I am disheartened that James Joyner continues to find more fault with conservatives' reasons and methods for attacking a socialist than with the socialist himself.
In the growing debate over a Che Guevara Cuban flag proudly adorning the wall of Barack Obama’s headquarters in Houston, Texas, Joyner comes galloping to Obama’s defense, ignoring the mounting evidence that Obama is as every bit as much a threat to capitalism as is Hugo Chavez.
To be fair, Joyner may not understand the depths of the Obama’s passion for collectivism. With the wave of the hand, wrongly dismisses any connection between Obama and Communism:
The “loyalty oath” goes to the whole notion — implied by Johnson and others quoted above — that Obama is under some obligation to declare that he’s anti-Communist and pro-American. Neither of those should be in doubt.
Oh, really? Consider the news I learned today at The Gateway Pundit:
Socialist (Democratic) Senators Obama and Sherrod Brown are proposing legislation that **forces companies to unionize **
to gain tax credits!
Threatened denial of tax benefits is a form of coercion only governments can perpetrate. And the kinds of governments that force collectivization are typically communist governments. It’s very short step to conclude, then, that men like Obama, who use the power of government to collectivize the workforce, are communists or socialists.
So I can safely go beyond the implied call for a loyalty oath that Joyner attributes to a bevy of conservative bloggers; I reject Barack Obama’s claims of patriotism and capitalism. I believe he is philosophical closer to Che than to Jefferson, Madison, or Monroe. Or Reagan, for that matter.
Joyner must be a very lenient boss. He believes that candidates for President of the United States should ignore the symbols associated with their campaigns.
But, surely, Obama doesn’t need to publicly weigh in on the decorating choices of every low level staffer?
Well, James, what if a low level staffer at the Atlantic Council of the United States chose to decorate her office with KKK signage? Would you object? Would your organization find lots of free publicity on the evening news? You’d hear Al Sharpton rhyming in your sleep!
I’m not trying to beat up on Joyner–he has credentials in this field far superior to mine. But I think he underestimates the significance of organic symbolism.
As conservatives, we tend to mock the symbolism so emblematic of the left. We relate to ‘Seinfeld’s’ Kramer who refused to wear the AIDS awareness ribbon in an AIDS awareness parade and was beaten up for his obstinacy. We see “I care” symbolism as a substitute for action, as in “Save the Earth” stickers on 1971 Chevy Impalas with V-8s and no catalytic converters.
But organic symbolism–that which swells from our passion–tells us far more about people than the things they say. A flag of Cuba with Che’s image on it tells us that the woman who hung it idolizes communists who savagely kill women and children in pursuit of the collectivist state. That the flag hangs in an Obama office tells us that those closest to his campaign believe Obama can deliver to the US what Che delivered to Cuba.
James Joyner is concerned at the vociferousness of the conservative vanguard. The Che thing represents Joyner’s second fight with the right in less than a week. Previously, conservatives jumped him for his attacks on Jonah Goldberg and others. I am concerned that James is fighting the wrong enemy. We who prefer capitalism over communism, the individual over the collective, freedom over slavery, and good over evil wish James would open his eyes and help fight the good fight.