Obama's socialist takeover

We are in the midst of a devastating ideological war. It is a war of words and ideas. Unfortunately, most Americans are unaware that the battle is taking place because they don't know the definitions of the words being tossed around like hand grenades, and they are currently too apathetic to do the necessary research to educate themselves. This is partially evidenced by my continued difficulty in finding enough people willing to attend my Constitution classes.

Let's start with some the "self-evident truths" mentioned in the Declaration of Independence: life and property (represented by the more familiar "pursuit of happiness" clause). When I ask people "Who owns your body?", they usually stare at me, incredulous that anything other than self ownership could even be imagined. I have never had anyone dispute my claim that private property is an inate and universal concept after discussing the practice of cutting the hand off of anyone caught stealing in certain Arab countries. It is at this point in the class that I summarize the Constitution and Bill of Rights in seven words: Don't hurt me. Don't take my stuff. From here it is a fairly easy logic process to demonstrate that the only purpose of any legitimate government is to defend your life, Liberty, and property.

Of course, there are many alternatives to our Constitutional republic. To wit:

A theory or system of social organization which advocates the vesting of [property ownership] in the community as a whole. It is characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

A theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.

The only real choice is either YOU OWN IT or THEY OWN IT - whoever they may be. I now draw your attention to a serious allegation implied by the title of an editorial by Jeffrey Kuhner of the Washington Times: President's socialist takeover must be stopped. Mr. Kuhner accuses the President of erecting a socialist dictatorship, and I agree with him completely. However you should never take the word of a newspaper reporter and a self-proclaimed Constitutional scholar for granted. This is something you should analyze and decide for yourself. Please read Mr. Kuhner's article, and then tell me if Obama's policies support personal or governmental ownership of (your) property. In short, do you think that Barack Obama is a socialist as demonstrated by his policies? If you you are still undecided, I recommend that you review the 2005 Supreme Court decision known as Kelo vs New London, Connecticut.

There no Socialism in the U.S.

There no Socialism in the United States?” If socialism ever were to arrive in America (and sorry guys, it hasn’t), I’d like to think that Oakland-based hip-hop group the Coup would help

[mjb: I emphatically disagree. I encourage ALL of my friends to read How Tyranny Came to America by Joseph Sobran - a wiser man than me.]

A rose by any other name

No form of collectivism has ever been pure. I don't think that it really is important to label it precisely, only to recognize that most of what we have in force presently is absolutely antithetical to the principles upon which our (once great) country was created by our Founding Fathers. So some form of collectivism is unquestionably in play.

But if we must label it, I believe that what we have in America is a form of fascism, tapping into the corporate culture (as opposed to religious insitutions during the Mussolini regime), to act as agents for the government; intruding into every aspect of our lives with impunity, because after all, the corporate employees (drones) are simply "following the law" (as interpreted by the corporate legal staff.) And don't forget about some of the more blatent government-corporate partnerships, as is occurring in many of the prison systems across this country.

We certainly have our work cut out for us as we try to change the minds of our fellow countrymen to return to the principals of liberty. But I remain cautiously optimistic. In my mind there is no other reasonable alternative, other than simply imploding!


I was listening to a podcast from http://www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/ and he was explaining that Thialand is actually a great deal more free than the U.S.  People make the blanket statement "Well, it's still the greatest country in the world...at least we're still FREE"....NO, we're NOT.
If you buy propety in Thialand it's YOURS.  And you may do as you wish with it.  If you want to turn it into a golf course and sell beer you may.  No permits, no nothing.  It is YOUR property.  Try doing that in THIS country....you'll be behind bars pronto.

He also made the statement that during the Viet Nam war that  the soldiers noticed the people there were actually more free than 'we' were even during that time frame.  Everyone knew we had no business there.    The comment was made that if you want to raise chickens, you may.  You may raise them in town.  No permits.  You raise chickens for your food.  Can YOU do that where you live?  I can't.

And just because I can still say it....MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!

Sorry but...

 ...Thailand in not "more free" than the USA. You could say that both nations are "unfree" but in different manner. 

Case in point? If you are not a Thai national, by that country's laws you cannot hold the majority of a business. At least 51% of control over any private enterprise must be in the hands of a Thai citizen. So if you want to create a $1,000,000 business there, you better have some Thai friends willing to come up with at least $510,000 and be willing to submit control of your company to them.

I would also remind you that in Thailand, the "Peace Officers" SOP for dealing with manifestations is using bullets on unarmed civilians, even those taking refuge in churches. They also seem to have no qualms about shooting foreign members of the press and media.

And that last bit about property in Thailand being "YOURS"...funny, I seem to recall one of the last gentleman to be in command of that nation had no qualms about confiscating tracts of land from their "owners", carving it up and distributing it among his proletariat buddies, en masse.. 

So yes, while Thailand may lack such statist insanities like the EPA or DHS and have a much less strict (or more business-friendly if you will) regulatory structure than the USA at the moment, it is far, far, far away from being a libertarian paradise. 

Please note that I am not an American touting my own horn. I'm an European looking at two nations that are in dire straits in what pertains to freedom; speaking from a nation that is also in dire straits somewhere in between those two in terms of gravity.
But given a choice between the States and Thailand, I'd place my bets on the good'ol US as which will wither the storm better and come out freer on the other side. Americans, at least those "few" million of them that matter, are much better equiped, culturally, mentally and spiritually than the Thai to carry out the non-violent evolution which is required.

And if that doesn't work, well, the Thai don't have 200,000,000 guns in private hands, do they?

Buy the Book or DVD Today!

Find a class in your city

JAW-DROPPING 8 hour immersion
into a subject you THOUGHT you knew.

Recent Articles

Witty, funny, engaging, educational, articles by Michael Badnarik.