Is Barack Obama Really a Socialist? You Decide
Socialism, according to Karl Marx, is the transition between capitalism and communism. To achieve communism, Marx says, there must be continuing revolution in which the fundamental principal is: The end justifies the means.
For more than half a century, capitalism in the United States has taken a beating from the socialist revolution. Despite the best efforts of conservatives since the Roosevelt era, socialists have made great strides toward converting the nation to socialism. Apparently, the majority of Americans either fail to recognize the transition, or welcome it. The enthusiastic support for Barack Obama, especially among young people, is abundant evidence.
Obama has declared that he believes every person has a "right" to health care. The Socialist Party USA believes every person has a "right" to health care.
Obama believes that labor unions should be allowed to organize without a secret ballot. The Socialist Party USA calls for unions to be recognized without a secret ballot. (Hear Obama's words here.)
The Socialist Party USA recognizes the "right" of adequate housing for everyone. Obama trained ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) workers to secure mortgages for unqualified people in sufficient numbers to collapse the housing and home-financing industries.
The Socialist Party USA believes that "capitalism is fundamentally incompatible" with socialism. For years, Obama worked in Chicago through the Annenberg Challenge, along with Bill Ayers, to funnel more than $50 million to anti-capitalist education projects. In November 2006, Ayers traveled to Venezuela to speak at Hugo Chavez's Education Forum where he railed against "the failings of capitalist education," and praised the "Bolivarian Revolution and the profound reforms in education made by Hugo Chavez."
The Socialist Party USA believes in open borders and six-months residency as the only requirement for U.S. citizenship. Obama marched with illegal aliens in Chicago in support of "comprehensive" immigration reform. Listen to Obama's promises to La Raza in 2007.
The Socialist Party USA calls for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. Obama says, "I will end this war," with never a reference to "winning" or "victory."
The Socialist Party USA calls for the "unconditional disarmament" by the United States. Obama has promised to dramatically reduce defense spending. Listen to his words here.
The Socialist Party USA calls for a "livable guaranteed annual income." Obama trained ACORN members to conduct "Living Wage" campaigns in cities around the country.
The Socialist Party USA calls for a "steeply graduated" tax policy to redistribute wealth. Obama has promised to increase the tax burden on the rich to redistribute wealth to the poor. He revealed his philosophy when answering a question from Joe the plumber, who complained that he was being taxed for his success. Obama said:
It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too. My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.
This list of comparisons could be quite long. This is sufficient to reveal an unmistakable similarity between Obama's political beliefs and the beliefs of the Socialist Party USA. The tragedy is that Obama's supporters don't care. In fact, many of his supporters are delighted that he promises to usher in a new era of socialism, and push the memory of capitalism further into history.
Socialists, who are in perpetual revolution, who believe that the end justifies the means, have worked through educational institutions, non-government organizations such as ACORN and by electing socialists to public office to silence teaching the virtues of free enterprise, capitalism, private property, individual responsibility and personal achievement. For nearly two generations, students have been fed a steady diet of socialism under a variety of disguises, including Outcome Based Education, No Child Left Behind, School-to-Work and a host of other "feel good" slogans.
Students and young adults no longer know why capitalism is better than socialism. Like Obama, young people really believe that when government redistributes wealth, "it's good for everybody." They do not realize that wealth redistribution is no substitute for wealth creation. They are never taught that the only way to create wealth is for an individual to combine his energy and intellect with resources to produce a product that improves his life, or for which someone else is willing to pay.
Private property, the accumulation of personal prosperity and individual achievement are anathema to socialism. Socialism sees the individual as nothing more than a cog in a government-run machine designed to ensure equity for all.
Capitalism seeks prosperity; socialism seeks equity. Freedom increases as prosperity increases. In a socialist system, there can be neither.
Labels: democratism is socialism is communism is democratism or is it fascism
posted by RD at 9:41 PM
AOL Sports Hottest Athlete
40 Comments:
Please examine the following articles for our differences with Obama. He is far from a socialist. While he has departed from many parts of the Republican upward distribution of wealth, he seeks to avoid the kinds of serious structural changes socialists promote - particularly guarantees to food, housing and education.
See these articles:
http://socialistwebzine.blogspot.com/2009/03/obama-at-le-jeune-military-occupation.html
http://socialistwebzine.blogspot.com/2009/02/obamas-825-billion-stimulus-plan-offers.html
http://socialistwebzine.blogspot.com/2008/11/obamas-demobilization-campaign.html
Okay...NYC, from the 825-billion stimulus plan article...
