The history of Obama’s historical ignorance
Here’s an interesting piece in Commentary by Seth Mandel on Obama’s ignorance of history. It’s part of the old “knave/fool” dilemma that’s been discussed so much already on this blog. Although the article emphasizes the “fool” aspect in regard to historical knowledge, it does not ignore the “knave” part either, when Mandel writes: “We talk a lot about the defects of the president’s ideology, but not about his ignorance. The two are related…”
Obama’s historical ignorance is so widespread as to be, in Mandel’s word, “comprehensive.” Some specific areas Mandel lists are Putin’s resume, the basis for Israel’s claim to its territory, and the Crusades.
Obama’s historical ignorance was one of the first things I noticed about him. I wrote a post about it back in May of 2008, before he was elected. It’s interesting and revealing to me to look back now, with so much more information about Obama, and read what I wrote at the time:
I have long lamented the decline of the teaching of history and of critical thinking. One can be a highly intelligent intellectual today and know almost nothing about either.
This is where it’s led us. A Democratic nominee this ignorant, and a populace who can’t tell the difference.
Obama is the least qualified serious contender for the Presidency from either party that I can recall in my lifetime.
The word “this” links back to a piece at Hot Air discussing the fact that Obama had said that Iran doesn’t “pose a serious threat to us in the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us.” Note the subject matter of the error here: denial that Iran is a serious threat, a denial that has been consistent to this day.
I now believe that the “knave” factor in Obama’s view of Iran was much greater than the “fool” factor, and that he denies Iran’s leaders’ intentions and character not necessarily through ignorance but because he has made up his mind to favor Iran. This preference for Iran—you might even call it a “pro-Iran” stance—has become more and more apparent lately to more and more people; there’s been a flurry of recent articles on the subject. But it is not a recent development, not at all; it simply has become more obvious to more people.
What Obama actually said back then was that Iran was less of a threat than the USSR had been because Iran is tiny compared to the Soviet Union, a statement so odd that I wrote another piece on the subject. I began this way:
I used to think it might be a good thing for Obama to continue to make egregious errors. It would allow people to see his feet of clay and to understand the dangers of his naive and uninformed views.
But, as he’s made goof after goof and none of his myriad supporters””including his enablers in the MSM””seem to notice or care, it’s become more frightening. Now I’m hoping he smartens up, but fast””especially if he wins the election.
The post was entitled, “Obama’s ignorance: this is getting scary,” and it was written on May 20, 2008, quite early in the game. I’m not pointing out any of these old quotes of mine to say how perceptive and far-seeing I was, because I don’t think what I noticed was difficult to see. Actually I think it was (or should have been) easy to see, and I made it clear in that piece that I had hoped and expected that a large number of voters would notice and that it would matter.
I was wrong about that part. As the British poet Philip Larkin wrote after WWI, “never such innocence again.” We’ve all learned quite a bit from Obama’s presidency, and much of it hasn’t even been about Obama.
To get back to Mandel’s article—it seems to me that his emphasis is incorrect. Yes, Obama is historically ignorant (or at least seems to be; one never knows whether it’s a pose and he really knows the truth but is just misrepresenting it to the public in order to sway them to his preferred position). But if he is ignorant, the reason for it is not just that he was poorly educated in these subjects, although I believe that is true, and true of many educated people today. It’s not even a general lack of motivation on his part, as in laziness; Obama is quite motivated in some areas. I believe it isn’t even just his own arrogance about being the smartest person in the room, although that’s certainly how he feels. Nor is it the fact that he likes to choose advisors who are admiring yes-men and yes-women, quite a few of whom share a similar lack of historical curiosity.
I think the most important reason for his historical ignorance is that Obama has an agenda—or, as Mandel puts it “defects in ideology.” It is his ideology that drives this, combined with the ignorance, arrogance, etc.. But the ideology comes first, because if you have a firm belief that you want to favor Iran, for example, and that belief has been held for a long, long time, and most of your moves as president have been predicated on that belief (and you also happen to think you’re incredibly brilliant), what possible motivation would you have to seek out or listen to information that contradicts what you think you know?
