Assign a 'primary' menu

Did Obama Affirm His Collectivist Mentality In His Inaugural Speech? A Reflection of His Marxist Foundations?- Part One

By Terry | Bill of Rights

[dropcap color=”color-default” font=”times” style=”oblique” size=”scmgc-3em”]C[/dropcap]ontrary to current government brain washing and propaganda, our Constitution was based on the concept of individualism. Now, of course, the framers and the colonists may not have called it that, but they did understand that all freedoms arose from the individual, NOT the government.

To determine where Obama falls on the scale of balance between Individualism and Collectivism let’s take a look at some of the differences.

Our Constitutional Intent

The ideal that the American Founders set forth when they drafted the Declaration of Independence, our Constitution and the Bill of Rights was to affirm and clearly establish the individual’s rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness.

The Constitution and more specifically The Bill of Rights affirms the sovereign rights of the individual such as but not limited to freedom of speech, press, privacy, self protection, self government and more. Later this approach was given the more sophisticated label of individualism. Back then it was referred to as liberty or freedom.

Counter Point- French Revolution Constitutional Intent

On the other hand, the French Revolution which promoted freedom through the State as the dispenser of rights and benefits. This socialist model was promoted by the Illuminati through the Jacobin Clubs and their hired thugs, the Marseillaise. (See my posts on Le Mis – The Hidden Back Story for more details on the French Revolution.)

The idea that the individual’s life belongs not to him but to the group is known as collectivism. The individual is only important or of benefit to society if they serve the groups collective purpose. That is people only have the rights that the society or State permits them to enjoy, provided they adhere to the rule of law as determined by the State.

A simplified but clear presentation of the difference between these two world views can be seen on YouTube and I would encourage you to view the entire series which is not all that long:

 [vsw id=”MkSHg3JV_V8″ source=”youtube” width=”425″ height=”344″ autoplay=”no”]

The individualist concept of rights is reflected as follows:

  1. Rights originate in individuals and nothing constrains them but the rights of other individuals.
  2. Every individual has the right to take any action that does not interfere with the rights of another individual
  3. Individual rights may only be transferred by the individual’s right of consent.
  4. Governments exist to protect the rights of the individual as a servant of the people who consent to be governed.
  5. The moral rights of government can never be greater than the moral rights of the individuals who delegated to government its power.

The collectivist concept of rights is reflected as follows:

  1. Rights originate from the team or society and are constrained by what contributes to the greater good of the society.
  2. Every individual has those rights which are determined to contribute to the greater good as determined by the State or more accurately, those in control of the state.
  3. Individuals exist to serve society or the group and not themselves. This is reflected in the phrase often referred to from Karl Marx “From each according to his ability to each according to his need.”
  4. The individual’s production exists to be distributed as determined by the group and not as determined by the individual.
  5. Government exists to distribute wealth produced by the workers so that all share equally in the wealth produced. (Liberte, egalite fraternite for example)
  6. The moral rights of the individual are never greater than the moral rights of the group.

Next, we’ll look a little further at the distinction between Individualism and Collectivism and then some excerpts from Obama’s inaugural speech and see where he falls.