
The only way to conduct a satisfactory analysis of the Obama agitation is to use a class standpoint, rather than a racial criterion or an outlook based on gender. Obama is an operative for the finance oligarchs. The Democratic Party bureaucracy is supporting Obama and opposing Senator Clinton because this is the decree of Wall Street, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberger group, the Ford Foundation, Skull and Bones, the Chicago School, the Council on Foreign Relations, and other ruling class institutions. The Democratic Party bosses like Howard Dean and Donna Brazile are not supporting Obama because they care about what happens to black voters. The Democratic Party has proved repeatedly that it cares nothing whatever about the fate of black voters. At the same time, it is very naïve to assume that the explanation for the slander campaign of the controlled corporate media against Hillary Clinton is that the media whores for Obama are motivated by misogyny and hatred of women. That may be a factor in individual cases, but the main reason the controlled media are vilifying Senator Clinton is that they have been ordered by their Wall Street paymasters to do so. The main issues in this contest are class issues, and not racial or gender issues. Blue-collar working-class voters are not generally opposed to Obama because of race, but rather because they can sense in his elitism and condescension that he is a candidate loyal solely to the dictates of the financiers.
[...]
We are arguing, in other words, that Obama's embrace of the philosophy of academic postmodernism has constituted an important stage in his development towards fascism. The postmodernism of which we speak has of course been the dominant intellectual outlook among most college and university faculties since about the 1970s. Intellectually speaking, it is a thin and unappetizing gruel, suitable for crabbed little people operating in a phase of imperialist decline. The starting point of postmodernism is the despair, disorientation, demoralization, and defeatism which emerged from the collapse of the positive social movements of the 1960s. From its very beginning, postmodernism has been much more interested in race and gender than in class. Postmodernism is an unsavory stew of existentialism, structuralism, deconstructionism, anthropological relativism, and Malthusianism, all thrown together in the cauldron of historical pessimism and cultural pessimism. The aspect of relativism has been especially important for the rejection and destruction of classical culture with its indispensable notions of human reason, human freedom, human greatness, and the heroic sense of the world historical individual. Instead, the drawings of patients in mental institutions are placed on the same plane as the works of Leonardo and Rafael, and Athens and Florence are compared unfavorably to hunting and gathering societies where cannibalism and infanticide proliferate. Postmodernism is the creed of the morally insane. A thoroughgoing postmodernist (or "postie") must axiomatically reject any notion of objective reality; postmodernism when challenged beats a hasty retreat into a dream world of myth, metaphor, and archetype. Postmodernism gets its philosophical underpinnings most of all from Nietzsche and the other exponents of what the academics like to call "Continental philosophy," so as to avoid talking about the strong fascist overtones of many of these thinkers. The latent fascist potentialities of present day academic postmodernism are immense, and have only been waiting behind masks of cynicism and apathy for the appearance of an appropriate demagogue to mobilize them into the obvious forms of frenetic sociopathic activism.
[...]
Fundamentally, Obama is an apolitical and anti-political candidate who is opposed to a form of government in which economic questions are decided primarily by the give and take and haggling inherent in the parliamentary and legislative processes. Obama thinks that these decisions ought to be made by bankers speaking among themselves in the measured tones of the corporate boardroom. His entire campaign therefore has a decidedly anti-parliamentary thrust, a characteristic that it shares with the early Italian fascism of Mussolini between 1919 in 1922. The Duce once described the Italian parliament as a cattle pen, and his contempt for parliamentary methods was always flagrant. Obama offers the same attitude in a somewhat laid-back postmodern or new age form, but...
[...]
In my book Obama -- The Postmodern Coup: The Making of a Manchurian Candidate, I argue that presidential candidate Barack Obama is a wholly-owned puppet of Zbigniew Brzezinski and his associates of the Trilateral Commission, founded by David Rockefeller. As some have noted, Brzezinski has been attempting to conceal his actual domination of the Obama campaign, for which he is the chief guru and controller. Now a rhetorical outburst by Obama on the campaign trail in Oregon at the close of the primaries once again pointed to the reality that Obama is a ventriloquist's dummy, with the Russia-hating fanatic Brzezinski, a barbarous relic of the Cold War, acting as the ventriloquist.
