Saturday, October 27, 2012

For President; Not Barack Obama

Unlike four years ago, when I abstained from voting for president due to Obama's overt collectivism and McCain's equally collectivist nationalism and disdain for free speech, this time I will be casting a presidential vote--for Mitt Romney. Politically, the best I can say about Romney is that he's not Obama. But at least he has some respect for business and, more importantly, the dignity of the individual.

Not so Obama.

Obama appeals to the very worst in people; to envy, greed (a sense of entitlement), resentment, fear of self-responsibility, bigotry (against success), outright hatred of the good for being the good, dependence, suspicion of others. His political agenda reflects overt collectivism, egalitarianism, and state supremacy. His unabashed faith in the state as the source of economic well-being leads straight to a hybrid socialist/fascist system and consequent widening impoverishment. His foreign policy fosters a growing imperialist Islamist threat.

All of these negatives have been around in varying degrees for decades, acting to slowly rot out America's culture of individualism and capitalism. But Obama represents the most overt manifestation of those cultural trends ever. He is the logical consequence of the "progressive" philosophical assault on Americanism. It is a sad commentary that we have reached a stage where a president believes he can succeed by openly appealing to those corrosive character traits--and garner enough popular support to keep an election that should be a slam-dunk for any Republican close.

But that's where we are. This election will not reverse the century-long tide toward a socialist America. If Romney wins, he may stem the tide temperarily, giving us a breather which we can use to continue our work of moving the culture away from altruism and toward egoism, the fundamental moral victory that must precede any hope of changing the political course we are on.

If Obama wins, the trend continues more forcefully than before. He knows that--with only eight years to accomplish his goal of fundamentally transforming America, half of which has (productively, from his perspective) past--he must cram as much additional "transformation" into his second term as he can.

That's why Obama must be defeated--to buy time. There are risks, however. Just as the 2008 financial collapse has been blamed on the statist Bush's alleged "free market" policies--tarnishing the reputation of a capitalism that doesn't exist in America--so a second collapse under a Romney administration wrought by Obama's policies will be blamed on some alleged Romney "free market" policies, compounding the damage.

But that's a risk worth taking. Few people today even know what capitalism is or how it actually works, so our educational work is already cut out for us.

Romney for president.


Steve D said...

I suspect from his manner that Romney may be slightly better than his campaign. The fact that he chose a man smarter than he is, suggests a smattering of self-esteem. It could be wishful thinking, though. Also, Romney seems to at least sense the tremendous immediate danger our national debt and the depletion of our military entails.

Mike LaFerrara said...

I agree. Considering that Romney has no discernible philosophy, his policies are likely to be largely shaped by the people he surrounds himself with. Picking Ryan is a good sign.