Why in the world do some people associate Obama with socialism/communism? [Archive]

NoMore

28th July 2009, 16:16

Because republicans are so paranoid that when anybody has a socialistic idea such as universal healthcare (which I don't think obama is going to do anything about anyways) they go off in what seems almost like a compulsive rant about how that person is a socialist, a commie, devil worshiper, a degenerate, a goddless sodomite... you get the idea.

Misanthrope

28th July 2009, 17:50

Ignorance, stupidity, lack of education.

LOLseph Stalin

28th July 2009, 17:53

New Tet

28th July 2009, 17:59

The media.

Quickest explanation ever. ;)

And one that Sarah Palin uses at her convenience.

Axle

28th July 2009, 18:03

The media told everyone he was a socialist/communist/Marxist/ect...and since the general public has absolutely NO IDEA what those things actually are, and don't understand which way the media bias in America actually goes, they believe it.

Communist

28th July 2009, 18:23

People generally don't know what socialism actually is. Polls indicate an increasing number of Americans are leaning towards socialism, but few likely have any idea what they think it is they want.

It's not the fault of the Republicans exclusively, the anti-Communist/Socialist climate in America, what we were all raised in, was promoted by Democrats, too. Right now the GOP is frantically calling Obama a socialist to exploit the anti-radical feelings; most of them know full well he's not.
And I hear and see a lot of Democrats running around denying Obama is anything remotely near a socialist. That's accurate, but the only reason they're being honest is because of the anti-socialist culture.
Point being, what capitalist politicians say and what they know are usually completely different. And when that rare truth does emerge, it's only to serve their interests.

New Tet

28th July 2009, 18:29

Anybody who encourages government intervention in any way is Socialist in a Republican's eyes, even if it's bailing out a huge corporation. Why? Because that's not "Free Market" and must mean Obama is a freedom hating Commie. :rolleyes:

True, but incomplete explanation.

I think you'll agree that the Obama/Socialism nexus, if it even exists, is much more complex than that. And potentially less detrimental to the real cause of socialism than we think.

x359594

28th July 2009, 18:42

..what capitalist politicians say and what they know are usually completely different. And when that rare truth does emerge, it's only to serve their interests.

That's entirely accurate.

At least since the late 1940s anti-communism has been the national religion of the USA. The words "socialism," "communism," and "Marxism" have been demonized by the corporate mass media, so that even people who agree with the actual content of these terms reject them because of the deep seated misinformation associated with them.

That said, I believe the situation is changing. Anti-communist (and that includes anti-socialist) indoctrination has been on the wane in popular discourse, though it's still alive and flourishing in the intellectual community (I'm think of the recent campaign to prove that the liberal journalist I. F. Stone was a Soviet spy based on de-classified KGB files.)

*Red*Alert

28th July 2009, 18:45

It really ticks me off as there's nothing socialist about him or his policy, its plain ignorance fed by the media. I always laugh any Americans who support Obama (my sister-in-law) actually defend him from the attacks, saying that he's not a Socialist, as if it would be a bad thing if he was!

McCarthyism done its job well, although he's rotting now, it kept his wage packet high!

The Idler

28th July 2009, 22:03

Anti-communism has been the prevailing orthodoxy in the United States for decades so labelling anyone remotely interested in welfare capitalism as a "communist" suits the interests of supporters of monetarism. The problem with this, is it requires a lot of distortion of, and basically just changes the meaning of "communism" and "marxism".

In UK politics, at least at the moment, such accusations are not taken seriously by accuser or accused. There seems to be generally a better idea of what communism is both among the educated and even the unacademic don't seem as fervently anti-communist as in the US. I was reading about Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory which is a publication of the Centre for the Study of Socialist Theory and Movements at the University of Glasgow. The journal was inaugurated by Professor Hillel Ticktin. Hillel was designated Emeritus Professor of Marxist Studies at the University of Glasgow in 2002.

Are misconceptions about communism peculiar to the unacademic in the United States?

Communist

28th July 2009, 22:10

Are misconceptions about communism peculiar to the uneducated in the United States?

I think more so than anywhere else, yes. Also a lot of misconceptions among the educated.

Revy

28th July 2009, 22:20

Because he's a Democrat. They said the same thing about Kerry, they had a website which is still up called "Communists for Kerry" which was a parody site made by Republicans.

ZeroNowhere

28th July 2009, 23:11

The media does play a part, as do schools (I believe somebody already mentioned schooling as 'lack of education', however). Generally, the political spectrum is seen on purely capitalist lines, so that the only difference between 'economic' theories is the amount of state intervention and such. So 'communism' is a lot of it, 'socialism' is some of it, and so on. This also means that where 'socialism' begins is fairly vague, and therefore anybody advocating left-reformist measures can be chucked there if it would be helpful to advance one's cause.
Of course, the Socialist and Communist Parties in the US don't help much either.

