TBD on Ning
America's Great Leap Forward
Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
When Barack Obama was campaigning for president in 2007, his backers frequently compared him to former president John F. Kennedy. After a year in office, however, President Obama's words and actions align more closely with China's despotic Chairman Mao than with JFK's.
When Mao Tse Tung conquered China in 1949, his secret goal was to dominate the world. When Obama was elected President, many started referring to him as President of the World. Both Obama and Mao had carte blanche to set out a path of radical change.
As part of his strategy, Mao informed his top echelon, "There has to be a personality cult...it is absolutely necessary."* With the aid of the state media, Mao crafted an iconic image of himself as the savior of the common man. Propoganda was everywhere - including the fields where workers could listen to messages from Mao as they worked. Sound familiar?
In 1958, Mao kicked off what he called The Great Leap Forward, an extraordinarily creative intervention in China's economic development. Mao planned to abolish wages and put society on a non-cash basis. He then set about abolishing private property.
The ownership of tools, animals, and other means of production were taken over by the state - in the name of the people. Just as the ownership of the auto, banking and insurance industries of today have been taken over by our government.
Chairman Mao, in the name of the people, also took over China's health care. The 'state' determined who would receive this essential service. The elderly were moved into "houses of happiness" so that they could be looked after - by the state. Much like the proposed government takeover of America's health care today.
Chairman Mao's government also plunged the country into a deep debt by drastically increasing spending on the development of heavy industry. But the state-sponsored industry that developed was not only non-productive, it ended up wasting money and resources on a massive scale without producing anything of value. Much like the bloated government behemoth Obama's policies are producing today.
Mao, through a cult of personality and firm control of the levers of government, had the ability to impose his own version of reality on China. Just as Obama has today.
Mao believed that collectivizing agriculture would lead to a new 'utopia.' Obama's campaign promise of 'equality' for all Americans is the modern vision of Mao's utopia. Which, by the way, not only failed, but failed spectacularly.
One year after Mao launched China's Great Leap Forward, things in China started to go wrong. Politics increasingly took precedence over commonsense. Mao's utopian dream turned into a nightmare as the central leadership grew increasingly out of touch with reality.
By the spring of 1959, in theory China was awash in grain. In reality, it was not. Rural communal mess halls that had been handing out free food, ran out of food. China's grain reserves were exhausted and the famine began.
Scholars have estimated that somewhere between 16.5 million and 40 million people died before Mao's experiment came to an end in 1961, making the Great Leap famine the largest in world history. Even Mao himself was forced to acknowledge that he had been wrong. Oops.
By late 1960, private ownership of land was reinstated and a modicum of capitalism was re-introduced. Peasants were finally given incentives to produce as much spare food as was possible by allowing them to sell their excess on the open market. Socialism had failed, yet again.
Chairman Mao never had to pay the price for his failed social engineering. The Chinese people paid it for him. Leaving Mao free to regroup, repair his image, and emerge back on the national scene in 1966 with yet another bold plan. The cultural revolution - which resulted in yet another failed social experiment and untold human suffering. The beat goes on.
The similarities between Chairman Mao and President Obama are too numerous to ignore. Like Obama, Mao's philosophy of how to 'change' China was clear from the outset. "...the country must be...destroyed and then reformed." "People like me long for the destruction because when the old universe is destroyed, a new universe will be formed. Isn't that better?" Quick - who said that? Mao, or Obama's buddy Bill Ayers? Answer: Both.
All of Obama's actions as president to date reflect the same mindset - the destruction of traditional values, the unwillingness to learn from history, the utter reliance on theory instead of reality. And the belief that man takes precedence over God and thus has the ability to shape reality according to man's whim.
Hubris and a charismatic personality allowed both Mao and Obama the freedom to implement costly social and economic 'change.' Change which is not change at all, but another futile attempt to revive the failed model of socialism.
Like Mao, Obama will most likely never be held to account when the socialist, big government policies he has championed fail. And fail they must. History shows us that. The American people will, once again, be forced to pay the very real price for Obama's naive attempt to redefine reality to his own specifications.
