I’ll admit that I’m enamored by Barack Obama.  I think his presence and oratory ability is refreshing after five or so years of watching Bush stumble through the most basic dialog.  But I am not a fan of Obama’s rhetoric.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accused the Bush administration on Tuesday of pursuing a policy of “social Darwinism” that leaves every man and woman struggling.

“It’s a strategy that we’ve seen this administration pursue over the last six years, that basically says government has no role to play in making sure that America is prosperous for all people and not just some,” Obama said to applause during an appearance before the Communications Workers of America.

The Illinois senator said the attempt to “divvy up the government into individual tax breaks” may be tempting, but government research and investment is what has made advances possible in the United States.

Obama, John Edwards and Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed the CWA’s conference, each accusing the administration of failing to look out for average workers and vowing to make changes if elected president.

Obama believes that this country derives it’s greatness from the government, not the people.  It is an alluring argument to make since I, and I would guess most Americans, feel that we have one of the best existing forms of government.  But what makes our government great is that it has significant limitations on what it can and cannot do to the free people of this country.  Other forms of government place restrictions on the people, not the government.  Our country is great because we are free and have a restricted (but ever more intrusive) government.

I would argue against Obama’s assertion that “government research and investment is what has made advances possible in the United States.”  Certainly there have been great technologies whose origins come from government programs.  The internet is a fine example.  But the market is what has made the lion’s share of advances possible.  Governments have a tendency to pick a technology to develop (usually for political reasons - think ethanol) and they pour money into a hole until someone can at least say the technology is mature, regardless of its commercial viability.  The market however, is ruthlessly efficient about applying scarce resources directly towards the most desired, although not necessarily the most needed, technologies.

The junior Senator from Illinois believes that the people need to be “looked out for” by the government.  We’re not capable of autonomy.  You and I all deserve something by virtue of the fact that we merely exist.

He accuses Bush of “social Darwinism” and I say, “What’s the problem?”  An economic policy similar to survival of the fittest is key to ensuring the long term health of our country.

Related content:

This entry was posted by Brian on Wednesday, March 28th, 2007 at 8:57 pm and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Please note the copyright policy.