Understanding the Nihilist in the White House

Obama is bent on destruction rather than creation, because destruction for its own sake is also part of the arsenal of nihilism.

Wall Street Journal columnist and former Reagan speechwriter Peggy Noonan is an example of a type of person with a good mind who has huge pockets of — I’m not sure exactly what to call it. Naivete? Trust? Idealism? Lack of comprehension? Almost willful blindness? She often gets to a certain point in understanding someone or something and then stops, refusing to open the door of the room she stands before, afraid to look inside. Or she opens it a crack, takes a tiny peek, and then slams it shut.

It is not just Noonan who does this sort of thing, either. If it were, it would hardly matter at all, even though she’s an influential columnist. This is the mindset of a great many people. It almost seems as though there are three kinds of humans in the world, and all of them are useful to Obama: those who are naive about human nature, those who are so cynical they equally condemn all politicians as equally bad/corrupt/selfish, and those who justify anything a public figure does if it furthers their own goals.

There’s a fourth: those who see more clearly that that. But of course, some of those who think they see clearly fall into one of the above categories.

Now for Noonan, who has written a column titled, “The Nihilist in the White House.” You know who it’s about:

The president’s executive action on immigration is an act of willful nihilism that he himself had argued against in the past. It is a sharp stick in the eye of the new congressional majority. It is at odds with—it defies—the meaning and message of the last election, and therefore is destructive to the reputation of democracy itself. It is huge in its impact but has only a sole cause, the president’s lone will. It damages the standing of our tottery political institutions rather than strengthening them, which is what they desperately need, and sets a template for future executive abuse. It will surely encourage increased illegal immigration and thus further erode the position of the American working class.

The term nihilism has quite a few definitions. One of them refers to a Russian revolutionary movement that advocated violent overthrow of the government during the 1860s-1880s. Obama is indeed a leftist, but that doesn’t seem to be his style (at the moment, he is the government), although it’s not difficult to believe that he would justify and order violence if he needed it and felt he could get away with it.

Nihilism also involves one or all of the following beliefs/attitudes: that life has no intrinsic meaning, that morality does not inherently exist, and/or that reality itself does not exist (“an extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence”). I don’t read Obama’s mind (or Noonan’s), but I think we probably can safely eliminate that last one from what Noonan might be talking about. Perhaps we can eliminate the first one; perhaps not. That leaves us with the middle definition, that morality does not inherently exist, and I think that is part of what Noonan might be getting at.

But it is clear that one of the main things that motivated Noonan’s use of the word “nihilist” for Obama was that he is bent on destruction rather than creation, because destruction for its own sake is also part of the arsenal of nihilism. In the paragraph of hers that I quoted above, she uses words that express this to describe the effects of Obama’s executive order on immigration [emphasis mine]: it is “destructive to the reputation of democracy itself,” it “damages the standing of our tottery political institutions,” and it “erode[s] the position of the American working class.”

I agree that Obama wants to destroy. His nihilism would be of the “active” type, however, because he also wants to create:

…”[A]ctive” nihilism on the other hand destroys to level the field for constructing something new. This form of nihilism is characterized by Nietzsche as “a sign of strength,” a wilful destruction of the old values to wipe the slate clean and lay down one’s own beliefs and interpretations, contrary to the passive nihilism that resigns itself with the decomposition of the old values.

In what does Obama believe, and what does he wish to create? His beliefs are those of the left: America must be punished and humbled for its crimes, which include colonialism and racism. And what does he want to build? He is dedicated to the idea that America must be remade into a leftist welfare state of the European type (or the Chavez type). Purposely encouraging illegal immigration seems a great way to further those goals, as well as (he believes) to gain the future votes of such immigrants and their offspring for the left.

Noonan ignores those goals, but that’s not the only way in which she exhibits naïveté. Here’s another:

This White House seems driven—does it understand this?—by a kind of political nihilism. They agitate, aggravate, fray and separate.