I’ve written a great deal on this blog about how difficult it is to take in new information and change your mind. This is true even for people far less arrogant, far less invested, and far less ideologically driven than Obama. You have to be open to the fact that you were wrong, and curious about truth, in order to learn and change in that way. Obama is neither. His ideology is set in stone and would be resistant to new information even if it happens to come his way.
You’re one of the last true great bloggers.
I see the Farce is strong in this one…
holmes, given the new internet of obama and his minions, that may be very true…
Well done Neo-Neocon.
As to Obama and his ilk:
The True Believer, Eric Hoffer … that is for the psychology of it …
Then there is the curse of Oikophobia ….
It’s happened before, US:
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2007/11/copperheads-flashback-to-democrats-of.html
It’s happened before, France: [discussion of a Kim Dutoit piece no longer available on the internet]
http://fidalgoman.typepad.com/god_guts_and_guns/2007/05/a_wolf_liberal_.html
However, in the end, I blame the voters …
Obama spent his grade school years in Indonesia. He never got the basics on US history and US geography that we got (at least in the 50s and 60s), such as memorizing all the states and their capitals. He never did that. And other such lessons. His American education picked up at the private academy in Honolulu for high school, where he was known for other recreational activities. And who knows what classes he took in college and whether he went to class. I am very dubious about his education in substantive matters. Someone has extensively worked with him on his communication skills, however.
W.R. T. Obama’s ignorance; if you already know everything why bother to learn more. It’s up to the rest of the universe to learn from Obama. I wish he taught flying or high speed racing.
Actually the split between fool and knave forgoes a third category, mildly insane as in delusional. This would explain a lot.
Also in a talk at a booksigning Victor Davis Hansen noted that many of the statements Obama made in his notorious Cairo speech were fabrications.
And he keeps getting away with it because his base is more interested in selfies and bloggers who turn their bathtubs into cereal bowls than the survival of democracy. Rome fell to Attila the Hun, the US is going to fall to a blogger with a bathtub full of Fruit Loops.
Based on the stubbornness we’ve seen from Obama over the past 6 years, the way he’ll double-down on a policy/idea that is clearly failing, he appears to be not that capable of learning from mistakes or reconsidering an opinion based on new evidence. I think this ties into to Jarrett’s effusive comments about Obama being so dang brilliant he’s bored. This seems to indicate he is incurious, not interested in exploring and learning about new things. Why learn anything new about, say, Iran that would challenge his opinion that they deserve nukes – he’s already made his decision and that will not change.
What makes all this even scarier for me is that it’s not only Obama who thinks this way, it fits with the thinking of a lot of the career folks in the State Department as well.
And then there’s our possible next president, Hillary, whose most recent comment on Iran supported Obama’s push against more sanctions.
When you campaign in all 57 states its obvious you are not an American. The boychild is high on the wonder of the boychild. Still waiting to read those transcripts.
Didn’t The One study history with Brian Williams?
neo – I had come to the same conclusion, about the same time, and was using what Obama said about his own reading as evidence.
Here’s my conclusion:
‘He claims to have read one novel (with an Iowa setting), started one serious book, and at some time in the past to have read unspecified fictional books by leftist authors. No military history, no economics, no political philosophy, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. That’s not an impressive reading list for a man who wants to be president.
For a man this ignorant, one song seems like an obvious choice, Sam Cooke’s “Wonderful World”, with its famous opening line, “Don’t know much about history.”‘
(Obama was replying to an open-ended question on what books he read.)
You’re all using the wrong categories. For example, knowing history and learning from it is useless to someone like him – he’s here to rewrite it. America’s past is not something he even needs to learn because – listen to what he said – he’s here to fundamentally transform this nation. And he’s doing it as fast as he can.
Most people, however, didn’t take him at his word.
Obama’s the honey badger. The honey badger don’t care:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg
This question about a president who proclaims:
“I’ve been to 57 states, with only 3 more to go…”?