"It is unlikely the proposed $825 billion stimulus package will have a measurable impact on a national recession that is moving like a category five hurricane. The U.S. recession is deeply related to the expanding global recession; it is likely the U.S. government would need to invest more than $10 trillion dollars into the economy to accomplish any measurable results. Even if such funding were available, socialists believe a socialist transformation of society is necessary; this will require radical demands on the existing system, demands that challenge the basic assumption of a capitalist market economy while pointing the way to a new society."
Now.. we are already looking at 6+ trillion and before Obama is done he will make that 10 million... so what is your point... that socialists don't think Obama went far enough fast enough?
lol
Baby steps comrade... baby steps.
and comrade, cut Obama some slack he's done everything but quote Karl Marx... oh wait, never mind.
Yes, I know that it is so much easier for you to red-bait the hedge-fund Democrats. Sorry though, socialism, at least democratic socialism, is about form not speed. We need to not only democratize the economy but also begin to produce useful things - not just service-sector work. Funny that the conservative do not mention anything about this preferring to stay on the safer terrain of fear-mongering.
lol.. too funny.
Right... it's Republicans that are fear-mongering... not.
Excuse me but it's your buddy Obama and you guys that are screaming that the sky is falling and unless we convert to socialism immediately the world will come to an end... not Republicans. We know that all Obama and Democrats have to do to cure the economy is put money back in the peoples hands and out of governments greedy hands... too simple and straight forward for you, I know.
Perhaps you know that the multiplier effect of a tax cut is .75 cents. In other words for every $1 in tax money returned to private hands it adds .75 cents demand to the economy. The multiplier for state and local government spending is $1.38.
You may have an ideological motivation to advocate for tax cuts but please do not try and pass that off as economic strategy. It has not and does not work.
Finally, Obama is not our candidate. We ran a candidate against him in 2008 elections - Brian Moore. In addition, we have been the most consistent critics of his administration.
Right... the socialist says that letting the people keep more of their money every week is bad for the economy... shocking!
I am aware that Obama is not socialist enough for you... but that don't mean he ain't a socialist.
John McCain ain't conservative enough for me, but I'll bet you a roll of Russian toilet paper that he is a conservative in your category.
Nuff said comrade.
Oh please no, do not believe me. How about Nobel-prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz? Here is his position on tax cuts or budget cuts...
http://www.cbp.org/pdfs/2008/0807_pp_cutsortaxes.pdf
Please forward to me a comparable plan devised by Conservatives.
Look Stiglitz is a smart guy but here's the difference.. I don't have to forward you to a "Plan" or theory.
I can forward you to history. The longest period of economic growth in America's history came as a result of the Reagan tax cuts and other measures by Reagan at the time like budget cuts and reducing government.
Growing the size of government has NEVER resulted in long term (or short term for that matter) in true economic growth in the private sector which is the engine that drives this country... but I don't expect you to understand that... it requires you giving up on your dream of total government.
Look, you're not gonna do two things...
1 convince me that socialism is good and
2 convince me that Obama is not a "socialist-lite" at the minimum.
Capitalism works (if you get government out of the way) and Socialism fails (because of government getting in the way).
Have a nice day and thanks for trying.
-red
Now this is patently false. The longest period of economic prosperity in the US came in the years after WW II. This was not a period of "socialism" but it did have features typical of classic liberal economics - a regulatory state, progressive taxation and broader forms of state support.
Socialism, democratic socialism, entails extending democratic rights beyond the political process and into the economy. Things like participatory budgeting and self-management of productive enterprises have worked in the past and offer the best prospects for economic growth paired with social justice.
Capitalism "with the state out of the way" has increasingly been the case since Reagan. We are all now living with the consequences of this experiment - mass mortgage defaults, heavy debt loads, a financial sector meltdown, the erosion of wages and benefits... I think it is time to declare this idea a dead end.
Finally, I do not think that socialism is about the size of the government. I think of socialism as more about establishing notions of rights to necessary goods and in the rationale use of scarce resources in order to unlock the limitless potentials of humanity. Once the burden of debt, of war, of survival are lifted wonderful and unexpected things may arise.
All the best.
I will clarify then.. the longest and greatest period of peacetime economic growth in our history.
Now... you name one time in history that socialism i.e. communism has ever.. ever "unlock(ed) the limitless potentials of humanity."
as you wrote above.