* Mao: The Unknown Story by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
When Barack Obama was campaigning for president in 2007, his backers frequently compared him to former president John F. Kennedy. After a year in office, however, President Obama's words and actions align more closely with China's despotic Chairman Mao than with JFK's.
When Mao Tse Tung conquered China in 1949, his secret goal was to dominate the world. When Obama was elected President, many started referring to him as President of the World. Both Obama and Mao had carte blanche to set out a path of radical change.
As part of his strategy, Mao informed his top echelon, "There has to be a personality cult...it is absolutely necessary."* With the aid of the state media, Mao crafted an iconic image of himself as the savior of the common man. Propoganda was everywhere - including the fields where workers could listen to messages from Mao as they worked. Sound familiar?
In 1958, Mao kicked off what he called The Great Leap Forward, an extraordinarily creative intervention in China's economic development. Mao planned to abolish wages and put society on a non-cash basis. He then set about abolishing private property.
The ownership of tools, animals, and other means of production were taken over by the state - in the name of the people. Just as the ownership of the auto, banking and insurance industries of today have been taken over by our government.
Chairman Mao, in the name of the people, also took over China's health care. The 'state' determined who would receive this essential service. The elderly were moved into "houses of happiness" so that they could be looked after - by the state. Much like the proposed government takeover of America's health care today.
Chairman Mao's government also plunged the country into a deep debt by drastically increasing spending on the development of heavy industry. But the state-sponsored industry that developed was not only non-productive, it ended up wasting money and resources on a massive scale without producing anything of value. Much like the bloated government behemoth Obama's policies are producing today.
Mao, through a cult of personality and firm control of the levers of government, had the ability to impose his own version of reality on China. Just as Obama has today.
Mao believed that collectivizing agriculture would lead to a new 'utopia.' Obama's campaign promise of 'equality' for all Americans is the modern vision of Mao's utopia. Which, by the way, not only failed, but failed spectacularly.
One year after Mao launched China's Great Leap Forward, things in China started to go wrong. Politics increasingly took precedence over commonsense. Mao's utopian dream turned into a nightmare as the central leadership grew increasingly out of touch with reality.
By the spring of 1959, in theory China was awash in grain. In reality, it was not. Rural communal mess halls that had been handing out free food, ran out of food. China's grain reserves were exhausted and the famine began.
Scholars have estimated that somewhere between 16.5 million and 40 million people died before Mao's experiment came to an end in 1961, making the Great Leap famine the largest in world history. Even Mao himself was forced to acknowledge that he had been wrong. Oops.
By late 1960, private ownership of land was reinstated and a modicum of capitalism was re-introduced. Peasants were finally given incentives to produce as much spare food as was possible by allowing them to sell their excess on the open market. Socialism had failed, yet again.
Chairman Mao never had to pay the price for his failed social engineering. The Chinese people paid it for him. Leaving Mao free to regroup, repair his image, and emerge back on the national scene in 1966 with yet another bold plan. The cultural revolution - which resulted in yet another failed social experiment and untold human suffering. The beat goes on.
The similarities between Chairman Mao and President Obama are too numerous to ignore. Like Obama, Mao's philosophy of how to 'change' China was clear from the outset. "...the country must be...destroyed and then reformed." "People like me long for the destruction because when the old universe is destroyed, a new universe will be formed. Isn't that better?" Quick - who said that? Mao, or Obama's buddy Bill Ayers? Answer: Both.
All of Obama's actions as president to date reflect the same mindset - the destruction of traditional values, the unwillingness to learn from history, the utter reliance on theory instead of reality. And the belief that man takes precedence over God and thus has the ability to shape reality according to man's whim.
Hubris and a charismatic personality allowed both Mao and Obama the freedom to implement costly social and economic 'change.' Change which is not change at all, but another futile attempt to revive the failed model of socialism.
Like Mao, Obama will most likely never be held to account when the socialist, big government policies he has championed fail. And fail they must. History shows us that. The American people will, once again, be forced to pay the very real price for Obama's naive attempt to redefine reality to his own specifications.
* Mao: The Unknown Story by Jung Chang and Jon Halliday
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Comment
-
Comment by Bull on December 5, 2009 at 10:35am
-
http://teebeedee.ning.com/forum/topics/why-i-became-a-conservative?...