Oh wait, discussing the historical ignorance of a man who not once, but thrice refers to “CORPSESMAN” while pronouncing the letter, ‘P’?
Seriously, exploring the historical ignorance of an individual who believes that Austrians speak in a language called, “Austrian”???
Really?
s/b Corpseman
Obama partied with Bill Ayres on Martha’s Vineyard this summer:
This video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWMIwziGrAQ
Maybe analysis the depth of this regime’s historical knowledge is a tad …effete.
Sparta defeated Athene …
Excellent thoughts, Neo, especially that last paragraph. One of Obama’s many fatal flaws (flaws that would have been “fatal” were he not an affirmative action president) is that he really believes he is a “quick study.” He most definitely is not. Worse, there does not seem to be anyone on his staff or among his advisors capable of making him look less ignorant of what used to be thought of as “the basics” of history, geography etc. Put aside the fact that they are all mega-sycophants. Credentialed, but not educated, they are not well-rounded people, and unfortunately, in today’s world they don’t have to be. And yet they hold important positions in the highest echelons of our government. Sad. Dangerous.
Carter put the mullahs in control of Iran turning it from a pro U.S. nation into an anti-U.S. nation and Obama intends to make them nuclear. I swear I will never vote nationally or statewide for a Democrat for as long as I live.
Because it’s not just a change based on the acquisition of information, it is a change which wrenches and upends a belief system. The most difficult words in the English language: “I was wrong!”
A tip of the hat to those who have made that journey; you have my respect.
I have said many times, and I will say it again (and again and again and again since it is rock-solid truth and the cause of all out problems): Worse than Obama, by a hundred-fold, are the people who voted for him.
They are not bad Americans. They are not Americans at all. They are Comrades in the socialist revolution hell bent on destroying America and taking the spoils of the war they are waging.
They look like your neighbor and fellow American. They look like your relative or co-worker and sometimes even friend.
But friends they are not. Fiends they are.
Only when we admit the obvious do we – and they! – have a chance to change their dark hearts into decent ones.
Vikto Frankl was right: There are only two races of people on earth, the decent and the indecent. Democrats belong to the latter race. They will do, and never doubt it, what the German Guards did. All they await are the orders and the structural setup.
It’s something that goes beyond Obama, to Marx, and even beyond Marx.
The 10th Commandment: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor’s.
It goes back at least to Moses, envy does, and most certainly even further.
The political left sold its soul when it determined to make the envy of the have-nots toward the haves a political plank. Marx’s “revolution of the proletariat” is nothing more than this. Was it FDR who first played this card in the US? And they’ve been playing it faster and harder as time goes on, doubling down every chance they get..
History is a big thing. It is always amazing to me that some histories are written (or considered acceptable) for the “general public” and others, presumably, for the discerning-erudite priesthood of academia.
At what level of knowledge is one validly considered historically knowledgeable? How many people can name a single fact about how many of the men portrayed by Plutarch?
Who can name even a simple connection between Galileo, Newton and Einstein?
What party opposed the 13th Amendment and what is the 13th Amendment?
Compare and contrast, but only if you can: Lenin/Stalin, Churchill, Hitler, Mao, Reagan and Thatcher.
It’s not easy.
Regarding BO, I can only quote someone whose name I forget about someone else whose name I also forget – – that no one has yet plumbed the depths of his shallowness.
Hell, I can’t even plumb the depths of my own shallowness.
And politically, what difference does it make in 2015?
For instance, the non-Left is ridiculously non-informed about islam. It is very apparent that the non-left really has not informed itself about islam except in the most superficial way.
It really would take about a year of intensive informal study to be conversant with the cruel absurdity called islam. It is obvious from the daily written words of even the folks who have a generally non-submissive attitude toward islam that they just aren’t interested in getting the details.
True, there is almost zero education in logic, and the reliance on feelings/propaganda in our culture, divorced as it is from the concepts of human nature and natural law, reigns supreme, yet ignorance of history is a cultural reflection of indifference to human nature and natural law and not the problem in itself.