CUBA? lol
How about Chavez? lmao
Socialism/communism does the exact opposite and you very well know it.
You should think seriously about what you mean by economic growth. Real wages stagnated throughout the 80s and only picked up in the 90s. In fact, wages rose for American workers in every decade from 1830 until 1970. From 1970 on they have stagnated or declined. So, the GDP growth of the 80s and 90s became an upward distribution of wealth.
Regarding culture and socialism, here is a small sample of socialist cultural workers from different periods:
Christy Moore of Ireland:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsmAMKUIXbE
Pablo Neruda of Chile:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXHPk-ctoYY
Dave Van Ronk of the USA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eymBZF9gIkw
Dimitri Shostakovich of the USSR (conducted in NYC by the great Leonard Bernstein)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogJFXqYEYd8
George Orwell of Great Britain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4s9pdL7tpA
Should I continue? Please offer references for what you understand as important conservative cultural icons. Are there any?
I appreciate you trying to control the direction and subject of the debate, but we have strayed far from the post we are discussing.
Cultural icons? Seriously.
lol
One major difference in socialism and conservatism is this very thing you bring up... socialists put their faith and hope and dreams in a person or persons (Like Chavez and Castro) and conservatives put our faith in conservative ideals and policy... not the government.
But there have been plenty of iconic conservatives throughout history and you know who they are.
I didn't know we were debating pop culture though, I thought you were going to provide me with a long list of countries where socialism has thrived and the people prospered... what was it you said... socialism "unlock(ed) the limitless potentials of humanity."
Would Cuba or Venezuela be your example of this?
OR are you gonna try and sneak maybe France or some small Skandinavian country at me?
Socialism has never worked on it's own without stealing from others.
No, I am quite serious. Who would you describe as the cultural workers of the conservative political project (past and/or present)?
No need to point to Cuba or Venezuela (both interesting projects but outside this discussion). The best parts of American society are organized around socialist ideals - say for instance social security. Social security promotes the idea of solidarity and compassion. In addition, respect for the elderly is a component of many, if not most, world cultures and religions. These are ideas I am committed to and that I think form the basis of democratic socialism.
There are a few others that can be found in this pamphlet:
http://www.socialistparty-usa.org/literature/whatsbest-flyer.pdf
My suspicion is that there is some base cruelty inside of conservative ideology. Bush tried to reverse this notion with his "compassionate conservatism" but, for me, that formulation seemed to acknowledge the existence of cruelty. Perhaps you might comment on this and enlighten me as to what is the ethical/moral/humanistic core of conservatism.
I asked you to provide examples in the world of socialism succeeding... you have provided everything but that.
You can read my blog and find plenty of examples of what is ethical/moral and humanistic about conservatism it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out... that is if you are truly looking which I question.
Or you can listen to this and get a pretty good understanding of what we are all about.
LINK
You red state wackos crack me up. Trying to scare leftists with the moniker "socialist" is about as effective as trying to piss off Phish fans by calling them hippies. Obama's never been anything even close to a socialist, and the socialists don't care for the guy. Now, granted, he's not leaning hard right like you pseudo-religious, tax and spend on meaningless losing wars while draining the treasury for our rich friends' benefit ditto heads, but he's still a capitalist, and that is essentially anti-socialism.
Wake up and smell the world that 30 years of Reaganomics has destroyed.
You socialists crack me up... at least NYC local up there is honest about his loyalties... even if not about Obama's.
What do you consider "close"? His pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright is a Marxist according to his own Church website and material... Obama was within a few feet of him for decades. That sounds close.
Or are we still splitting hairs?
Socialist
Communist
Marxist
Stalinist
Woodie Guthrie-ist
or all of the above?
Hey, waitaminute, I'm not with NYC or his party. I'm no democrat, either. What I am is thoroughly anti-conservative. Mostly because you guys don't stand for anything other than "greed is good." And maybe "violence solves everything."
If there's ever been a more hypocritical bunch of anti-American, anti-christian foulness than the spew frothing from Limbaugh's constitution-mangling oxycontin-addled triple chins, I've never heard it.
If you guys wanna follow a $400 million a year liar, then that's your bad, but you're gonna get some noise from all kinds of people who refuse to be ditto-heads.
Hey wait a minute... you an anarchist?
Or are you just against everything?
If you want to discuss Limbaugh this isn't the thread to do it in.
