I used to think that Mr. Obama was merely misguided…..but I am beginning to wonder.
Ya ‘know, I was thinking the other day about Mr. Obama’s budget rantspeech where he stated that he will NOT ever, under any circumstances, reduce the level of subsidy to those he deems worthy….At no time would he consider lowering the benefits doled out to the poor and starving (or whatever criteria he might use….). Instead, despite the deficit being incredible, and approaching limits which are unsustainable, and despite an ever increasing debt level, he would advocate raising taxes on the “rich” (class warfare, the never ending refuge of the liberal….) but never expect those who benefit from such handouts to ever accept less than what they are currently given, and never take any responsibility for themselves…. Even though the average handout benefit has increased by nearly 35% from 2007 to 2010.
At first, I thought that this was just an ideology which I could neither understand nor would I ever find acceptable….. Then I realized that this is a continuation of the Cloward-Piven strategy….Written Large.
While I believe that the entitlement system will never remove poverty, primarily because it rewards “bad” behavior…and does little or nothing to incentivize people to move to a more productive and self reliant lifestyle, and likely perpetuates “poverty” (albeit continually re-defined), I realized that it could be that his actions on the budget and the deficit are likely a giant step forward in the ideology put forth by his mentor, Saul Alinsky…whose writings were an inspiration for both Cloward and Piven.
The aim is to destroy the US through internal revolution. And Mr Obama’s actions may well move that goal forward by destroying the earning power of those of us who are left paying taxes….and WILL lead to the destruction of the welfare state. As it is, currently more goes out to the average household than comes in as taxes….Leading to the desired collapse?
One wonders, however, if the destruction which his mentors wish to create, and the resulting revolution will take the form which they envision? Will the destruction of the welfare state do anything to help the “poor”?
Will the destruction of the “welfare state” cause a replacement which is more helpful to the poor….or will it result in something which forces them to make do with less help? Will the revolution actually result in a stronger, more viable welfare state which will give more to the poor and disadvantaged, or will it result in less of a welfare state, with fewer benefits for the “poor”….Will it force the “poor” to reduce their dependence on the largess of others and make them modify their lifestyle to become more self reliant?
One has to question if the strategy of Alinsky (and Cloward and Piven) is designed to do more than just somehow uplift the poor.. …like help hasten the destruction of the economic health of this country.
And I really don’t think they want the type of “revolution” that will result.
Thanks, Mr B for gathering these thoughts in this format. Very timly post for me. I agree with your thoughts.
Some people see a collapse of this country with the result a socialist state. Tax the rich and select corporations into extinction. The result of a revolution being this welfare state socialism.
I don't think that people will roll over so easily. I think those that deserve help will/can always find help in giving organizations (churches) but the lazy welfare slugs will be the ones to lose out. Those that work for a living will be fed up with the nonsense.
We are at a crossroads. Things cannot remain as they are – there WILL BE A CHANGE. Will we change to greatly improve our rights as defined (not granted) by the constitution or will we become slaves to the state?
If there is a revolt in this country, the socialists will be the ones stacked up in front of people's houses like sandbags. they can't exist without other people's money.
Blunt, Og. I like the picture that you paint.