RadioRaheem84

28th July 2009, 23:37

It's because the right has infected political discourse with idiotic ramblings about communism. Anything to the right of Free market economics is socialism or communism. Any form of public assistance or federal programs are considered communist, yet the right has no problem what so ever with the trillions of government spending on the military. We have a frickin' Soviet Style/Chinese army for crying out loud and yet they say nothing!

Obama is another Jimmy Carter-esque type politician. Like LBJ too, he'll implement some Great Society social program that will benefit the poor a bit but still not solve any of the real problems in this country.

What surprises me is that so many REAL socialists, communists and progressives have come out and yelled to the roof tops that this man is NOT a man of the left, yet the right wing still associate him with socialism. Apparently, the more the left denies that he is a socialist, the more the right wing believes that its just a cover up.

Point is, anything that is not free enterprise is somehow socialist to these people.

ArrowLance

28th July 2009, 23:41

Well, he was already a Black Atheist Muslim Terrorist that LOVED eating kittens and kicking babies. So the just threw Communist into the label.

zimmerwald1915

28th July 2009, 23:43

Because he's a Democrat. They said the same thing about Kerry, they had a website which is still up called "Communists for Kerry" which was a parody site made by Republicans.
Are you sure that was a parody site? IIRC the CPUSA were for Kerry.

RadioRaheem84

29th July 2009, 00:40

Then again, should we keep our eyes open for any sort of corruption in Obama administration in terms of violating the constitution? I know that the right wingers are nuts, but I am very skeptical of this man myself. I see him as an arrogant liberal who will force his policies onto the nation, whether they are good for the nation or not. Whether I agree with him or not about certain measures, I still think that he could totally widen the scope for government expansion in a bad way.

Revy

29th July 2009, 00:43

Are you sure that was a parody site? IIRC the CPUSA were for Kerry.

Yes, they were. But the site was a parody.
The CPUSA supports the Democrats which is really sad.

RadioRaheem84

29th July 2009, 00:56

How is taking money from the poor and giving it the rich a socialist move?

Apparently, to some of my right wing buddies it is. The massive bailout was socialist, buying GE was socialist, giving money to corporations in the form of subsidies is socialist and on and on.

Socialism by definition is about putting the means of production into the hands of the people. How is Obama, a supporter of giving selected companies a bailout a socialist in that sense?

Dimentio

29th July 2009, 01:01

It bewilders me. :confused:

What is a quick explanation one could give someone who thinks this?

He's to the left of the republicans. That's why.

el_chavista

29th July 2009, 01:25

What is a quick explanation one could give someone who thinks this?

It's a propagandistic attack from the republicans.

On the other hand, this propaganda may induce people to think that socialism can't be that bad as they used to be told before Obama.

Manifesto

29th July 2009, 02:29

Republicans think that Democrats and Communists are the same thing.

29th July 2009, 02:40

Its the misrepresentation and the fact that media are "changing the facts", but as well is the fact that most people dont know what communism really is, and the are always ready to accept things TV etc says as facts that cant be questioned.People have been brainwashed by the media which can send them any message they want..
It is just something Obamas "political" rivals made up, to make him look bad to the peoples eye, as communism to their eyes equals bad.

Fuserg9:star:

Agnapostate

29th July 2009, 02:49

They're morons. Anyone with a brain realizes that liberalism and socialism/communism are antithetical because liberalism utilizes the welfare state to maintain macroeconomic stabilization and growth in the capitalist economy. More than that, there's an interest in appeasing worker militancy and preventing the adoption of more radical tactics supplemented by “subversive” ideologies (i.e. actual socialism).

Consider the Henderson report, issued for the National Industrial Recovery Act (which was ultimately nullified by the SCOTUS), which included this section as an illustration of that reality:

Labor unrest exists to a degree higher than warranted by the Depression. The unrest flows from insecurity, low annual earnings, inequitable hiring and rehiring methods, espionage, speedups and displacement of workers at an extremely early age. Unless something is done soon, they [the workers] intend to take things into their own hands.

Interventionism is thus a necessary component of the capitalist economy (accounting for its perpetually mixed nature), lest something more radical and unacceptable to the financial class occur.

Rjevan

29th July 2009, 08:56

It's as people said, "communism" seems to be another word for "death, gulags and hell" for the average American, they don't even know the meaning of the word communism it's just the most vicious ideology on earth for them which lurks everywhere, ready to destroy America.

