|He is an acolyte of the vampire religion that dare not yet speak its name in the light of day.|
He hasn't advocated the abolition of private property; only of individual control over it. A distinction in search of a difference.
Our political context and history is not China's: they have moved(for now)towards freedom, we away, looking for all the world like a step towards convergence. But Deng has been clear about China's intentions. for anyone who has taken the time to research the matter. He criticized Mao and the former cultural revolution for trying to skip the 'necessary phase' of capitalism on the way to the People's Utopia. IOW, before the elite beekeepers can carve the carcass, the people must freely build the beast--for some period of time. People must be 'allowed' -- for some period of time sufficient to build the beast -- to run free under the illusion of freedom.
Not the same at all in our political context. We have experienced the once 'necessary phase' of capitalism. Our trajectory is different, as is the general feel, presently, in this nation, as we move away from individual freedom. Obama's present needs were not Deng's needs when he made those observations, even if they share the same vision, are cut from the same left wing ideological cloth. He, as the latest attack on individual freedom from the left, must stoke the illusion of freedom in America, enough to keep the carcass struggling. Hence his charade of 'courting' pro business crony deals with the guns of state, his celebration of yet remaining pockets of rural PA 'capitalism,' the borrowing of 'we do big things' from a small drilling equipment manufacturer / capitalist in PA as his 'proof' that he and his haven't quite yet killed every remnant of capitalism in America, that it yet lives in tiny pockets far from the DC beltway and cozy crony deals with government plans to 'run the economy.'
But he's simple to evaluate. In our crippled political context, is he an advocate of free association, or forced association?
Deeds, not words, answer that question.
That's all one needs to know about him. The claptrap of his latest spin of the moment PR campaign is pure fluff. Even his rhetoric -- 'we do big things' -- is borrowed clothing.
There was once a world struggle for global dominance of two distinctly incompatible ideas. In round one, the free world, led by a free America, won the battle. At the end of round one, that same America suffered from the Western disease, which is, forever ending conflict before the conflict is actually over. Like, taking only half the prescribed dose of antibiotics.
The gutted America that will be around during round 2 is one that has been indirectly and corrosively attacked from within on multiple fronts. It is no shape to lead a free world anywhere. It is, in fact, sprinting towards its own version of totalitarian nirvana, it's own race to the bottom.
If there is ever going to be a rebirth of freedom in America, it is going to come from the bottom, not the top. From weakness, not strength. It is going to come from a failed, dystopic nation on its knees.
Just like the first time.
(Edited by Fred Bartlett on 1/31, 8:38am)