Obama, An Internationalist, Unsentimental about Europe

Obama's Flawed Realism

By Roger Cohen, March 18 2016 (LINK to article)

"Obama emerges as an internationalist, unsentimental about Europe . . "

Which is why globalist "progressives" love him, while the nativist, white Right hates him.

It is important to understand this, rather than indulging one's "progressive" sense of self-righteousness and moral superiority, because otherwise it will rip America, and Europe, apart in civil war.

Why would a self-identifying African American like Obama feel sentimental about Europe? Clearly, he identifies emotionally far more with his African heritage, despite enjoying the fruits of centuries of European civilisation, which he seems to take it for granted, like most whites also do.

That he views climate change as a bigger threat than terrorism, reveals his wisdom.

He is a wise African American, who is "unsentimental about Europe", Europeans and European Americans (apart from some white members of his immediate family). He is far more sentimental about Africa, Africans and African Americans.  And why wouldn't or shouldn't he be?

He was the obvious choice of President for African Americans and for white Americans,who have embraced the ideology of racial self-denial and self-contempt prescribed by western academia, initially in overreaction to the evils of Nazism and the Holocaust (as well as those of European imperialism, slavery, Jim Crow and Apartheid), which addresses a sense of racial guilt, but conveniently for the West's white elites, also serves as an instrument of socio-political intimidation and control, just as medieval church ideology once did (see BLOG in which I elaborate).

The False Premise of American Nationhood

When the State of the Union Is Strong, but Doesn’t Feel Like It

By Bryce  Covert, JAN. 13, 2016 (LINK to article)

This commentary on the "state of the union" is so wrong-headed it is difficult knowing where to begin in criticising it.

It is based on false premises. First and foremost, the false premise that America is a nation. It is not. Like all states, it is a mercenary "patron state" deceitfully posing as a nation, in order to legitimise itself, its ruling elites, and the immense power they wield and abuse, to their own and favoured (especially wealthy and academic) clients personal advantage, at the expense of society at large.

Then there is the false premise (which follows from the first) that economic growth is an absolute good, that everyone, no matter how wealthy they may be, always needs more money.

Far from being an absolute good, perpetual economic (and population) growth poses a dire threat to any society's very survival.

In order to understand where I'm coming from with my criticism, one must view ourselves, our society and civilisation from a human-evolutionary perspective, which tragically a previous generation of academics made a taboo of doing, in OVERREACTION to the Nazis having hijacked the half-baked ideas of social Darwinism, which they abused for their own evil purposes.

It is exactly the kind of overreaction warned against in a recent NYT editorial, The Price of Fear: “In the reaction and overreaction to terrorism [evil] comes the risk that society will lose its way".

Western civilisation has indeed lost its way - badly, and unless corrected, fatally.