At a campaign stop in Oregon, Obama intoned:
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK," Obama said. "That's not leadership. That's not going to happen," he added. If India and China's "carbon footprint gets as big as ours, we're gone." (AFP)
This remarkable statement reveals the true program of a future Obama administration: savage austerity, brutal economic sacrifice, and a massive further reduction in the standard of living of the depleted and exhausted US population -- as demanded by David Rockefeller, George Soros, and Obama's Wall Street backers. This will be done under left cover -- through a global warming tax, a third world solidarity tax, and other demagogic frauds, with the revenue going to bail out Goldman Sachs, Citibank, and JP Morgan Chase. The tired, discredited post-9/11 "war on terror" slogans will be largely dumped. Most interesting is that Obama's sound bytes are actually a sloganized version of a key passage from Zbigniew Brzezinski's recent book Second Chance: Three Presidents and the Crisis of American Superpower.169 This book contains Zbig's desperate strategy for preserving the crisis-ridden US-UK world empire, including by making the US "social model" more attractive to developing sector publics. Zbig writes:
In mutually compounding ways, material self-indulgence, persistent social shortcomings, and public ignorance about the world increase the difficulty the American democracy faces in formulating a globally appealing platform for effective world leadership. Americans must recognize that their patterns of consumption will soon collide head-on with increasingly impatient egalitarian aspirations. Whether through the exploitation of natural resources, excessive energy consumption, indifference to global ecology, or the exorbitant size of houses for the well-to-do, indulgent self-gratification at home conveys indifference to the persisting deprivations of much of the world. (Just try to imagine a world in which 2.5 billion Chinese and Indians consume as much energy per capita as Americans do.) That reality the American public has yet to assimilate. To lead, America must not only be sensitive to global realities. It must also be socially attractive. That calls for a broader national consensus in favor of correcting the key failings of the American social model.
[...]
During June 2008, the Democratic Party split. There emerged a coherent movement of opposition to Obama and to the postmodern fascism he represented. These were the PUMA Democrats, who first emerged on May 31 when Soros' man Howard Dean had cut the Florida and Michigan delegations in half on the basis of his Wall Street doubletalk. PUMAs were suddenly all over cable television threatening to vote for McCain, but it was clear that what they really wanted was to prod Senator Clinton to come back into the race. They said they were not calling for some futile and self-defeating gesture, but rather pointing to the path that lead to victory in November. The preconditions for a Clinton resurgence were an open convention not subject to the totalitarian control of discredited and hated figures like Dean, Brazile, and the other machine bosses and hacks. Then, there had to be the chance to vote through a formal Roll Call of the States, the centerpiece of every American convention since time immemorial. But Dean and Brazile were already attempting to cancel the Roll Call of the States, and orchestrate a convention of mindless Obama hoopla, preventing even platform debate. Obama was demanding that he give his acceptance speech in the Denver ball park, and was trying to schedule a speech before the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin on his upcoming trip to Germany so he could posture as the new Kennedy.
[...]
My book Obama -- The Postmodern Coup: The Making of a Manchurian Candidate grew out of the realization on the weekend between the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary that the Obama bandwagon was not a normal political campaign, but rather an application of the methods of the neo-imperialist and neo-liberal people power coup/color revolution (as we had seen them in Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon, etc.) brought home to the United States. It was a postmodern coup under the cover of an election. A little digging showed that Obama's handlers and controllers -- Zbigniew Brzezinski, Mark Brzezinski, Joseph Nye, Austan Goolsbee -- represent the core of the Trilateral Commission-Bilderberger group, closely associated with the Rockefeller interests. Some of these people, especially Zbig and Paul Volcker, are the handlers who directed the catastrophic Carter Trilateral presidency thirty years ago.
[...]
An attempt to obscure the real nature of fascism as an anti-establishment, anti-parliamentary mass movement came from the former CIA employee Ray McGovern. McGovern was one of those left-liberal personalities who had stubbornly refused to go beyond the CIA's blowback theory of 9/11 to examine the more realistic alternative explanations of the MIHOP school.219 In the March- April 2008, McGovern authored an article entitled "History's Lessons: Creeping Fascism -- Lessons from the Past." (consortiumnews.com) Here McGovern presented the question of fascism solely and exclusively as a problem of top-down police state measures, with no reference whatsoever to historical fascism as a mass movement of idealistic students, goons, and guttersnipes backed by financiers and operating under anti-politician and anti-establishment cover. Fascism for McGovern was a matter of Bush's violation of the FISA wiretap law and similar top-down measures. Interestingly, McGovern cited the late, notorious, British agent of German nationality, Sebastian Haffner. Haffner had written about the National Socialist seizure of power in 1933, criticizing the "sheepish submissiveness" and the "cowardly treachery" of the labor-based Social Democratic Party. Haffner found that "it is in the final analysis only that betrayal [by the Social Democrats] that explains the almost inexplicable fact that a great nation, which cannot have consisted entirely of cowards, fell into ignominy without a fight." But it is very easy for modern-day left liberals with CIA connections to fault the German labor politicians of 75 years ago. Haffner did not mention that his British paymasters had thrown their support to Hitler, as in the case of Lady Astor and her Cliveden Set. What can we say of Howard Dean, Pelosi, Jay Rockefeller, Ted Kennedy, and the other rotten Democratic politicians who have rushed to support postmodern fascism in the form of the Obama campaign long before any seizure of power? The modern American politicians do not fare well in this comparison.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
interesting reading this now-- you make a strong point and most folks are still praying that Obama will turn it around and be the savior -- they missed Goldman's profits, bonuses and 1% tax rate
Post a Comment