And since the USA are a country built on conservative and capitalist values everything which seems at least a tiny little bit left is instantly communism, it can be nothing else. Reforms which were done here in Europe centuries ago cause unbelievable mass protests in the USA, outrageous discussions and furious people waving "Stop Communism!!!" posters. Just type "Obama communist" or "Obama Stalin" in google pictures, you'll have the time of your life. :lol:

Dimentio

29th July 2009, 14:46

For the bourgeoisie, socialism is not the working class taking over the means of production, but populistic demagogues rising up to rabble-rousing the plebs to attack the rich. From the bourgeoisie perspective, socialism equals tyranny of a party or a despot who are ruling with the support of the wide majority.

Communist

29th July 2009, 17:36

I think it's rather simple to automatically blame the public misunderstanding of socialism on the idiot Republicans. If I recall correctly, the GOP lost last year, pretty badly, despite all the rhetoric.
And the other major capitalist party, the Democrats, don't seem very willing or able to clarify the definition, do they?

Well, a few (http://stopsocialism.wordpress.com/2009/07/19/blue-dog-democrats-to-save-the-day-on-health-care/) are.

h9socialist

29th July 2009, 18:05

From the point of view of someone who has fought these battles in the US heartland for several decades, I can only say that while Obama is no socialist or fiery leftist, he's about as good as the American system has ever produced. And a huge breath of fresh air compared to Reagan and Bush.

This is more an indictment of the US system than anything else. The US has to move considerably left to reach the standards of European social democrats. On the other hand, for those of us in the US, Obama has at least given us a little hope that it's possible to push back the right-wing in this country. And it should mean a little hope for the broader US Left: the base of support for Obama are all those groups that we've said for years would make-up a majoritarian coalition that could move things to the Left. I grant you there's a long way to go. But I wouldn't trade Obama for the last few clowns in the White House.

Communist

29th July 2009, 19:35

while Obama is no socialist or fiery leftist, he's about as good as the American system has ever produced.

(http://www.workers.org/2008/us/obama_0605/)"Obama is not a revolutionary and he poses no threat to the capitalist system. Still, in a relative sense, it is hard to imagine a more dramatic sign than Obama’s electoral success that the people of the U.S. want to break with the reactionary, warmongering, racist and xenophobic political climate that has endured seemingly forever and certainly since 9/11."
- Larry Holmes

This (http://www.workers.org/2008/us/obama_0605/) was written last year prior to Obama's nomination.

h9socialist

29th July 2009, 19:57

Believe me, I'd love to see US politics move a lot further to the Left than Obama. I'm just not terribly optimistic about the prospects. So, I suppose you can count me in with CPUSA.

Chow Foo

29th July 2009, 20:34

Ignorance is the answer. Idiots in America still live in the 50's.

Sarah Palin

29th July 2009, 20:36

It's quite obvious to anyone with brains that Obama is a communist who wants to take away all your rights. It starts with universal healthcare, for the entire universe, including OSAMA BIN LADEN and ends with a dictator training your son to be a tall blonde gymnast. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Sarah Palin

29th July 2009, 20:39

Republicans think that Democrats and Communists are the same thing.

And to that point, it is so annoying. At this town festival there was a Republican Party booth and I went up and blasted them on oppression of homosexuals and ethnic minorities and finally asked them where the communist party booth was, to which they replied "Go see the democrats." WTF is that shit. If only they knew what real communism was, fucking idiots.

Communist

29th July 2009, 21:12

Believe me, I'd love to see US politics move a lot further to the Left than Obama. I'm just not terribly optimistic about the prospects. So, I suppose you can count me in with CPUSA.

Honest mistake on your part, comrade. The CPUSA does not criticize Obama, or barely any Democrats, for that matter. Here's (http://www.cpusa.org/article/view/1015/) a post where the CPUSA does their in-depth analysis of the Obama victory. :-)

At this town festival there was a Republican Party booth and I went up and blasted them on oppression of homosexuals and ethnic minorities and finally asked them where the communist party booth was, to which they replied "Go see the democrats." WTF is that shit. If only they knew what real communism was, fucking idiots.

Well, they were being facetious, as were you in asking about a CP booth.
Do radical parties set up booths in your town festivals? If so, very cool, but I've never seen that before.

Wait, were you referring to and looking for a CPUSA booth..?
If so, they were at least partly right.

Sarah Palin

29th July 2009, 21:20

Well, they were being facetious, as were you in asking about a CP booth.
Do radical parties set up booths in your town festivals? If so, very cool, but I've never seen that before.

Wait, were you referring to and looking for a CPUSA booth..?
If so, they were at least partly right.

