Jack - [3:59 PM]:
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/politics-socialism-capitalism-private-enterprises-obama-business-problem.html
Hussain - [3:59 PM]:
I read that.
Jack - [3:59 PM]:
You like?
Hussain - [3:59 PM]:
D'Souza's projecting.
The very definition of American is anti-colonialist.
After WW2 we abandoned our protectionists ways and have accepted our anti-colonialist ways.
Look at the name at his upcoming book. He's a hater.
He's promoting his book and his flawed perspective.
It's not a bad argument, it's just for his head, not Obama's.
Jack - [4:02 PM]:
I dunno, the label "anti-colonialist" might be bad, but I don't think he's far off in identifying Obama's motivations.
Hussain - [4:02 PM]:
I was going to write a blog post about it, but that's the essence.
Anti-colonialist isn't bad, but D'Souza makes it out to be.
That's the cleverness of his projection, it's not far off if you want to see it in a socialist-hater way.
Jack - [4:03 PM]:
But then why is it projection? He's not anitcolonialist, is he?
Hussain - [4:03 PM]:
The problem is he's a hater, so he casts what's good about America - being anti-colonialist - in some negative light.
No he's an Indian of some sort, and has British colonialist baggage.
He is an anti-colonialist, but a non-socialist, hero-like one. He clearly doesn't like Obama's dickrider, socialist reclaiming of "anti-colonialist."
He's the arbiter of anti-colonialism.
Jack - [4:04 PM]:
Reclaiming? Didn't they always own it?
Hussain - [4:04 PM]:
Apart from my psychobabble, the root of the issue is whether anti-colonialism is American or not American.
It's American.
Jack - [4:05 PM]:
I associate it with the modern left.
Hussain - [4:05 PM]:
Why?
Jack - [4:05 PM]:
At least as he defines it.
Hussain - [4:05 PM]:
America's very roots are anti-colonialist.
The very.
Jack - [4:06 PM]:
Well, I don't feel like there was much of an idea of worrying about "the other guy" util maybe the 1960s.
Hence "modern."
Hussain - [4:06 PM]:
Beleiving that people have the right to be soverign nations is how we were founded and then after WW2 we started asserting on it.
More like 1930's
Jack - [4:07 PM]:
Ok, but I was thinking it was more a financial thing.
Like, clearly they US has been "not about having colonies of its own" since day 1.
Hussain - [4:07 PM]:
That's a distraction/cleverbit by D'Souza.
Jack - [4:07 PM]:
So I see what you're saying.
Hussain - [4:07 PM]:
Tying it to that veers you in that way.
A cornerstone of the argument is linking anti-colonialism to socialism.
The problem is it's feeble.
Not only not having their own, but also not being one.
Jack - [4:08 PM]:
Well, it's more like I was already over there, and then he said "by the way, where you are is called 'anti-colonialism'" and I said "fine, whatever."
Hussain - [4:08 PM]:
Well, sure
That's why if you're a hater, it's a clever ruse.
You're there, here's another term to call it. Make a sign next Tea Party.
Jack - [4:08 PM]:
Like, for me, Obama is part of a movement that's about a global socialist government.
Hussain - [4:08 PM]:
Make sure to spell it right lest you get youtubed writing "MORAN"
Well, that's definitely an opinion, probably one D'Souza holds, and is now leveraging to sell "The Roots of Obama's Rage"
Why doesn't he go about just talking about the logical ties from socialism to Obama? Why does he try to distract with core American-ness (aka anticolonialism)
He literally shoots himself in the foot, causing Rage.
But, selling books.
Jack - [4:10 PM]:
Well, I think the word is wrong, but I don't think he's wrong about the motivations.
Hussain - [4:10 PM]:
I'm sure his pseudointellectualism will do a lot to further confuse the debate. Like the Christian Right has done to the Tea Party.
That's opinion, though, not backed by even the arguments in the article.
Jack - [4:11 PM]:
I think that Obama really thinks the world will be better if the wealth is spread around the WHOLE world.
Hussain - [4:11 PM]:
He keeps tying things to anti-colonialism as if that's socialism.
Anti-colonialism is explicitly self-sustaining soverign nations.
His definition of socialism is loose enough to snare you.
Especially in this economy, it's enough to snare anyone.
"Hell no, he's not spending my hard earned $1.05 on Brathillianz!"
Like, really?
No, not really.
After WW2, we help people.
Prior, we were very protectionist. We still have R-party members who are insistant on being retroactives, and that's fine, it's in our history.
Pretending that we're excessively helpy is an edge argument.
It'll sell a book, though.
Jack - [4:14 PM]:
Well, it's not really important to me that it be called "socialism."
I think that's an accurate term for what Obama wants, but whatever.
Hussain - [4:14 PM]:
That's ok, too, but note, that farts on D'Souza's argument and we're off his deal.
I happen to agree with you, but not with the rhetorical slight of hand D'Souza's pulling.
Jack - [4:15 PM]:
The only reason I'm sorta "meh" about what you're saying is that I responded to what he was saying by trying to understand it in terms that I like, as opposed to really worrying about how he was saying it.
Like, I can see you point, but I just connected the dots so they made sense for me, rather than really listening to him.
Hussain - [4:16 PM]:
Sure, I understand. I get that and that's how D'Souza will sell books.
Sure.
It's how you win arguments, hearts, then minds.
Much later minds, if they can even be counted on to pay attention.
Jack - [4:17 PM]:
Is there as much Obamabacklash as it seems like?
Hussain - [4:17 PM]:
Plunk down the $22 on the book first, then whaawhaa about the argument.
I don't think so, but the media's all about it.
They love a fire.
Jack - [4:17 PM]:
I dunno, the comments...
Hussain - [4:17 PM]:
You know my opinion on the media.
Jack - [4:17 PM]:
I always look at the comments.
Obviously they're always "U NO HE A SOCALIS! NO FANK!"
Hussain - [4:18 PM]:
I do, too.
Jack - [4:18 PM]:
But lately they're all anti-Obama.
And annoyingly so.
Hussain - [4:18 PM]:
I think the article's misleading, but cleverly so, so I don't trust the comments.
In this case.
Jack - [4:19 PM]:
I was promised that he was magic.
But he's not magic!
I am losing hope for change.
Hussain - [4:19 PM]:
Lately, everyone's got some frustration to pin on Obama, the big target, too.
Jack - [4:20 PM]:
"WHY HIM NOT MAKE JOB FOR ME??"
Hussain - [4:20 PM]:
Well, what I thought after realizing D'Souza cleverness (which is quite clever) was that Geez, Obama's actually doing what he said he would, he's keeping hope alive.
People just aren't in the mood for that shit right now, but he's holding true.
It's not going to help him.
Jack - [4:20 PM]:
Is he a one termer?
Hussain - [4:20 PM]:
If you're right around here, for example, it's wholly irrelevant, you just have to be the one they like.
Too early.
Jack - [4:21 PM]:
I dunno, you might be right, I'll ask Carl.
Hussain - [4:21 PM]:
The R's + the Tea Party might blow their wad this midterm.
Jack - [4:21 PM]:
Yeah.
Hussain - [4:21 PM]:
I wouldn't count the D's, or really Obama, out yet.
The Tea Party is embarassing, though.
If they really sway the R's, they'll fall off the wagon and go Gibson.