Thanks for stopping by though.
-red
Nope, not an anarchist, I'm what you call an "American." Ever heard of one? Like this:
“As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.” — George Washington
You're the one who posted the link to pill-head Rush's CPAC speech. I guess $400-million a year won't buy you a real intellectual. Too bad.
You are mistaken there duck, my taxes don't go to Rush Limbaugh.
Your partisan liberalism toward the Democrat(ic) party oozes from every word... yet you hide it and pretend you are just an "American".
Based on everything else you've been wrong about above... I wonder if even that is true... or are you just ashamed?
I don't really blame you. Liberalism is hard to defend and socialism doesn't work... so all you are left with is empty hatred.
Reagan had nothing to do with Barney Franks Fannie Mae scam bringing down the entire economy.
I feel sorry for ya duckey, i really do.
-red
Wrong above? You haven't even addressed what I said above other than to back away from Rush, which is admirable. I wish your party could do as much.
How many times did you vote for Bush? Talk about errors of judgment. And you expect anyone to care what you think about economics, politics, or even sports?
I direct you to this little diatribe.
What you said above doesn't really need or deserve a comment besides what I already said.
You went on an ad homenim attack on Republicans without providing anything to support it other than your rage and hate.
Okay... you hate Republicans. I hate people who hate Republicans... so there we are sparky.
I went and read your hate filled rambling ...whatever that was. Too bad you live in world where you make up your own facts and make up your own history and pretend others are the haters while you spread hate.
You attack Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh but think Bill Maher is a God...lol ahh the irony... except the maher copycat dittohead that you are, you probably don't believe in such a thing since your mentor, your champion, your own Rush Limbaugh doesn't.
You are exactly like those you are condemning... classic stuff there crispy or sparky or whatever.
lmao
Where, exactly does cripsy offer made up facts? Where does he get history wrong? and where does he claim that Maher is God?
Just where exactly, on this post, do you offer any facts at all Tater? Mostly seems like "lol" and "lmao" and "not", if anyone actually reads this blog you might try supporting your arguments rather than dismissing other opinions outright.
Barndoor, if you are going to jump into an argument you have nothing to do with and know nothing about... you are going to have a lot of questions that have already been answered. Thus your state of confusion.
he opened his comments here by dismissing my opinions and namecalling.
Do you have a comment about Obama being a socialist or not?
If not... then move on or make a coherent point. I don't have time to play childish games with you two.
Hold on, 'Roid. I don't call you a Nazi, because I don't believe you're a Nazi. (though the similarities are unnerving)
Obama says he's not a Socialist, the Socialists say he's not a Socialist, and yet, on you go calling him a Socialist.
What you're doing is trying to scare the muffins out of your base, to mobilize them by LYING to them about things they don't (and won't) understand. It's a coward's tactic (though it's been working for you righties for decades now), and you're following Limbaugh right down there.
You guys need some new saviors. Maybe some pro-America ones this time.
well, Tater, I do have something to do with this conversation- I am a SP-USA member- I have also read the entire post and comments. I also read the blog by cripsy that you refer to as having made up history and facts.
Calling you out on your refusal to actually support your idea that Obama is somehow a socialist IS making a point. Simply saying you believe it to be true is not good enough, when NYC local points out the differences all you can say is "lol" or "not"
Why not admit that Obama isn't really a socialist? It doesn't mean you have to agree with him.
Hey barndoor, my question is why are all you so-called "socialists" so afraid to embrace "Him"?
His pastor is a marxist, he's pals with a domestic terrorist and louis farrakhan called him the messiah and that ain't good enough for you guys... tough crowd.
What's your problem?
Are you guys mad because he denies you? A socialist scorned?
Dude's c'mon he has to say he's not a socialist... golly gee he doesn't even know what that word means... but he sure knows how to implement socialist policies and socialist ideals.
Or are you not for spreading the wealth and each according to his own any more?
Actually, I was highly upset with Obama's denunciations of Rev. Wright, what Wright said was true. Obama didn't have the stomach to stand by him. The William Ayers thing was overblown, the record shows that they don't "pal around". Wasn't aware of Farrakhan's views about Obama being the messiah, but Nation of Islam isn't socialist.