A few thoughts:
Sometimes people don’t hate you for what’s bad about you — sometimes people hate you for what’s Good about you. (See, e.g., America vs. the International Left).
Tonight, I ran into two women friends at Whole Foods, ages 46 and 50; both liberal birdbrains. I mentioned that I saw American Sniper last night, and the 46-er said, with a moue of distaste, “Isn’t that that controversial movie? I heard something about it,” and the other one chimed in, also disapproving of this VERBOTEN movie neither had seen. With some exasperation, I said, “Well, taking it on the merits as a MOVIE, it was very powerful. And Bradley Cooper was brilliant in it.” They changed the subject to how great he was playing a manic-depressive in Silver Linings.
Then they turned their shoulders slightly to fence me somewhat out of the trio, and carried on talking exclusively to each other. I’d been shunned. Subtly but definitely.
The psychology, though, was interesting (albeit infuriating): they’d recognized this movie as Taboo, they confirmed they were “of the Borg” by a shibboleth, and they shunned the one who had indicated she was “Not of the Borg.” It was clear that their alleged minds might as well be encased in cement, so effective is the conditioning to avoid even thinking about what the Left doesn’t want them to consider.
Last thought: I just bought a copy of Klemperer’s Nazi Germany diary, “I Will Bear Witness.” He started to keep it when Hitler was made Chancellor, and continued right up to the war. A lot of the effects he noticed in the people around him are what we are seeing nowadays: it’s chilling, and fascinating. Klemperer was born a Jew but converted to Lutheranism; married a Protestant German, but was still singled out for persecution as a Jew during the Third Reich.
Reading the entries, written literally as the rapid slide into tyranny occurred, is fascinating: watching how he and his wife adjust to each tightening of the anaconda coils, still struggling to breathe. . . .
Klemperer’s descriptions of Hitler’s affect, and his speeches, and the various ways the Germans are reacting to him, make sobering reading: Human nature doesn’t change, and mob psychology enables all sorts of horrors.
One more book recommendation: “Winston Churchill: An Informal Study of Greatness,” by the brilliant and witty Robert Lewis Taylor, quondam “New Yorker” writer — and Goldwater supporter. (Taylor’s obit, in the Times, is worth reading, too!)
Snippet:
“The Russians in the late war, while disgruntled at his funny suit, were enormously impressed by Churchill at the board. The impunity with which he absorbed caviar and vodka convinced the Soviet leaders they were fighting on the right side. Hitler, the bilious ascetic, had drunk next to nothing and picked at his food like an anxious raccoon.”
Oh! and Taylor also wrote a wonderful bio of W. C. Fields (who once remarked that “the British sense of humor is a dark and embarrassing business) — “W. C. Fields, His Follies and Fortunes.” Marvelous collection of the old reprobate’s favorite stories.
Showing my age on this; but, I remember one of the conversations between Nixon and Mao in which Mao was trying to flatter Nixon by saying that the Americans won their revolution despite the fact that the British had so many advantages over the American such “the British had electricity when the Americans didn’t!”
It was an LOL! moment; thinking how ignorant Mao was on such a basic historical fact.
I never thought that we would see the day when an American President would be almost as ignorant.
Beverly:
Klemperer’s diaries during the Nazi era are amazing, and especially pertinent in what they say about human nature.
Just a small nitpicky fact coming up—but he actually had kept a diary long before the war (I think he started it at 18 or so, but I can’t remember) and continued it till a few months before he died, which was in 1960. All but the early diaries have been published (although heavily edited; the originals are a lot longer), starting with the Hitler years, as you say. The later diaries included his life under the East Germans; I wrote about that here.
Isn’t V. Jarrett Iranian born? If, as we know, Obama relies a great deal on her advice and counsel, is it not possible/likely that his policies are a direct result of Jarrett’s urging?
According to her entry in Wikipedia, Jarrett was born to American parents living in Iran; she left there when she was five years old. She’s also said that she has Jewish roots. So who knows where’s she’s coming from.