Obama’s Two Chicken Theory

In 1919, at the age of 25, Mao Tse-tung witnesses the seeds of Chinese Revolution when students demonstrate at Tiananmen Square protesting the government’s acceptance of some demands in the Versailles Treaty.

By 1920 Mao has immersed himself at Changsha school vying for universal education of the masses.  He fancies himself a community organizer.

In 1921, supported by the Soviet Union, the Chinese Communist Party holds its first National Congress in Shaghai with only 57 members.  Mao becomes the Hunan Province general secretary where he begins to organize labor and union strikes.  ACORN has yet to have been created.

Mao was an admirer and disciple of Karl Marx, but differed believing the cause ought to be taken up not by the proletariat, but by the peasantry.  This differentiation had less to do with ideology than it had to do with the raw materials for revolution available to Mao at the time, and the ease at which those raw materials (the peasantry) could be molded and manipulated.

During the twenties, thirties and forties, the Nationalists lead by Chiang Kai-shek and Mao’s Communists battled for power.  Millions died in the process and Mao narrowly escaped his own execution after being captured by Chiang guards.

Throughout his campaign Mao recruited peasants to the Communist Party by declaring anyone possessing fields to grow food and a house in which to live, rich.  These rich were open game, bourgeois opportunists who obtained their comforts by subjugating the peasant class, deserving of ravage and plunder.

By 1949 Mao had seized complete power of China as Chiang fled to Taiwan.  The Chinese Communist Party boasted 4.5 million members.   Over four million of those came from the peasantry.

Their reward for loyalty to Mao and the CCP?

Mao marked the 1950’s with schizophrenic policies that first encouraged intellectuals into the CCP and then purged them as traitors.   While technical counsel from the Soviet Union saw China’s economy grow, Mao rejected this new found modest prosperity.  Following his own arrogance and ideology which envied independent success, Mao culminated the decade with the Great Leap Forward proclaiming it would advance all sectors of society.

Integral to the Great Leap Forward and to ingrain what Mao viewed as utopian communist principles, all members of Chinese society were forced to work in communes and factories to appreciate first hand, labor experienced by the peasant class.

The Great Leap Forward was an abject failure which saw drastic reductions in productivity resulting in the deaths of some 15 to 20 million people due famine, and left Mao to declare he understood nothing about economic planning (like most communists).

Mao’s reign over China continued to be tumultuous until his death in 1976.  While he was lauded as a hero shortly after his death, it wasn’t long before revisionists began to describe his deeds and policies as inhumane and destructive to China.

Mao’s communist utopian ideals were always constructed to secure power for himself with little consideration for the plight of Chinese citizens.  His decisions in regard to economic issues throughout his tenure generally saw destruction of the middle class with no relief ever for those among the peasantry.

And what policy change did Mao stipulate, during his turbulent rise, to his band of peasant murderers, after laying waste to every rich person or family possessing a field and a small house?

Rich was redefined to describe anyone who owned at least two chickens.

Most Americans identify capitalism as integral to US culture, and most find any talk of socialist or communist ideology offensive.   Drawing comparisons between evil leaders like Mao, or Stalin, or Hitler with any of our politicians is generally determined extreme or radical.

Clearly, no American politician could ever obtain the kind of absolute power nor wield it with the kind of inhumane application that these evil men did because America simply does not possess the sort of squalor and desperation required to move disciples to such diabolical action.  Specifically because our capitalist system creates so much wealth and good fortune does America enjoy such a high standard of living.

That being said, it is still instructive to illuminate the ideologies of those who embrace political principles offensive to American culture and examine how those ideologies parallel those of some contemporary American politicians.  It is not by accident that Mao Tse-tung used the class warfare political tools to enlist the help of China’s poorest citizens, and it is not by accident that Barack Obama has promised not to increase taxes on anyone making more than $250,000.00, I mean $200,000.00, I mean $150,000.00, no I mean $41,600.00.

Copyright 2008 Jim Pontillo

15 thoughts on “Obama’s Two Chicken Theory

  1. Very nice work. The parallels are obvious. The Obama imbeciles are going wuillingly to their slaughter. For what? For an egotists with stale ideas. Those who do not understand the mistakes of history are condemned to repeat them.

  2. No, see, Graham, you don’t get it. Here is a summary of what this column is actually saying.

    Obama is just like Mao!

