Neville Chamberlain, British prime minister from May 1937 to May 1940 has gotten a particularly bad rap from a lot of historians, particularly his successor in office Winston Churchill. Later historians have tended to be a bit more charitable. Given the vicissitudes of history, one wonders if Barack Obama might some day come to be known as the Neville Chamberlain of the United States.
Yes, Chamberlain was a Conservative (Big-C for the formal party known by that name) and Obama is an extreme liberal, probably properly called a socialist (Small s for a philosophy rather than a party). However, they do have some similarities. Both served during dangerous times. Both neglected to build up their country’s militaries. In fact, Obama has stripped ours to virtually nothing. One remaining heavy division isn’t going to scare anyone. The Air Force and Navy also have been cut down to third-world sizes. In a stand-up-and-knock-down battle, there are half a dozen countries around the world that would outnumber us in tanks, aircraft and men by not-survivable odds.
The interesting thing about Obama is that he took office with lot of built in good will. Even conservatives (small c) like myself had hopes we were turning a corner by electing our first black president. No, I didn’t vote for him either time, but I was a bit proud that we had elected a black. It was past time for that, though I can think of a host of black conservatives who would have been much better choices.
In his Chamberlain-like foreign policy, Obama has sought to appease radical Islam, just as Chamberlain sought to appease Nazi Socialism. Just as Chamberlain saw Hitler as a man who “could be dealt with”, Obama sees the Muslim Brotherhood and a host of other radical groups as organizations to be “dealt with” rather than stoutly resisted and defended against. Like Chamberlain, Obama has more faith in negotiations than in carrying a big stick.
Where the analogy breaks down, of course, is Obama’s radical socialism and One-Worldism. Obama thinks we can negotiate with radicals and believes the United Nations has legitimacy and the U.S. should bow to its wishes. Chamberlain wasn’t a socialist, nor did he seek to subjugate British interests to the League of Nations.
I expect the UN will go the way of the League once the next great war breaks out. And there will be another one. That history already has been written. It’s called the Book of Revelation. Such a prediction also is just common sense. Man is a warlike creature and isn’t going to change his stripes. Of course, when those days come, there may not be many historians left, or time to write history. But it would be interesting, and probably likely that Obama would be relegated to a similar position in such histories as that of Neville Chamberlain