No this is:
Dinesh D'Souza and I come to this from different directions. I grew up as we were fighting the Communist and NAZIs all over the world. Our education system was good and it was thorough. We learned American and World History, both modern and ancient. We learned about the founding of America and the Constitution and why we are exceptional. I grew up when freedom allowed us to out produce any other country in history.
This is my critique of D'Souza's article in Forbes.
Here is a man who spent his formative years--the first 17 years of his life--off the American mainland, in Hawaii, Indonesia and Pakistan, with multiple subsequent journeys to Africa.
He was also mentored before that by "Uncle Frank", as he called him in his book, who was Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party and a known bi-sexual. From the only picture of Davis I have seen he may also have been Obama's real sire.
Obama's maternal grandparents and his mother were also Communists.
Even so, King's dream is not Obama's: The President never champions the idea of color-blindness or race-neutrality. This inaction is not merely tactical; the race issue simply isn't what drives Obama.
There is another reason for that. MLK was a Communist operative who protested the Vietnam War as well as agitating for "Civil Rights." Civil Rights, just like feminism and the homosexual agenda, was a ploy to disrupt American society and cause us to question our values.
An odd choice (Obama, Sr.), certainly, as an inspirational hero. But to his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. Obama Sr. grew up during Africa's struggle to be free of European rule, and he was one of the early generation of Africans chosen to study in America and then to shape his country's future.
The anticolonialism drive was inspired by the Communists to throw the European countries out of the third world so the Communist themselves could exploit the natural resources of those countries. They wanted the Europeans out before the natives could govern themselves and resist Communism.
The Mau Maus were a brutal group of savages supported by the Communists. They would raid villages and rape the women and young girls and use machetes to lop off peoples' heads, arms, legs or whatever, including women and children. They were terrorists and Obama, Sr. supported them. He resented the British for stopping their raping and pillaging.
Who paid Obama, Sr.'s way to Harvard, a seemingly convenient way-station for Communists?
Colonialism was demonized by the Communist for their own purposes. Colonial rulers were not as brutal as presented, especially in the 20th Century, and they did much to bring the third world out of the stone age. Once they were ejected most of those countries devolved into anarchy and chaos. The stone age was still near by.
These forces of neocolonialism oppress not only Third World people but also citizens in their own countries. Obviously the solution is to resist and overthrow the oppressors. This was the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. and many in his generation, including many of my own relatives in India.
Verbiage straight out of Marxism.
From the anticolonial perspective, American imperialism is on a rampage. For a while, U.S. power was checked by the Soviet Union, but since the end of the Cold War, America has been the sole superpower. Moreover, 9/11 provided the occasion for America to invade and occupy two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, and also to seek political and economic domination in the same way the French and the British empires once did. So in the anticolonial view, America is now the rogue elephant that subjugates and tramples the people of the world.
More Communist verbiage. The USSR did not check American power, it was the other way around. We didn't invade our neighbors, the USSR did in Korea and Vietnam. They also held on to Eastern Europe after promising to allow elections in 4 months after WWII. Those elections were never held. Our ability to check their power and ambitions, and Reagan's willingness to do it, is what ended the Cold War. We have never invaded countries to seek political and economic advantage, including Iraq and Afghanistan. Did we take their oil for our use? It is all Communist propaganda.
Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial. Emerging market economies such as China, India, Chile and Indonesia have solved the problem of backwardness; they are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment.
D'Souza seems to have a blind spot where Marxism is concerned. China is exploiting its cheap labor but it has also moved rapidly into Africa and other countries in order to assure itself the raw materials it needs for expanding its economy and manufacturing base. Thanks to Jimmy Carter China also controls both ends of the Panama Canal. It is guilty of the same colonialism D'Souza decries.
Domestically, we have to compete in a world where other countries are much freer than we are economically. The Marxists in our government have strapped us with so many rules and regulations that we can hardly move industrially. Taxes and labor unions greatly increase our costs and lower our productivity. None of that exists in China.
Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation's agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father's dream.
Sigmund Freud would be proud.