    Well, he’s nothing like Mao.

    Except he is!

    But there’s no comparison. Still you should PRETEND there is one.

  3. Obama is not like Mao only to the extent that American culture holds him back.

    He wants to imprison people who use a handgun for self-defense in their own home (against the 2nd Amendment).

    He wants to kill living babies from botched abortions (against the Declaration of Independence that says “we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights”—life being one of those).

    He wants the Supreme Court to defy the Constitution and demand that government legislate to redistribute wealth (against Article I of the Constitution where the legislature is endowed only with specific duties—redistribution of wealth not being one of those).

    He does these things just like Mao, not because he cares about the peasant class (Obama can’t even take care of his own brother or aunt living in squalor) but because he wants to give the people some crumbs to convince them to award him with power, just like Mao did with his peasants.

    When Charlie Gibson explained to him in debate that raising the capital gains tax would reduce revenue as history has proven, his rejoinder was “I’m interested in fairness.”

    In other words screw the people (just like Mao did) as long as they “think” we are helping them. My only fear is, what is this evil demagogue going to do when we run out of chickens?

    Mao was a power hungry liar.

    Obama is a power hungry liar.

    I think this article isn’t too far off the mark, no matter what that Crumbunist guy says!

  4. Hm! An entirely fair response! Let us all remember that no other president has ever compromised the constitution in the service of ideology and rhetoric! Nobody ever passed a PATRIOT Act, no president was ever elected by the Supreme Court, no president has ever sent American troops to war without a proper declaration! Yes, surely Obama’s particular brand of constitution-defamation is SO NEW and SO RADICAL that it can only be compared to one of the greatest mass-murderers of all time! Yes… this is an apt comparison in every way…

  5. First, I would like to thank Jim for the very intelligent, well thought out columns that you write. I’ve enjoyed reading them ever since I found your site and find them very thought provoking.
    As for Crumbnut, you really need to get over that whole election problem you have. Bush won in every recount, there have been multiple recounts by journalists that are definitely not Bush fans and they all found that he won. The Supreme Court just put an end to the countless recounts that the Democrats would have demanded.
    However, if you want to protest about a stolen election you might try the last election for Governor in Washington state. The Republican candidate won the election, but it was close enough to have a recount. He won the second recount, but the Democrats demanded another recount. After many shady procedures, tossed ballots, lost ballots etc. the Democrat won a recount and became Governor. So despite the Republican winning multiple recounts, the Democrats kept recounting until they got the result they wanted. So if you want to protest an election, protest that one. It would be more logical, but hey liberals are not known for their logic…

  6. Ok, I will replace my one comment regarding the election with something less offensive to the delicate ears of such factually-accurate characters.

    Wilson and the Sedition Act. John Adams and sedition.

  7. Jim, what’s your take on this whole sub-prime loan thing? It seems to me that a lack of regulation in this area is what caused the majority of our economic troubles. You seem to always be opposed to regulation, so how do you justify your position in light of recent events. It seems that the Europeans are faring better than we are because of economic regulation. P.S. Most European countries ARE NOT socialist. YOU may call them that, but in fact they are regulated capitalists. Please avoid any rants to me about the evils of socialism. I agree, that’s why I believe in regulated capitalism, or what I like to refer to as the middle ground. It seems that a majority of Americans agree with me as well, and no amount of rhetorical obfuscation on your part can change that fact. Enjoy the next four years!

  8. David,

    I’ve missed you brother. Where have you been?

    Nice to have you back, however, by your comment it seems you’re not up to date. Read column number 95 (among others).

    As for the next four years. An Obama presidency isn’t all bad. It’s good for the black community, and I think it will be good to put some deep wounds from racism behind us. Obama has already signaled he may not be able to institute all the things he wants to right away. That’s double speak to let you know he’s going to move to the center.

    Stay tuned, this week I’ll give you a column about it you’ll be happy to shred!

  9. Well you know, between two jobs and full-time college it tough to find the time to post.

  10. I have to wonder if those who so vehemently defend Obama will be anywhere to be found if Obama starts down the path that so many fear he will.

    On the other hand I think I’ll be more afraid if those who support him are still around after he starts down such a path.

    Food for thought.

  11. We can look to the recent past to see what happens when the president screws everything beyond repair.

Comments are closed.