Obama’s Misreading of History

“We are going to have to guard against a rise in a crude sort of nationalism, or ethnic identity or tribalism that is built around “an us and a them,” and I will never apologize for saying that the future of humanity and the future of the world is going to be defined by what we have in common, as opposed to those things that separate us and ultimately lead us into conflict. Take Europe, We know what happens when Europeans start dividing themselves up and emphasizing their differences and seeing a competition between various countries in a zero-sum way. The 20th century was a bloodbath.”

Barack Obama

If you ever wanted to have a more egregious misreading of History you would have to look long and hard to find one more errant than this one.

It was not Nationalism that created WW II. In point of fact, it was letting loose Bolshevik Internationalism that created WW II.

Woodrow Wilson, the Internationalist, by his boneheaded actions in WW I paved the way for the Bolshevik Internationalists to come to power. Without Wilson’s meddling in Europe, the nations in Europe would have settled their war just as the Nations had been settling wars for centuries in Europe, by negotiated peace.

However, Wilson had to stick his creepy Internationalist nose into Europe. Then he had to use US Troops to protect the Soviet Reds railroad in Russia, freeing up Red Troops to polish off the Christian White and Green Russian armies. Wilson’s actions in World War I bathed Europe in blood because those actions empowered the blood letters of the next 70 years.

Then FDR, the next Internationalist, overturned the protocol of the 4 prior US Presidents and gave diplomatic recognition to the Internationalists in Russia, thus giving them International credibility.

It was the Bolshevik Internationalists who had created a Comintern to spread Bolshevik Internationalism across the globe with the same intent as Obama … to create a New World Order as run by the International Bolsheviks in both New York and Moscow.

It wasn’t Nationalism that bloodied the 20th century. It was the damn pestilent Internationalism that let loose oceans of blood. The same Internationalism that Obama has been a creature of.

Obama’s whole presidency can be described as being built around “an us vs. them,” mentality. It is the height of hypocrisy for him to lecture anybody about that particular danger.

Finally, Obama insists that humanity needs to build on what they have in common. This is the old “Brotherhood of all men” chestnut that has been debunked a million times. All men are not Brothers, if only because of their differing faiths. Those who believe in ordered liberty have nothing in common with the International Marxists with their New World Order agenda.

Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling.

I am postmillennial in my eschatology.
Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity
Reformed in my Soteriology
Presuppositional in my apologetics
Kinist in my family theology
Agrarian in my regional community social order belief
Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief
Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic
Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern
Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview
One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics
Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place

Some of my favorite authors,

Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc.

My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture .

Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.

3 thoughts on “Obama’s Misreading of History”

  1. Regarding Graves mandate, it was this, the Aide Memoire:

    http://pbma.grobbel.org/aide_memoire.htm

    Any discussion of what motivated Graves must involve that document because that was what was given to him by the State Department prior to his expedition. There is mention of aiding the Russians in government, but it is not expressed to be for or against a particular faction, but rather, what the Russian people deem best. Considering the Russian people were heavily divided at the time, embroiled in a civil war, it seems Wilson’s policy was to wait and see. All that is left to do is decide what influence Graves’ command did have on the eventual outcome, and whether it bore any significance to the end result.

    Here is what Graves has to say about the railroad agreement:

    https://www.marxists.org/archive/graves/1931/siberian-adventure/ch06.htm

    Particularly of note is his stance of neutrality which often clashed with others:

    “We were guarding the rail-way, not against the actions of the Whites only; not against the actions of the Reds only; not against Bolshevik or anti-Bolshevik depredations; but we were to see that no one interfered with the railroads.”

    But also of note is how the railroad agreement benefited the anti-Bolsheviks:

    “Section 2 provided, that at the head of each railway shall remain a Russian manager or director with the powers conferred by the existing Russian law. If it were the intention of the framers of this agreement that the anti-Bolsheviks should have complete control, and that the railways should be run exclusively for the Kolchak adherents, then the agreement proved a success. There was no way for the Inter-Allied Committee or anyone else, except Kolchak or his adherents, to change an officer or employee of the railways.”

    and

    “In practice, these railroads became entirely Kolchak Railroads financed by the Allies. If a Russian, who was not sympathetic to Kolchak, approached a railroad station with the idea of travelling on the railroad or shipping supplies, he was in grave danger of losing his life or liberty. These statements are established by official reports. Soon the anti-Kolchaks began to complain that we were helping Kolchak by guarding his line of communications. My only reply to that was that I was guarding the railroad for them as well as for the other side, and that I had no means of knowing what was in the cars I was protecting while in American sectors. This did not satisfy the anti-Kolchak people and they soon began attacking the American detachments, or property under our charge.”

    Graves was not pro-Bolshevik, nor was he pro-White (he seems to have despised Kolchak), but because of his mandate and the nature of the various factions, if any side benefited more than the other from his presence in Siberia, it was the White Army, and compared to the logistical benefits provided to the White Army, the distraction of some Cossack forces seems negligible.

    1. “Any discussion of what motivated Graves must involve that document because that was what was given to him by the State Department prior to his expedition. There is mention of aiding the Russians in government, but it is not expressed to be for or against a particular faction, but rather, what the Russian people deem best.”

      Bret

      1.) Here we must call (BS) Bob Siratt. Per Anthony Sutton’s well documented book, “Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution” the State Department already knew what the Russian people had deemed best because the fix was in. Graves was going to end up aiding the Bolsheviks.

      2.) Wilson’s policy was not “wait and see” because Wilson’s money men who elected him had already determined the outcome. Again, reference Sutton.

      3.) As long as the Reds knew that the Whites were not going to take the railroad the Reds were free to turn their attention away from the concern of guarding the Railway and so focus on decimating the Whites (and Greens).

      4.) Graves was a tool of the International Bankers. The end result of the Revolution was sealed when they sent Lenin and Trotsky back to Russia well financed. See Sutton.

      You might want to consider more History books before you weigh in on this era.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *