Why Obama will never give up on the health care bill
SusanAnne Hiller writing at American Thinker brings out a key aspect of the health care fight to which almost no attention has been given, and in doing so she provides perhaps the best answer to the question that has so many of us agog: why are Obama and the Democrats so passionately devoted to the bill to nationalize health care, notwithstanding their inability to pass it, the country’s opposition to it, and the grave political harm it is causing to the Democrats themselves? The answer is that they see it as a “civil rights” measure for nonwhites, and the reason they see it that way is that more than half the people without medical insurance, the main intended beneficiaries of the bill, are minorities. To the left-liberal mind, such a huge racial disproportionality in health insurance is intolerable. The health care bill is about attaining substantive racial equality in a key area of life. That is why the Democrats don’t care how ruinous the bill will be to the economy, how explosive to the national debt, how inflationary its costs, how Kafkaesque its bureaucratic complexities, how crushing to American freedom. What they care about is fulfilling Martin Luther King’s racial-socialist vision of racial equality of outcome.
As Hiller makes clear, King after the civil rights victories of 1964 and 1965 moved radically to the left, calling for massive distribution of wealth from whites to blacks, and, in King’s words, “a reconstruction of the entire society, a revolution of values.” Take in the significance of the fact that America’s greatest black figure, the patron saint of the liberal order, was a racial-socialist. And that America’s first black president, who is (at least) the second most important black in American history, is a racial-socialist. (If you don’t believe me, see my analysis of Obama’s March 2008 race speech.) Of course the real King has been covered up by the official story of the “race-blind,” pro-Constitution, patriotic King of the early 1960s, just as the real Obama was (until his presidency) covered up by the conciliatory, thoughtful, non-threatening Obama of the 2007-2008 campaign.
What we must understand is that organized black and Hispanic America, as represented by its pre-eminent leaders, is not part of the same America that most whites are a part of; that blacks and Hispanics deeply resent whites for their greater wealth-producing abilities and other natural and civilizational advantages; that blacks and Hispanics are aggrieved at the very fact that America is a white majority country that reflects (even now, after decades of multiculturalism) white history and culture; and that blacks and Hispanics, facilitated by their white liberal allies, will not rest until through socialist measures they have achieved equal wealth (or rather equal poverty) with whites, dragged America down to a Third-World level, and destroyed America as a historically distinctive country. Only when non-liberal whites truly recognize the reality of this race resentment-driven agenda and the profound evil it represents will they begin to stand against it. Only then will they begin to defend their property, their way of life, their culture, and their very existence as a people, by re-asserting their historical identity as the majority people of this country.
Jim C. writes:
“The answer is that they see it as a ‘civil rights’ measure for nonwhites, and the reason they see it that way is that more than half the people without medical insurance, the main intended beneficiaries of the bill, are minorities.”—AusterLA replies:
That is true, but providing more government jobs for minorities is not what makes the bill a messianic cause which they cannot give up. After all, there are already many millions of minority government employees.Michael Hart writes:
As you so often do, you have hit the nail on the head.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 12, 2010 11:08 AM | Send