ARC has put up audio files of a speech by Ayn Rand from 1972 called “A Nation’s Unity,” with the Q&A session. If you have two hours this weekend, give it a listen. The speech is a brilliant analysis of how pressure group politics destroy a nation’s unity and freedom.
The speech is especially relevant today because the Democrats’ health care bill that no one wants is being passed by buying off various pressure groups. AARP gets this, Nebraska gets that, insurance companies get the other thing… at whose expense? As Bastiat put it, “The state is the great fictitious entity by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.”
Miss Rand’s speech was delivered during the McGovern-Nixon presidential race. It’s quite fascinating to hear how the Democrats have not changed since 1972. From the beginning the New Left was a totalitarian movement. I was stunned to hear that at one point in the campaign McGovern proposed that everything Americans made over $12,000 be confiscated by the state. He quickly backed away from the idea, as it must have gone over like a lead balloon. Excuse me, Senator McGovern? We’d like to introduce you to reality. Before the reaction of the voters, this idiot actually thought it was a good idea to steal everything over $12,000 in income per American.
So what’s the difference between a Democrat and a communist? The Democrats would let you keep $12,000 in 1972 dollars, whereas the communists would take it all.
It makes you realize how good it was that from 1972-2008 we elected only two Democrat presidents, both of whom were fairly weak presidents. Now, however, the Obama-Reid-Pelosi era has brought the New Left into power. Now the White House Christmas tree has ornaments with Chairman Mao’s face on them. The Obama White House can think of no better way to celebrate Christmas than by hanging pictures of the greatest collectivist mass murderer in history.
One great irony of Obama is that he campaigned as a unifier, but has governed as the most partisan and divisive president in memory. Our nation’s unity will suffer greatly under this little man’s governance; Ayn Rand explains why.
UPDATE: Irony is the wrong word in that last paragraph. It’s not irony that Obama promised to be a unifier but turned out a divider; it’s just a lie.
You’re right about it being just a lie. Obama doesn’t care about being the most divisive president in history. Such words mean nothing to him. Divisive is just a linguistic tool his enemies use to make him look bad in the eyes of the public who have, through an arbitrary social construct, decided that divisive should mean something bad. This being so he will utter that word whenever he wants to strike out at his enemies. He thinks that word has the magic like power to evoke in the public a negative feeling which he hopes will translate into an action favorable to him and/or inimical to his opponents. But the meaning of the concept divisive? There isn’t one. Words are only emotional prods.