The Obama Youth

© 2008 Selwyn Duke 

It really does seem that the more evil a movement is, the more likely it is to enlist children in its cause.  (Well, they really do make beautiful little human shields.)  Most of us have now heard about the “Sing for Change” video, in which 22 young, impressionable victims of misguided parents are singing a song in homage to Barack Obama as if he's a god . . . or an extremely good imposter.

Interestingly, the way the story behind this has developed provides an excellent example of how leftists have absolutely no courage of their convictions.   The Drudge Report had linked up to the video on Tuesday (9/30), giving it exposure to millions of ears, including many unsympathetic ones.  Thus, some of those who responded to it in the YouTube comment section entered negative responses.  So, lo and behold, what did these activist-minded leftists do?  They turned the original version into a private video, meaning, only those they invite may now view it (here is the YouTube page of the original poster).  Fortunately (or unfortunately – no exposure is almost always worse than criticism), though, other Web users had already posted it, which is why it's still available.

This kind of cowardice epitomizes leftists.  This is reminiscent of when a public official, bureaucrat, college president, school principal or someone else will advocate politically-correct lunacy and then run for the hills when asked to defend his actions.  This happens all the time, and it often comes to light on the cable news show the O'Reilly Factor.  It's utterly amazing how often Bill O'Reilly has asked such people to appear, only to find himself engaging in a media game of hide-and-go-seek.  And don't tell me me it's because O'Reilly is a pit bull.  I disagree with him on many issues and he'd find many of my positions anathema.  Yet, even if I knew I was in for a tough interview, I'd jump at the chance to appear on his show.  After all, isn't spreading the Truth the whole idea?

Then again, an astute person might just suspect that for leftists, it really isn't.  Look, making it onto the Drudge Report – which, last I heard, got 16 millions hits a day – is big time. There aren't too many better ways to get your message out.  And wasn't that the video creators' goal?  At the end of the work, after all, they flash a get-out-the-vote message on the screen.  Thus, they should have been tickled pink that their video, which otherwise would have languished in anonymity, was receiving major media exposure (Hannity & Colmes picked up on it as well).  

So what was the problem?  Did they really think you could create something such as this and not have to endure the slings and arrows of criticism?  Were their wittle feelings hurt?  It's pathetic; they got their day in the sun and then ran for the shade.  Perhaps it's understandable, however.  There are certain types of organisms that only flourish in dark, cold places, you know.  

This phenomenon brings to light a number of things about the creatures called leftists.  First, you have to wonder if they really believe that what they say is true.  I mean really believe, deep down, through and through.  People who believe they speak Truth have courage of their convictions.  Their attitude is: Bring it on! I'm fighting for something far greater than myself, something worth enduring criticism for, sacrificing for – and maybe even dying for. I'll brave the salvos at the front lines because, even if I take flak, the greater good is advanced.

As for me, I don't have to wonder.  I know that leftists don't even believe in Truth, let alone think that what they disgorge happens to be it.  This is one of the reasons they have authored hate-speech laws all over the western world and speech codes in colleges and workplaces.  Oh, they may say their goal is to protect others from offensive and hurtful speech, and, admittedly, man's nature is complex and people often have multiple motivations.  Yet there is another reason.  It's not so much that they find politically-incorrect dissent offensive; it's just that they don't happen to like it.  It makes them angry and uncomfortable, and for good reason.

Leftists' beliefs are wrong.

Thus, they can't defend them against the light of Truth, so they must use a different tactic.  This is to simply stop the other side from leveling criticisms they can't refute.  If you can't win the debate, stop the debate.  Then you don't have to hear those rationalization-shattering Truths, those horrible and hoary things that make you angry and uncomfortable because they nudge you toward a question.  Can it really be the case that the world view that has lent my life meaning and happiness is an illusion?  Am I living a lie?  Ah, no, we can't be bothered with facts; we have fantasies.  Muzzle that man!

This is why leftists, like so many other emotion-driven, self-deceived deceivers before them, use rhetoric, not reason; feelings, not fundamentals.  Take the video, for instance.  It's nothing more than empty slogans – we're going to change the world; Obama will lead 'em; yes, yes, we can, can – delivered in a very stylish way, much like the Obama campaign itself.  Where's the beef?  What tangible policies justify this passion?

If you would say this is simply a video, something akin to a pep talk, I don't disagree.  My point is that emotion without reason is dangerous.  Passion is invaluable, but it must be directed toward a just and good end; thus, an emotional appeal must have as its underpinnings a sound philosophical foundation that is expressed somewhere.  Otherwise it may be immoral.  

In other words, sing about fighting the darkness and rally the troops, but not before explaining what the darkness is and why it must be vanquished.  If this cannot be done, then an honest person must wonder what he really is for and against.  Perhaps he has become an enemy of the light.

I also don't say that enlisting children in a cause is always wrong, as that would be intellectually sloppy.  After all, some would ask how having children recite prayers they don't understand is any different from having them sing about political matters of which they're ignorant.  As to this, someone on the Internet did ask if this was any worse than what happened in the Christian "Kids On Fire School of Ministry."  Yet there is a tremendous difference.

The kind of reverence displayed in the Obama Youth video should be reserved for God.  Sure, we may disagree with a given religious group's theology, but they're not exalting a mortal to godlike status.  You may argue that the group's conception of God is errant (and, yes, such errancy can cause other problems), you may say God doesn't exist, but for certain is that a human is not a god.  We can admire others, but we tread a very dangerous path when we deify them.  It was wrong when ancient emperors did it, when it was done with Hitler and Mussolini (here is a version of the video in which its imagery is juxtaposed with something similar from dictator Kim Jong Il's North Korea), and it's wrong when we do it.  

Maybe this partially explains why the video's creators now deny the public access to it.  Perhaps on some level they know it's not something of which to be proud.  Now they just need to re-examine their own beliefs.  After all, how should you characterize your reformist program when you run and hide as soon as it’s challenged?  Would you really call it "change you can believe in"?

Selwyn Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show.  His work has appeared in Pat Buchanan's magazine The American Conservative and he writes regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective.

http://www.ediblog.com