Obama’s Fascist Mantra

(Note: this the first in an as yet unnumbered series on Barack Obama’s fascist tendencies, mostly brought about through my reading of Jonah Goldberg’s superb book Liberal Fascism let me say right here that I don’t believe that Obama is a fascist in a Nazi or Hitlerian manner, only that he tends towards ideas and programs that seek to replace God with the state, or possibly himself.)

“Change we can believe in.” “Yes we can.” These are the seemingly meaningless phrases that Barak Obama throws around like they were a panacea for everything that ails us as a country. And it works. Sorta. It accomplishes what it is really meant to do, and that is to act like a siren’s song for the young and disenfranchised. It is vital to realize that these phrases weren’t chosen out of caprice, this verbiage wasn’t chosen by lottery. As Obama said in his plagiaristic speech, words mean something. And you can be sure every word used for a motto of a Presidential campaign has a very specific meaning and they seek to convey a very specific message. Barack Obama’s campaign theme “change we can believe in” is a most specious motto, but once it is closely examined, it reveals fascistic tendencies. So that is what I have done, I have considered each word he has chosen, words which obviously have a very real, if disturbing meaning. The very first word is change, which is obviously is no mistake since it really is the word that Obama uses the most, the word that really his whole campaign is focused around. Obviously, the question is whether the change that Obama intends to bring about is good or bad. Change is an action word. Barak Obama’s going to do things, he’s going to shake things up, he’s going to upset the status quo, and this energizes youth and the disenfranchised. But when one is so determined to change things, when many if not most people are resistant to change on a basic level– well let’s just say that democracy gets in the way of radical change. That’s why this is a fascistic motto. Mussolini declared himself a man of action. Political action certainly is exciting, but that doesn’t make it beneficial. Change is a rebellious concept which is clearly chosen to take advantage of the unpopularity of George W. Bush, but it is vital that we look with open eyes at what we are moving towards instead of what we are moving away from. Rebellion can be the most costly of reactions. The second word is we. Believe it or not this word is also very important. It is important because its universal. We excludes none, most notably Barack himself. More common in this case the structure would be “Change you can believe in” because you is personal. You suggests that this might be something that benefits you, this might be in your interest. You can also be plural, and it would imply that those around you, those you care about can believe in this change too. The problem is that you is too personal for any fascist motto. You emphasizes the individual, it emphasizes personal values, and that is not fitting with liberal or fascist ideas. We is more important. We is collective. We’re all in this together. The good of the group comes before individual rights. We unites us. As Mussolini said, “Against individualism, the Fascist conception is for the State; and it is for the individual in so far as he coincides with the State, which is the conscience and universal will of man in his historical existence. It is opposed to classical Liberalism, which arose from the necessity of reacting against absolutism, and which brought its historical purpose to an end when the State was transformed into the conscience and will of the people. Liberalism denied the State in the interests of the particular individual; Fascism reaffirms the State as the true reality of the individual.” It is the rejection of the importance of the individual that insists on using “we” instead of “you.” Can. This is the second most often used word by Obama, and this is the word that he uses in his mantra that his followers repeat in eerie unison. In this case though it is not the word of action but of affirmation, reassuring you can believe in this politician. Believe. Believe should be an odd word for politics. After all, politicians should almost never be believed, certainly not when they haven’t already proven themselves. And a politician saying believe me, trust me should be the most suspicious. Barack Obama’s candicy does require belief, though. Not only because he has an almost invisible voting record and no history of managing or running anything, but because his claims are beyond the scope of a man as President. Democracy uses baby steps. Obama is promising giant leaps. But we are not just supposed to trust Obama as the next President. We are to believe in him. He is our hope. The number two believer, behind Obama himself said it clearly: she was finally proud of her country because so many people believed in her Barack. Or as she phrased it “because it feels like hope is making a comeback.” One can only conclude Mrs.Obama believes that without Barack there is no hope. Make no mistake, this is religious faith. We are to believe inBarack Obama.