Translation: Obama and his White House are not carrying out their unifying, uplifting, positive rhetoric of yore. Instead of building (as other presidents of both parties have tried to do, and as Obama has said he wishes to do), they destroy. Instead of uniting, they separate. Is this deliberate, or are they unaware of what they’re doing?

My response to Noonan is this: are you joking? What part of “community activist” do you not understand? What part of “Alinskyite“?

But Noonan herself seems not to be aware of any of this. Or perhaps she is merely doubting and denying her own dawning understanding and its meaning, because it is too frightening. She refuses to connect the dots. And she is most assuredly not a dumb person, nor does she lack perceptiveness. But she has a blind spot for human evil, and would like to attribute the best motives to people rather than the worst, despite the evidence before her eyes.

In this she is not alone. Much of America ignored (and many still ignore) the evidence before their eyes, which is now irrefutable. Obama’s destructiveness is deliberate, and his goals are the remaking of American in a leftist image, and permanent power for the left. This continuing denial on the part of many Americans is one of the main reasons he may succeed.

Good article. Americans are the perfect dupes, esp. of the communists and the racial extremists, examples being(Obama, Holder, Michele Obama, Sharpton, Jackson, Sheila Lee Jackson, Conyers, DeBlasio, Mario Barry (d - fortunately), the COngressional Black Caucus, Congressional Progressive Caucus (i.e Marxists), and most of the fools in the liberal media.

Obama is not a “nihilist”. He is a very well Marxist-trained “organizer”. He knows what he wants to do, i.e. “transform” or in plain English, subvert America onto the road of a “creeping socialism/Marxism”. Saul Alinsky was a “red”. His goal was “communism” or “Marxism” (the same in the long run), not improving capitalism. Obama was one of his students/followers (as was Hillary Clinton).

Their teachers and mentors were Communist Party members or followers or black racists (Frank Marshall Davis, David S. Cantor, Don Rose, Prof. Thomas I. Emerson, Prof. Vern Countryman, Prof. Charles Ogletree, Bill Ayers, etc.).

Obama has been the most successful Marxist in the history of America other than a few Soviet spies and journalists.

He has gotten what he wants while much of American sleeps in ignorance, and the learned media makes sure that the public doesn’t know the truth (at least Prof. Gruber finally told the truth but you would hardly read it in the MSM or hear it on their TV network news).

Never underestimate the powers of deception of the Marxist/islamist “true believers”. ISIS/Al Qaeda never were a “JV team”, only in Obama’s mind or in his deliberate attempt to cover up for them (a toss up right now but both choices are logical).

Selling out to No. Korea, Moscow, and Red China is what one red is supposed to do regarding another. Selling out to the jihadists, esp. in Iran, is what a Moslem sympathizer is supposed to do, and lying about it is “taqqiya”, a proper tactic of lying to the non-believers/dhimmis/crusaders.

Obama is “pure evil with a smile”. Holder is “pure evil with a moustache” (remind me who else had a moustache). Michele is blind ambition on steroids. Susan Rice is pure incompetence at its highest level.

David Axelrod (trained by Soviet reds/friends), Jay Carney (sleaze personified), and John Ernest (Jay Carney on steroids), are the perfect mouthpieces for the greatest lying administration in American history, and they are “white bread” frontmen.

I could go on but you get my drift. Noonan is a nice person but in this fight, a “nice person” is usually a “naïve person” who will get the rest of us killed due to their blindness.

In this fight, “good guys” need to fight like the “bad guys” or they are gonna lose. The educational level of about 50% of Americans is so low that the Reds and Black Extremists are having a cakewalk over the decent people.

If you don’t believe me, ask the honest black business owners who were just burnt out in Ferguson whether their so-called leaders were heads-up on what was going to happen, or happily naïve, believing in negotiations, giving the protestors (arsonists/rioters/radicals) “their space”, etc.

And as for the MSM, PUKE. Never to be trusted again, and I speak as a reporter (from the streets of DC to Vietnam) of some 30+ years.

Naivete’ will get you killed. The truth is the only shield you have in preparing for the worse, and the truth is in short supply today in America.