I was seriously looking for a radical booth, to no avail though. I mean I'm in an über conservative town so I knew there was no way of finding a radical booth. It's a shame though, I even talked to the democrats about universal healthcare (about 3 months or so before Obama decided to talk about it) and they were shaking their heads and condemning socialism. It's a damn shame.

Communist

29th July 2009, 21:28

It's a shame though, I even talked to the democrats about universal healthcare (about 3 months or so before Obama decided to talk about it) and they were shaking their heads and condemning socialism. It's a damn shame.

Thank you comrade. What few seem to understand is, while Democrats talk the talk (albeit weakly), they're little or no more on the side of the oppressed than the other party. Capitalist imperialists are capitalist imperialists.
Hilary Clinton's health care plan failed in 1993 or so, when there was a Democratic congress and senate. While I would love to see it passed, honestly, I'll believe it when I see it. Does Obama really want health care to pass? I think so, yes, but he'll live if it doesn't, while thousands of the poor will not.

RadioRaheem84

29th July 2009, 23:31

Sarah Palin

29th July 2009, 23:58

What is Obama's plan exactly? I have yet to see a documented account of it. It's obviously not going to be a real universal health care system ala Canada, UK or even Japan. I know its going to some sort of dealing with the health insurance providers and the private hospitals. It always is when American wants to "reform" something and provide a "social" service.

This was presented to congress 6 days after Obama's inauguration, by the most left leaning members of the house:

http://www.pnhp.org/docs/nhi_bill_final1.pdf

It's essentially a single-payer system.

As you can see, 7 months later, it has yet to be voted on and will likely not pass if it ever comes to vote. What is probable to be voted on though is an "public option." Probably a very cheap, to free, way to pay for health-services, but I doubt it will do any good.

Old Man Diogenes

30th July 2009, 14:05

I've heard him proposing to redistribute but I seriously doubt this will be in a socialist/communist way if it all. If he does attempt to "redistribute the wealth" it'll probably be through some kind of liberal reform.

h9socialist

30th July 2009, 14:19

Sarah Palin

30th July 2009, 17:17

It also seems as though republicans have forgotten that their president, W. bailed out many a people towards the end of his tenure... Where were the cries of evil commie bastard there?

RadioRaheem84

30th July 2009, 19:41

The problem is not Obama -- down deep I think he's a good guy (even Fidel agrees with that). The problem is our old friend "Pepe the Crocodile" -- capitalism and imperialism, and the widespread notion that the US is capitalism's citadel. Obama is like a lot of American liberals: his otherwise good instincts are suppressed by patriotism and systemic pressure. As Marx indicated, capitalists are not bad people, but they do terrible things by being driven by the dictates of the system.

American Liberals are some of the worst out there besides conservatives. They support globalization yet feel bad about the externalities so to patch things up they get Bono to throw a fundraiser for X cause. Or they'll want the government to come up with some sort of market friendly social program. They're not good people. They're Economist-reading, think tank loving, elitist pricks that relate more with the upper class of other nations than the poor citizens of their own nation. They have almost a zealous passion for what they do and believe that they are on the cusp of changing the world with their ideas. Anyone that disagrees with them is not worthy of their time, in their eyes.

The Idler

1st August 2009, 13:43

The problem is not Obama -- down deep I think he's a good guy (even Fidel agrees with that). The problem is our old friend "Pepe the Crocodile" -- capitalism and imperialism, and the widespread notion that the US is capitalism's citadel. Obama is like a lot of American liberals: his otherwise good instincts are suppressed by patriotism and systemic pressure. As Marx indicated, capitalists are not bad people, but they do terrible things by being driven by the dictates of the system.
Thinking he is a good guy with no evidence to support the notion is pointless whitewashing of the guy who stands by while Israel bomb Palestine and remains silent on the killing of Sean Bell. Clearly he is just the new acceptable black face of capitalism and imperialism and ultra-lobbying specialist private interests of government but he shoulders some of the responsibility for accepting campaign funds from Goldman Sachs etc.

mosfeld

1st August 2009, 23:00

http://ladylibertytoday.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/obama_index_july_12_2009.jpg

Capitalism is becoming less popular and socialism is becoming more popular, thanks to the current recession. The bourgeoisie combat this evolution by associating the increasingly popular ideology of socialism with the increasingly unpopular president Obama, since his ideas of universal healthcare go against their interests, and they'd probably much rather want to have hardline conservatives in office, like McCain, who'd be more loyal than Obama.

On that image above, the bourgeoisie basically want an hammer and sickle next to Obama's face and have it called socialism/presidential approval rating.