The Obama: the Marxist, Anti-Colonial African Colonial - Update

L.E. Ikenga is hot on the trail of D'Souza's wanting analysis in "The Obama Agenda and the New Global Elite". The Left were quick to categorize the article as "highbrow birtherism" (their assault themes are really getting quite worn at this stage). Ikenga deals with it without throwing around labels ad hominem:

Mr. D'Souza fails to understand is that post-colonialism ceased being a cantankerous "cause" or a "crusade" a long time ago. Instead, it now identifies a new way of thinking about the world in global terms. Post-colonialists have long since stopped attending "Reparations Now!" rallies and academic "roundtables" on race and politics. They are now the heads of liberally backed NGOs, Ivy League Institutes, or countries like the United States. (...) >>>

Read it all ...

September 14, 2010

Dinesh D'Souza is once again doing what he does best: narrowly missing at target practice. He gets the general drift and then dashes off after some red herring.

In an analysis on Forbes, "How Omaba thinks" he's bringing up a number of flabbergasting policy decisions by the Obama administration and concludes on that basis: "The President isn't exactly a socialist" and "Obama is a socialist--not an out-and-out Marxist, but something of a European-style socialist" to finally conclude Obama is actually an anti-colonialist.

D'Souza could do with a few courses Objectivism or perhaps study a tome on non-contradictory thought.

All Obama's policy decisions are perfectly explained by the Marxist narrative, which to a more or lesser degree and intensity follows the same simplistic, dialectical world view, broadly reading as follows:

The world is made up of two groups of humans: oppressors and oppressed. The battle is to entice away as much value as possible from the oppressors and hand it over to the oppressed. Since this is serious warfare and the ethical goal outweighs any other consideration, the end justifies the means.

The battle has been raging for almost two centuries.

In turn Marxism rests on the false theories of the German Idealist thinkers, notably Immanuel Kant and his follower Hegel who pushed the fallacy that the outside world - reality - for its existence is somehow dependent on man's mind (thought creates reality, or subjectivism). This is the basis of Progressivist thought.

While others have noted that Obama doesn't share the 'slave blood' of African Americans, the notion that Obama's background should be seen against the light of a black African, was first laid out in June of last year in an article on American Thinker by Nigerian born L.E. Ikenga. In the article the author explains the mental makeup of the typical African colonialist.

Ikenga's 'African colonials' have adopted a Western consciousness and took colonial thought and ideologies in order to advance the anti-colonial agenda, usually to the detriment of the former colony. All Obama is doing, is projecting the anti-colonial Dreams From His African colonial Father.

The same is true of Obama's 'Christianity'. On the basis of Islamic doctrine the case could be made Obama is formally a Muslim. But the fact remains, he's been sitting for over twenty years in the pews of the fire and brimstone emitting Reverend Wright, a typical exponent of Black Liberation Theology.

The tenets of postmodern Liberation Theology are in fact nothing more than a slightly Christianized version of the Marxist dialectic based on the Frantz Fanon's anti-colonial Sorelian myth, "The Wretched of the Earth".

Any doubts of Obama's Marxist root could be laid to rest by his early political exploits in the Marxist New Party (photos also here and do read all the Obama files on New Zeal).

That ultimately brought Obama to the highest office, where he's been redistributing value from his own quintessential 'oppressive' country - the USA - to those nations that share the Marxist dialectical world view, to wit Iran and its proxies, Brazil and a number of other Neo Marxist caudillo countries, the Chicoms, autocratic Russia, and the rest of the laundry list of beneficiaries, of allies thus far thrown "Under the Obama Bus".

Related

- Forbes: "How Obama Thinks", by Dinesh D'Souza
- American Thinker: "Obama, the African Colonial", by L.E. Ikenga
- Key Wiki
- Discover the Networks

Related dossiers

- "The Dialectics"
- "The Pomo Presidency"
- "Under the Bus"
- "Ruled by the Mob"
- "The Obama Civil Defense Force"
- "Stop The Obama Constitutional Crisis"
- "Obama's Radical Connections"
- "Postmodern Ravages"
- "The Pomo White House"

Too Good to Pass Up: Live Pomo Lingo

It was bound to happen sooner rather than later. Resistance is futile! In the B. Barack Obama campaign we find a real live example of the Postmodern attitude towards speech (sound waves may be weapons), truth and ethics (there is no 'wrong', just 'being different'), and the push towards the redistribution of speech rights (early on in the campaign I was told by an Obama team member to shut it about Dutch 'fasc' politician Geert Wilders - the latter a universal Leftist predicate for any random opponent).

