Back in 2006, Hillary Clinton published a book about caring for children titled, “It Takes a Village.” The book made the phrase a permanent part of the American lexicon, but the concept itself should not have been treated as something new by readers. It dates over 2,000 years to the writings of Plato and his […]
Back in 2006, Hillary Clinton published a book about caring for children titled, “It Takes a Village.” The book made the phrase a permanent part of the American lexicon, but the concept itself should not have been treated as something new by readers. It dates over 2,000 years to the writings of Plato and his seminal work “Republic.”
The Greek philosopher, student of Socrates and teacher to Aristotle, is so highly regarded as the founder of Western philosophy that it is often said that all who have come after him have been “answering Plato.” He covered many topics in his works, the most commonly referenced still today being his model developed in the Republic for an ideal society. In it, he argued for the sort of communal setting Hillary’s book title implies. He also argued for the community to be overseen by a very wise man, or group of men, creating the concept of a “philosopher king.”
Which brings us to Barack Hussein Obama, the man who is absolutely certain that he is the man about whom Plato wrote. Remember his famous 2008 line, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for”? Waiting for how long? Since the Academy was established, I would guess is what he meant.
Barack Obama has the kind of ego that would allow him the illusion that humanity has been waiting around over 2,000 years for his arrival. That ego was on display last week when he delivered a speech at Stanford University, deep in the heart of Silicon Valley. The topic was big tech and its policies for the sharing of news and information. In his remarks, the aspiring philosopher king said:
When I'm going to evaluate any proposal touching on social media and the internet is whether it strengthens or weakens the prospects for a healthy, inclusive democracy. Whether it encourages robust debate and respect for our difference
When “I’m” going to evaluate any proposal? Barack Obama has always been arrogant, evidenced by him telling a group of Republican Congressmen, “Elections have consequences,” during what was supposed to be an open discussion of healthcare policy. Not only is his arrogance dismissive, but it also allows him to look at Americans dead in the television monitor and lie to them, as in, “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.” Obama represents the odd wedding of Plato’s ideals and sophistry, the very thing Plato sought to condemn.
But we need to dwell on that single line from his speech at Stanford because it isn’t just about Barack being Barack again. It is about a mindset that was seeded by Plato and has been nurtured over millennia by the highly educated. It is a way of looking at humanity and saying, “You poor uneducated and huddled masses. You are so incapable of making the right choices for yourselves. Let me (us) help you. I am educated. I am thoughtful. I am wise. I have the best interests of all in mind.”
This is the mindset that may have started with Plato, but which has found its’ modern-day home in the agenda of the Klaus Schwab and his World Economic Forum. This is the modern version of Plato’s Academy, designed to educate and indoctrinate world leaders dedicated to creating a world of a few unified nations, all dedicated to the WEF’s notion of serving the “greater good” and all overseen by philosopher kings like Barack Hussein Obama. I’ll be publishing a book soon on the activities and agenda of Schwab and the WEF, aimed toward shining a bright light upon its very socialist agenda.
In the context of illustrating the need for his sort of omniscient wisdom in controlling the expression of free speech on social media platforms, Obama couldn’t help himself from wading onto the Chinese coronavirus vaccine serum. This statement shows how he would regulate content were he philosopher king:
Unfortunately, it turns out that inflammatory, polarizing content attracts and engages. Other features of these platforms have compounded the problem. For example, the way content looks on your phone, as well as the veil of anonymity that platforms provide their users, a lot of times can make it impossible to tell the difference between, say, a peer-reviewed article by Dr. Anthony Fauci and a miracle cure being pitched by a huckster."
I am assuming that by “huckster” he is referring to brave doctors like Vladimir Zelenko, who have successfully treated tens of thousands of patients with virtually no casualties while Dr. Fauci has permitted people to die by saying there isn’t enough evidence to authorize those same clinically proven treatments? This is indeed odd philosophy to be coming from a wise king. Obama continued:
Yet, despite the fact that we've now essentially clinically tested the vaccine on billions of people worldwide, around one in five Americans is still willing to put themselves at risk and put their families at risk. Rather than get vaccinated. People are dying because of misinformation.
This isn’t a piece about the Chinese coronavirus, but if it were, I could point out all of the very well documented problems with the vaccine, starting with the fact that it has produced the very side-effects that Pfizer said it would prior to release, and culminating with the fact that the vaccinated Obama himself contracted the virus post-vaccination. I refrain from making those points, but will simply emphasize the danger of having philosopher kings whose applied philosophy results in the indiscriminate death of their subjects.
The case for wise rulers is typically made by Cass Sunstein types who argue that left on our own we simply don’t make optimal choices, optimality being the obsession of the Ivy League class who think they fine tune all of our activities and interaction to make them just right (like Mussolini’s trains running on time). All we need to cede to them is absolute power and they will improve our lives for us. That is the premise behind the master’s of the universe in the WEF. That is Barack Obama’s premise.
However, as Lord Acton taught us, power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. No matter what their intentions might be, no matter their wisdom, these Obama sorts are destined to become twisted and evil if we surrender to them our sovereignty. Our founding fathers understood this. They were Aristotelian in their thinking. Aristotle’s view of the “golden mean” and the importance of private property rights (another Plato no-no) guided them in their creating a system of government that sought to prevent aspiring philosopher kings from ever taking power.
Barack Obama and his ilk have never been too concerned about our Constitution and its limitations of power. After all, it wasn’t written by a philosopher king. It was written by a group of men who had read Plato and who soundly rejected most of his ideas.
If only they had known all of the wonderful things Barack Obama knows.
