What a difference two weeks make. It’s encouraging to find that this week, there are people other than myself who are displeased, if not horrified, at the media onslaught-for-Obama, the excessive hyperbole on the internet by onslaughters-for-Obama, and, as to the most concerning, the politics being attempted by both those in coordination with their dim-messianic idol, Barack Obama.
I wonder which came first, the gullible and easily misled or the maladjusted, badly intended who mislead them. But does it really mattter to know the answer to that, except in some archaeological, sociological question after-the-fact.
The German people from an after-the-fact perspective were willing and certainly gullible in their respective present-day, if many of them could be believed when later questioned (and questioned, and questioned) as to how it was they enabled what they did in the 1930’s and 1940’s, and yet no one appears to have seen any farther down-the-line of developments as bad things occured, as to what could, would and did develope, what the dominoes were as they were put in place and then fell in wretched assault before being scattered.
What concerns me about the “Obama Messianic” fervor occuring today is that it is eerily similar to what history tells us occured in Germany in those bad days, that resulted in a politcal party (“National Socialists” – which, in acronym reference, translates to “Nazis“) and a Socialist figure associated with that politic, also back then, rising to cult status, to cult “leadership” of the politic. And encouraged in being such because there were just enough people then who were eager for something that should never, ever occur: a human figure supported in some other-wordly proportions and then run amok.
Which is what those other-wordly proportions in the socio-political tense result in, when there are not enough other people to demand the first bunch come back to earth and get realistic, or, in extremes, to expose and overcome the conditions that mislead many to such conclusions that they’d pursue this type of fervor and lose reason themselves. Try to explain how it was that Castro did what he did and remains in place in Cuba even today, try to explain why it was that Adolf HItler did what he did in Germany and remained in place as he did long enough to do what he did there, or Stalin, or other Socialist dictators (cult figures, all) and the explanations reveal gradual changes in-time with just enough fervor that was not challenged by just enough reason, culminating in the bad ends that the first bunch rationalized abandoning means to accomplish.
And what about these cult figures? They appear throughout history to come along only after first-hand experiences of regret replacing bravado by those who experienced the worst have died out. Obama as messianic figure, followers as the cultish, fervor-struck entranced, the politics pursued as “collective” based upon “taking away” from others to redistribute the undefined illusion to the followers — Socialism run amok, the extreme kind that degenerates into dictators and deprivations of individual conditions, penalizing even so much as minor variations from the collective or cult themes — are conditions that attempt to replicate the same conditions that existed in Germany in the 1930’s. The conditions are only possible today because too few individuals are informed and/or aware of what conditions actually existed in times past.
And so the fervor regenerates and decidedly among the very same mindset as in times past: people demanding government as “parent” or provider, figure of government, so-called, as “savior” or so unique as individual as to represent some bogus-divinity. And what you get is fervor that is unreasonable, as the “hope”s are also irrational.
I’m concerned a great deal about the media, that there are too few people among most media today who can see beyond their desks and look at what’s actually taking place, and instead, who supplant reality with these irrational demands for a kind of hypnotic illusion.
The other political opponents of the United States of America as republic are all lined-up in advocacy of Barack Obama (Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejad, Fidel Castro, to name a few), and I wonder if it’s because Obama is perceived as peer or easy mark. Either perception spells disaster for the world and for our nation.
For the interested, here is a realistic, informative article by Ralph Rieland and the Mises Institute, written in 1998 when “market conditions” and other socio-political alarms were already being sounded (emphasis added):
In 1944, Ludwig von Mises published one of his least-known masterworks: Omnipotent Government: The Rise of the Total State and Total War. Drawing on his prewar experience in Vienna, watching the rise of the national socialists in Germany (the Nazis), who would eventually take over his own homeland, he set out to draw parallels between the Russian and German experience with socialism.
It was common in those days, as it is in ours, to identify the Communists as leftist and the Nazis as rightists, as if they stood on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. But Mises knew differently. They both sported the same ideological pedigree of socialism. “The German and Russian systems of socialism have in common the fact that the government has full control of the means of production. It decides what shall be produced and how. It allots to each individual a share of consumer’s goods for his consumption.”
The difference between the systems, wrote Mises, is that the German pattern “maintains private ownership of the means of production and keeps the appearance of ordinary prices, wages, and markets.” But in fact the government directs production decisions, curbs entrepreneurship and the labor market, and determines wages and interest rates by central authority. “Market exchange,” says Mises, “is only a sham.”
Mises’s account is confirmed by a remarkable book that appeared in 1939, published by Vanguard Press in New York City (and unfortunately out of print today). It is The Vampire Economy: Doing Business Under Fascism by Guenter Reimann, then a 35-year old German writer. Through contacts with German business owners, Reimann documented how the “monster machine” of the Nazis crushed the autonomy of the private sector through onerous regulations, harsh inspections, and the threat of confiscatory fines for petty offenses.
“Industrialists were visited by state auditors who had strict orders to examine the balance sheets and all bookkeeping entries of the company or individual businessman for the preceding two, three or more years until some error or false entry was found,” explains Reimann. “The slightest formal mistake was punished with tremendous penalties. A fine of millions of marks was imposed for a single bookkeeping error.”
Reimann quotes from a businessman’s letter: “You have no idea how far state control goes and how much power the Nazi representatives have over our work. The worst of it is that they are so ignorant. These Nazi radicals think of nothing except ‘distributing the wealth.’ Some businessmen have even started studying Marxist theories, so that they will have a better understanding of the present economic system.
…lends an informed perspective to just what “community organizing” actually means…