Instead of rallying on bicycles in Obama support - as the Athenian Democrats saw fit last Sunday - we should be sincerely worried that the world's top job may well fall into the hands of pomo - if only because these psychotics from birth divorced themselves from reality and have since cut any remaining ties to orthodoxy (in the literal sense of 'uprightness') they might ever have had.

- Caption: Islamic Thinkers focus our thoughts on a Muslim take-over, but that is premature on their part; it might just as well be replaced with the Cuban, Venezuelan or Iranian colours; come to think of it - while we are at it - why not Kim's, in a good cause? -

Besides the pomo connection there's another very disturbing cross current: black liberation theology coming straight out of Frantz Fanon's "Wretched of the Earth" (1961) call to bloody revolution.

Dr Sam Holliday of the Armiger Cromwell Center - a regular contributor to these pages - yesterday forwarded following noteworthy commentary:

On 20 March 08 I wrote we need "to recognize how black liberation theology has replaced traditional Christian teaching in many churches and how the 'Afrocentric' agenda shapes what is taught in black studies programs of our universities."

The addresses by Rev. Jeremiah Wright to the NAACP on 27 Apr 08 and at the National Press Club on 28 Apr 08 illustrate black liberation theology. They also illustrate black separatism and postmodern thought. Here are my opinions on this public relations blitz. These presentations are well researched, carefully crafted and skillfully delivered illustrations of how to deceive, deflect and manipulate. They are about Wright's ego, pride, and self importance--not about the "black church", or about the unity and common good of our nation, or even about Obama's candidacy.

The Jesus of whom Wright speaks is not Jesus the redeemer who died for mankind's sins, but Jesus the liberator of the oppressed. This idea originated with the revolutionary Frantz Fanon and was developed by Marxist elements within the Catholic Church of Latin America. It was officially rejected and harshly admonished by Pope John Paul II. For Wright traditional Christianity is flawed, but he claims true religion can be found in the "black faith tradition".

Wright questions the United States as one indivisible nation--he favors diversity and multiculturalism. He turns patriotism upside down by stressing the failings of the United States rather than a willingness to sacrifice, by placing global interests over national interests. In his addresses he makes no reference to love, support, and defense of the United States. Rather he argues against those policies and actions of the United States government that he considers unfair, unjust, or oppressive of the disadvantaged.

He clearly sees change in accordance with black liberation theology as "progress" toward a Utopian world of equals built on the ashes of the modern era of Western culture. He seeks the deconstruction of the concepts and institutions associated with traditional Western culture. He wants subjectivity to replace objectivity--which he considers illusions created by white men to maintain their power and exploit the disadvantaged.

His emphasis on language and linguistics is typical of postmodernists for whom language concerning interpersonal relations is a way to manipulate. He seeks to change attitudes, values, and norms through language in order to achieve a "turn"--a major paradigm shift--in Western culture. His addresses illustrate how a demagogue can use cherished values to advance his own interests and agenda.

One of the merits of freedom of speech is that it allows others to make better judgments. On 29 Apr 08 Obama condemned what Rev. Wright said at the National Press Club. There is no way of knowing if this is just a necessary political move, even though he agrees with many of Wright's views. It remains to be seen if people will make the correct judgments about the threat to the security of the United States from black liberation theology, black separatism, and postmodern thought.

Dr. Sam Holliday, Director Armiger Cromwell Center


Update:

Dr Sanity: "OBAMA 'S MORAL RELATIVE [ISM]"

"Crazy Uncle"? I suspect that the Reverend Wright is Obama's true moral relative. (...) >>>


Related: "Postmodernism: Rhetoric, Tactics and Attitude"