Obama’s goal with Obamacare is to make every American utterly dependent of Big Brother Government for health care

Michelle Bachmann

…do we really want to change America into Sweden?

Bill O’Reilly

I am not going to start this article by preaching that the United States needs to drastically change it’s path by using another countries’ economic and political model. Every country has a different history, economy, political system and future and therefore there isn’t only one golden solution. That being said, I do consider that countries and governments can learn a lot from one another, and need to look at things that work and don’t work in other places. An example can be seen by analysing which countries dealt best with the recession and it’s aftermath (i.e. South Korea) and how they did it (i.e. stimulus).

Although Europe and the United States usually get lumped together as having a similar economic method (which we do in capitalism) we have different aims within our societies which I shall refer to as our ‘targets’. In many countries in Europe (not all) the target is increased equality and happiness as well as growth. In the United States the aim seems to be the chance of getting richer which will equate growth. Our targets therefore are quite different and produce different methods of progress.

The American Dream is a fascinating thing. The chance of getting super rich is of course intriguing especially when the media is full of celebrities and all of the things you may be able to buy in the future with your potential, hypothetical money. And I do understand if you ask someone if they would rather be satisfied in their life with adequate money, or would they rather gamble on this with the chance of being very very rich, even if the chances are miniscule, some people do prefer the risk.

But then throw in universal health care, a benefit system which will protect you if you lose your job, 10 weeks paid vacation every year, the chance to retire early, excellent public transport, and an outstanding education system. Is the risk worth it to lose all of this? If you ask many citizens in Sweden or Denmark this question, I can guarantee the majority wouldn’t give this up for the lottery ticket which is the American Dream.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) states that smallest gender gaps in the world occur in these socialist havens. These terrible commie governments also seem to always top the happiness indexes of the world. And who cares about standards of living, universal healthcare and excellent education when you can have private companies and individuals making billions.

It is hilarious when I hear Republicans who claim that Barack Obama is turning America socialist. Even if it was not his original plan Barack Obama has been cutting taxes! I am pretty sure that is the socialist dream. Socialists love tax cuts right? Lenin would be rolling in his blood soaked grave.

A sign is posted in a front yard in reaction to President Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan in Akron, N.Y., Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2009. (AP Photo/David Duprey)

US economic growth over the past century included spreading wealth more equally (yes that is right Michelle, another history lesson for you) for the majority of that time. It is not American to have low taxes and extremely poor and extremely rich people. That is right wing propaganda. Also, Sweden is not some socialist heaven where there is no economic freedom, as it has and continues to use its creativity to produce some very successful businesses (Spotify, Ikea, H&M). Therefore these two types of style of capitalism should not be scared of one another.

Now that you are able to breathe more calmly when you hear the words socialism or Sweden I will read out a message from the countries of the world who do offer universal health care; we don’t have death panels and our governments do not use it, as Bachmann states to hold it above us to make us dependent. We like our healthcare system, and will fight to keep it.

I am not stating that socialism is the system that should be in place in the United States. The countries that I have referred to throughout are not socialist; they have democratic socialist principles but also have used capitalism to grow. For example, Sweden has a voucher scheme for their school system which would be considered very right wing in other places. What I am stating is that we cannot use these theoretically titles to hold progress back. We need countries to use what will work for them. I can support the American Dream; however there should be a minimum standard of living which needs to be put ahead of this. Once everyone has basic living standards and are living comfortably, that is when societies can aim higher. We all should rise and fall together.

A senior Saudi Arabian diplomat, who also happens to be a member of the royal family, has claimed that Saudi Arabia will begin to build nuclear weapons if Iran attains them. Now, read that again but replace the words ‘Saudi Arabian’ with Syrian or Lebanese or any other nation that is not classed as a friend of the West. How would we react? Would it be the same reaction, or more likely would we respond threateningly to the smaller nations who are less likely to use them in fear of being totally obliterated? So, what’s the big deal? A government who is trying all it can to annihilate any hint of change or revolution in its own and neighbouring countries is trying to blackmail the US to take an even tougher stance on Iran. What are friends for? I do understand that Saudi Arabia sees Iran as a threat to what it perceives as the regional status quo and therefore is responding to protect its own interests, but the issue is how the United States will respond.

Cables released by Wikileaks gave an interesting look at the influence that Saudi Arabia has had over the US’ policies over Iran. King Abdullah privately warned the US in 2008 that all countries including themselves in the Middle East would develop nuclear weapons if Iran did so. So this news is not new to those at the top, yet I have not heard of any sanctions or condemnation to the extent of other nations claiming such things.

When Saudi Arabian troops entering Bahrain to fight against the Arab Spring protesters is met with silence in the West, we really should be questioning whether we are on the side of human rights and democracy or whether there are other motives in play.

So where is Obama, the so called supporter of the Arab Spring and long time ally of nuclear disarmament? At a time when we are bombing Libya because the premeditated violence that would have being perpetrated by Gaddafi would have “stained the conscience of the world”, why can we not see all of the other stains? Is it because our glasses are covered in blood?

Surely our friends over at the House of Saud have done nothing to stain the conscience of our world. If I was pushed I suppose I could say that things such as the excessive use of the death penalty (for crimes including being a wizard), the use of amputation as a punishment, the lowest proportion of females in the workplace (5%) despite making up 70% of university graduates, the complete lack of religious freedom, a place where LGBT rights are not recognised at all. But are these really stains if we get something in return? This list therefore becomes irrelevant amongst friends. You may as well forget all those lives that have being and will continue to be lost and tortured until a certain item runs dry.

Many people accept that a key reason why Ahmadinejad supposedly wants to attain nuclear weapons is because Israel has them and he understands the theory of deterrence; it is not a suicide mission. Can we not see the obvious hypocrisy between condemning and preventing Iran from pursuing its nuclear ambitions yet taking the Saudi threat as more reason to prevent Iran? We are more than happy to support Israel in its quest for self defence yet are enraged when it is a country that does not meet the criteria of friend (usually a non-friend implies that they have not opened their markets to us, or have nothing that we want). So far the media has responded to this issue by stating that we need to make sure that Iran does not attain any nuclear future, ignoring the pure hypocrisy regarding Israel and Saudi Arabia. The United States has two choices; to fully support an ethical stance where they treat all nations as equals and hold them to the same standards, or to do away with the charade that is pretending that they care about human rights and democracy in other countries. We must treat Iran, Israel and Saudi Arabia equally in the context of nuclear weapons if we were to take the ethical stance. Of course, as many of us know the issue lies much deeper than ethics. Much deeper.

The word I assume many of you are waiting for in this article is of course oil. I bet you were impressed that a progressive article went this far on the issue of the Middle East without mentioning the O word. I am not going to claim that I know the hidden agenda behind US foreign policy but I will say that there is a reason that Saudi Arabia have gotten off so lightly in terms of criticism from the current and previous US governments.

Let us stop pretending that our governments are standing side by side with the Arab uprisings. We have supported most of these regimes for a long time, so therefore we were and are part of the problem, not the solution. Until we begin to criticize our friends and push them to the same standard we criticize our enemies for, we are not the beacon on light we claim to be. But we can be, if we stop our dependence on oil and therefore on these countries. President Obama; don’t let Saudi Arabia bully you to push Iran more, but let it push you to look more closely at your relationship with the Saudis. However, what reply do we expect to hear back? Silence. Lots of it.