Obama not “nihilist”..... well Marxist-trained “organizer”.
gotten what he wants while much of American sleeps in ignorance

Those of us on the "Right'" noticed the increasing ignorance of our fellow Americans a long time ago. It would be naïve of us to think that the educated on the "Left" would have failed to also notice. In fact, the Leftists run education and can guarantee that ignorance. But where they have scored against us is to have formulated effective programs, plans, and tactics to take full advantage of it. That's what The Bolsheviks-Alinsky-Cloward-Piven taught them. As yet, we have no response.

The Left has mobilized their Low-Information Voters, organized them, and sent them forth to destroy the culture and institutions of the country. OTOH, we on the Right distrust the ignorant, tend to have as little as possible to do with them, and also tend to have a mystical faith in the protective power of those very institutions of the Republic that the Left is methodically destroying.

E.G., It is clear that Obama (and Holder) have encouraged the riots in Ferguson by pretending to condemn them while not very subtly encouraging their base to take to the streets in violence. Perhaps it's a lesson they learned from LA Mayor Tom Bradley when he fomented the riots in support of Rodney King.

That is a pretty convincing demonstration of the effectiveness of the Left, and their control of the public square. There is no, repeat NO, answer to this from the Right. No political party. No cadre of federal bureaucrats. No Program. No Plan, Certainly No Leaders.

Furthermore, the Left is financially supported by government. Every federal agency is staffed from top to bottom with Leftists ala Lois Lerner (no exception she!) Ditto every Congressional Committee, and most Congressional office staffs, whether working for Republican or Democrat representatives. As presently arranged, government is a Leftist monopoly and the Right simply is not on the scene, except to pick up their payoffs from guaranteed safe seats.

Republicans in the House Majority? Business as usual. Republican Majority in the Senate? Will that be business as usual? Obama has transformed America. How the hell are we supposed to transform it back to constitutional government with no Program, No Plan, and weak leadership?

Good article, but I still think Obama is just a sock puppet. There have been equally bad US presidents, people just had no idea what was going on before internet.

Carter: Handed Iran over to the enemy. Iran is behind a lot of the trouble in the Middle East, and paid for Chavez campaign in Venezuela, which Carter helped with as well.

Woodrow Wilson: signed the Federal Reserve into law. Got us in WWI, had to know Rockefeller and the banks were funding both sides of the war.

1929-1933: Federal Reserve Reduces Money Supply by 33%
1930: Great Depression Began

June 4, 1963: Kennedy Issued an Executive Order (11110) that Authorized the US Treasury to Issue Silver Certificates, Threatening the Federal Reserve’s Monopoly on Money This government issued currency would bypass the governments need to borrow from bankers at interest.
Nov. 22, 1963: Kennedy Assassinated

December 1963: Johnson Reverses Kennedy’s Banking Rule and Restores Power to the Federal Reserve
1999: The Financial Services Modernization Act Allows Banks to Grow Even Larger
2007: Subprime Mortgage Crisis

LBJ: Rockerfeller puppet, New Deal, Vietnam

My vote for worst President goes to FDR:

FDR: Established UN in NY, approved the new Illuminati designed dollar in 1935, got us in WWII, handed China over to the enemy. Mao was the biggest murderer in the history of humanity, and FDR has responsibility for that.

The US didn’t need China to defeat Japan. Stalin, Great Britain, and Roosevelt had other motives. The cynical FDR foundation credits Franklin D. Roosevelt with China’s “Emergence as a superpower”.

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/new-roosevelt/china-s-emergence-great-power-began-fdr

“FDR’s interest in China was in some respects linked to the history of his own family, as his maternal grandfather, Warren Delano II, was involved in the China trade in the 19th century. But it was the onset of the World War II in Asia that greatly intensified his interest in the region.”

“China Trade” is code for Opium Trafficking in the 17th 18tj century, and only Loyalist Americans with connections to the Royal Crown got in on those deals.

FDR also handed over major chunks of Europe to his ally, Stalin.

Truman: Dropped the bomb 2x, needlessly fire Bombed Japanese cities with innocent people, and needlessly put the nation under Marshall Law.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.