The Wrong Side of History
By now you have heard it
many times. The Russians are going to be
rolled back in the Ukraine and in Syria because they are on the wrong side of
history. The same goes for ISIS in its
quest to revive the Caliphate. It is
even true of Republicans when they resist gun control.
In each of these instances,
when asked to explain his policy, Barack Obama has resorted to this
argument. His listeners are routinely
assured that everything will eventually be well because things are destined to
work out favorably. All we need to do is
be patient.
The question is where did
Obama dredge up this thesis? In fact, it
is good old-fashioned Marxism. Karl Marx
insisted that he knew the direction of history.
His “scientific” study of dialectical materialism led him to the
conclusion that a proletarian revolution was inevitable.
Marx further believed that
the progression from socialism through to communism could not be
prevented. Whoever sought to stand in
its way would be rolled over by the steamroller of its inexorableness. It was, therefore, wise to step aside and
allow his supporters to take over.
This did not mean, however,
that Marx was passive. He passionately
inveighed in favor of the coming revolution.
“Workers of the work unite. You
have nothing to lose, but your chains.”
And then he participated in organizing conventions in order to consolidate
the troops.
Barack Obama’s approach is a
bit different. He believes that the
inevitability of his progressive agenda requires him to do nothing to advance
his cause on the international stage. He
must merely stand back and allow the Russians, the Iranians, and the Chinese to
implode.
The trouble with this
strategy was revealed long ago. Edmund
Burke told us that the only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good
people to do nothing. It follows from
this that unless we protect freedom and democracy, their enemies will fill the
void.
Meanwhile on the domestic
front, Obama has decided to act on his own.
He is going to pretend that the Republican “obstructionists” in congress
don’t exist. Rather than follow the
constitution, he will simply do what is going to happen anyway.
Obama is so sure he is
correct that he does not have to convince others of his wisdom. If the congress or the American people
disagree, he must nonetheless do what is in their interest. Because he knows best, he must not allow
their reservations to get in the way of historical necessity.
Here the difficulty is that
Obama is not as brilliant, or perceptive, as he believes. Time and again, his “common sense” strategies
have little to do with common sense. Time
and again, they have failed to achieve the objectives he solemnly pledged. No doubt it would be the same with gun
control.
Of course, Marx’s
predictions did not turn out well either.
The western European revolution he expected never occurred, while the
Russian and Chinese Revolutions delivered tyranny and privation. The brotherhood supposedly inherent in
communism clearly did not arise.
As an aside, isn’t it
interesting how much progressive liberalism has in common with socialism? For years Democrats bridled at being labeled
socialists. Thus, they howled like stuck
pigs when ObamaCare was described in this way.
But now that Bernie Sanders,
and avowed Democratic Socialist, is running for their presidential nomination,
they have mellowed. Somehow neither
Hillary Clinton, nor Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National
Committee, will define, or renounce, socialism.
The fact is that socialist
principles are in their blood.
Liberalism is socialism light. It,
therefore, affects the mindset of adherents like Barack Obama. But, worse still, it influences their
policies. They really believe the collectivist
dogmas, which have repeatedly been disconfirmed, are unimpeachably correct.
It is time for the rest of
us to wake up to what is actually happening—before we march off the cliff to
which they are leading us.
Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
Kennesaw State University
No comments:
Post a Comment