Reply by Bull on October 4, 2009 at 12:56pm
Delete
Twice in this thread you have said you held off posting this, yet as I showed you posted it over a year ago seems to me to be at the least a little disingenuous.
I wrote that article months ago and never posted it.
I also held off on posting this article,
http://teebeedee.ning.com/forum/topics/why-i-became-a-conservative?...
Reply by Bull on October 3, 2009 at 11:28am
It might seem that either the author has a bad memory, or reworks her blogs and reposts them under a different name. At any rate I think this should bring her credibility into question.
Jackie,
I wrote that article months ago and never posted it.
http://thereaganwing.wordpress.com/2008/08/19/a-conservative-in-los...
-
Comment by Westerly_2 on December 5, 2009 at 8:39am
-
Comment by Nancy Morgan 5 hours ago "Pardon me, but why did she place them out here for the viewing public, if only to trash the ones who disagreed with her rather unbalanced argument? How useful is that? The wise person learns from second and third opinions to tighten up the logic and make a stronger case."
"Pardon me, but why did she place them out here for the viewing public, if only to trash the ones who disagreed with her rather unbalanced argument? How useful is that? The wise person learns from second and third opinions to tighten up the logic and make a stronger case."
Wesley - Its called 'debate'. Duh
No "duh" due me, thanks. It is not I who suggested you ignore the debate with a cheer of "bravo!"We do seem to be having that debate, rather than your trash-canning our comments as was suggested you. I'm glad you do welcome that debate after all.
-
Comment by ZenDog on December 5, 2009 at 6:08am
-
"From a person of proven questionable credibility"
Please back up your statement. You maintain author has been proven 'uncredible' - Please supply the proof.
Seems to me you've provided ample proof as it is . . . Unless you would now maintain you were phished and that in fact you never wrote nor posted the above, um, whatever it is . . .
-
Comment by Nancy Morgan on December 5, 2009 at 2:48am
-
"Pardon me, but why did she place them out here for the viewing public, if only to trash the ones who disagreed with her rather unbalanced argument? How useful is that? The wise person learns from second and third opinions to tighten up the logic and make a stronger case."
Wesley - Its called 'debate'. Duh
-
-
"From a person of proven questionable credibility"
Please back up your statement. You maintain author has been proven 'uncredible' - Please supply the proof.
-
-
When Mao Tse Tung conquered China in 1949
When Obama was elected President,
It all really falls apart early with the difference in the two words conquered and elected. The rest is mere conjecture and assumptions. From a person of proven questionable credibility.
-
-
JeeWiz Orian, I really wasn't aware this kind of right wing madness required a reasoned rebuttal.
I mean, really. I thought Mao's policy on the rice harvest 58-59 looked a lot more like the kind of behavior we saw at CountryWide with their sub-prime loan scam. I mean, hey. Both were designed to fail, although in fairness to Mao, I don't really believe he planned it that way.
To bad the same can't exactly be said for the sub-prime lenders.
-
Comment by caseyjo on December 4, 2009 at 6:14pm
-
I think you conveniently overlooked a few things Orianb...How do you know we are all lefties? Are you one of the ones who sees everything in Black and white, left and right, conservative and liberal? Just curious? As human beings most of us cross over these lines writtren in the sand. What is it with people who want to divide?.....It is the fears they live in which separate us.......Peace Y
-
Comment by Whiny Old Bastard on December 4, 2009 at 5:56pm
-
Great rebuts lefties.
"Oh brother"
"WTF?"
" I cannot believe my eyes"
Boy, that's telling her.
-
-
Pardon me, but why did she place them out here for the viewing public, if only to trash the ones who disagreed with her rather unbalanced argument? How useful is that? The wise person learns from second and third opinions to tighten up the logic and make a stronger case.
Of course, the conservatives will "get it." This is like mother's milk to them. Nothin new, even. Heard it all before.The real challenge is in winning over thinking people. Now THAT'S when a political writer can really deserve a "bravo."
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Aggie.
Powered by
You need to be a member of TBD to add comments!
Join TBD