Our problem is that Obama supports mostly the same old stuff that American corporations and ruling elites have supported for a century. The current bail-out and stimulus is a giveaway to corporations mainly, not a redistribution of wealth to the people. Obama stands for a prolonged presence in Iraq, troop increases in Afghanistan, and illegal bombing of civilian populations in Pakistan. His stance on rendition is the same as Bush's! If he were truly a socialist he would support HR 676-health care for all. If he were a socialist he wouldn't have appointed de-regulation collaborators to his cabinet. We stand for citizen and worker control of the economy and government through democratic processes, look at Obama's campaign donations to see how he will govern, and that is unacceptable to real socialists.
I encourage you to visit www.socialistparty-usa and read our platform.
I would also invite you to read a post on cripsy's blog at http://cripsyduck.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/guest-editorial-two-cents-from-a-real-socialist/
Hey.. nobody is the perfect candidate, but he's the best thing to happen to socialism since Fidel himself. You gotta remember he's in America, capitalism HQ man.
He's gotta be covert, he's gotta be on the down low daddy.
Hang loose, you'll see I'm right.. you'll be singing his praises in 4 years.
Until then... show the guy some love, he's doing the best he can for ya'.
Is this what you mean by not a socialist?
Barack Obama, NOT a socialist
maybe if he supported HR 676, and complete withdrawal I might be more lenient. Say what you will, Obama has stuck pretty much to his campaign ideas, not socialism. The current ideas about bailouts and nationalization aren't socialism at all, I call it reverse socialism you might deem it national socialism or national syndacalism which is what Hitler, Mussolini, Franco espoused.
Your conspiratorial musings on Obama's secret agenda are akin to me thinking that Bush was planning to dismantle the constitution and declare himself dictator for life.
Well then let's hope I'm as wrong as you were... that way we both win... you would have proved I was wrong and Obama turns into a right winger.
But then how do you explain that Obama used to be a member of the socialist New Party ?
Ahhh I get it. You see folks this is why you don't debate socialists... they are liars and con artists.
Actually I gave crispy & co. too much credit and too much benefit of the doubt.
You see folks, we are dealing with liars and con artists. Playing a sort of lame perverted good-cop/bad-cop type roles, crispyduck and his Bevus and Butthead buddy "Fester" were scamming me. While calling for me to be civil and considerate they posted THIS with following comments proving this fact here
But in case it accidentally gets deleted.... the scam.
"I let Fester out of the cage for a moment with instructions to guilt the guy into letting you rip ‘em up. We will see if it works. did you read this. http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/03/11/mercury/
Its all about the freedom to piss someone off with your words people."
and
"BTW… it worked with old ‘Roid. He posted a couple of my thoughts."
Busted buttheads.
I had heard some talk about Obama and the so-called new party. It is hard for me not to take right wing postings about this with a grain of salt. However, most of what I have read is that they were more progressive than radical. Plenty of progressive democrats are happy with Obama. The Democratic Socialists of America are not a socialist group, they push for reform of capitalism. They also work inside the Democratic Party for these reforms, they are a small group, and I'm pretty sure, judging by campaign rhetoric and his governing record, that BHO isn't even a progressive.
I would like to point out that lately the term "socialist" has been used to describe "social democrat" (a la European style welfare systems). Social Democrat is not a happy label for members of the real socialist cause. I submit that this term is what you believe BHO to be, again, I don't see any evidence of even that.
As for Cripsy and Fester, I turned ol' cripsy on to your blog, I hope you don't mind engaging with more readers. Fester, btw, is really just the feisty, devil's advocate, side of a pretty openly conservative libertarian. The only disrespect they meant was of your views, they are not con men. I often argue with these guys on cripsy's blog, that's just how they do! Fester truly did mean for you to be civil as a way of getting your points across.
I am the socialist, not cripsy or fester, and I haven't lied, and I am not conning you, neither was NYC local. We are comfortable enough with our cause to be able to debate freely with those who differ. I trust you are just as comfortable with your views, I hope you welcome the challenge! Please don't blame all socialists for the actions and words of two non-socialists.
It's hard for me not to take a socialists postings with a grain of salt... in fact it's impossible.
I mean... oh barndoor, your such a nice guy, I trust you and Fester and the duck. You know I was just kidding around with you guys. I don't really think Obama is a socialist... that's just crazy talk.
(baby steps comrade, baby steps, if you give yourselves away too soon the Messiah won't get all of his socialist policies in place before the rightwingers alert sleeping Americans and take back their country.... remember, ...baby steps comrade, be patient.)
Remember, Obama must stay beneath the surface little moles otherwise your gig is up.
Post a Comment
<< Home