Why Obama is NOT a Socialist!

[The Vegan Marxist]

Before anyone asks, this is kind of old & not updated to more information that leads into the facts that I'm giving in this. I made this to start a logical reasoning against the capitalist-supporters who began claiming that Obama is a socialist. So if there's anyone that would like to give out more information, then it would be appreciated. Let's get started.

For all my Socialists out there, & for all those that are awake to the fact that Obama is not a Socialist, let's prove to these people that Obama, the Corporatist Messiah, is clearly not a Socialist like us!

Obama gives taxpayer trillions to private capitalists while millions remain unemployed (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm). NOT SOCIALIST

He's making citizens pay taxes for private capitalist banks & industries throughout america (http://www.workerscompass.org/obama_bailout_cooke.html). NOT SOCIALIST

Now, there is two ways to deal with the federal reserve, either destroy it or nationalize it, which will make the elitists out of touch through their plans in the usage of the FR. BUT, Obama refuses to even nationalize it, & keeps it as it is (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/09/obama-wants-fed-to-be-fin_0_n_201234.html). NOT SOCIALIST

Here's a quote made by Obama, "People don't resent the rich. They want to be rich, and that's good. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/02/politics/100days/worldaffairs/main4914735.shtml)" Clearly not socialistic. Socialists believe in no rich & no poor. For everyone to be equal. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama doesn't want a government central planning for the infrastructure, & is keeping the same corrupted corporatism (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/upgrade/4295028.html) that is runned by elitist capitalists. NOT SOCIALIST

He supports for taxpayers to fund religious charter schools (http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/09/do_not_publish_obama_to_promot.html) & religious social services, which clearly violates the intent of separation of religion & government clause in the constitution. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama had made the comment that he supports free market capitalism (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/15/obama-vows-support-for-free-markets/). NOT SOCIALIST

Obama is supporting a healthcare system where he would turn over authority back to private insurance companies with some public healthcare to create competition (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/07/nation/na-sebelius7) between each other. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama has announced that he will be increasing the military in Afghanistan (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/obama.troops/index.html), Pakistan (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032602135.html), & keep thousands of troops to stay in Iraq (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13108). NOT SOCIALIST

Obama took in $700 million total in funding (http://www.socialistaction.org/goodman22.htm) through his campaign. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama is wanting to privatize NASA (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2010922405_nasa29.html?syndication=rss), which is one of the most successful nationalized program in our country. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama also appointed former Senator Judd Gregg, who is a social security privatizer (http://www.correntewire.com/why_obama_putting_social_security_privatizer_charg e_commerce_department), in charge of the Commerce Department. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama is allowing the advancements of the privatization of police force (http://www.mexidata.info/id2279.html). NOT SOCIALIST

Obama had appointed Arne Duncan, a school-privatizer/militarizer (http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5340:obamas-privatizing-agenda-for-education&catid=129:obama-watch&Itemid=305), to be his Education Secretary. NOT SOCIALIST

It is apparent now that President Obama does not care what is being funded or developed, despite it's huge cost for it to happen. For example, NM Rothschild, an investment bank, is planning to raise £100 billion by privatizing the motorway network (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article6814923.ece). NOT SOCIALIST

This is just half of what all obama does that is clearly not socialistic. It's amazing how you see him as a socialist, whether you hate it or not, but clearly he is a capitalist & is promoting capitalism while the media white washes socialism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egO4dFwdWfQ). Allowing the american people to promote the very thing Obama wants you to promote. CAPITALISM

I'd also like to add two videos made on the Glenn Beck program on Fox News. One will show you that even the Socialists say that OBAMA IS NOT A SOCIALIST! (http://www.youtube.com/v/gSqy3BmMBGs&color1=0x5d1719)

And another video here where, finally, Glenn Beck admits that America is not heading to Socialism (http://www.youtube.com/v/Pt9-IRjCpC8), which is what we want, but instead is heading to Fascism!

Now since Glenn Beck has been known to lie a lot recently, I don't think just his opinion will prove a point here. So I decided to give out this article where the top trends researcher, Gerald Celente, explains how we're heading towards Fascism & not Socialism (http://rt.com/Top_News/2009-04-19/_America_lives_in_a_fascist_state____Gerald_Celent e.html).

I'd also like to bring up two well known Socialists, giving the reason how they both have clearly stated that Obama is NOT a Socialist. The first person is Socialist Candidate Gloria LaRiva (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=32219). And the 2nd person is another Socialist Candidate, Brian Moore (http://www.nowpublic.com/world/brian-moore-barack-obama-not-socialist).

[RadioRaheem84]

Preaching to the choir, but thanks, I like the info. :)

[Nolan]

Privatize NASA? What the holy fuck?

[RadioRaheem84]

Privatize NASA? What the holy fuck?

How would that be even profitable? Are they going to have space rides?

[Nolan]

How would that be even profitable? Are they going to have space rides?

I guess instead of science theyll be building McDonalds on the moon.

[RadioRaheem84]

Wow. Obama was even dumber than I first realized. He's a giant hoax. How did the nation fall for the idea of Obama and totally missed what he was really saying the whole time?

[Nolan]

Wow. Obama was even dumber than I first realized. He's a giant hoax. How did the nation fall for the idea of Obama and totally missed what he was really saying the whole time?

As the conservetards would say, they are sheeple.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Wow. Obama was even dumber than I first realized. He's a giant hoax. How did the nation fall for the idea of Obama and totally missed what he was really saying the whole time?

Well, like Hitler, he played as the coming-savior of the Working Class. He was messiah-like to those of the Working Class, & even more towards those still suffering within the projects. So, he merely was a wolf in a Shepards clothing.

[Scary Monster]

Preaching to the choir, but thanks, I like the info. :)

Well DUH, of course you know already. Youre not a beginner. You know everything in the learning section already :lol:

Anyway, why the fuck would Obama want to privatize the police force and nasa?? Thatll be fucking disastrous! Seriously, Obama is a black George Bush Jr.

[RadioRaheem84]

Well DUH, of course you know already. Youre not a beginner. You know everything in the learning section already :lol:

Anyway, why the fuck would Obama want to privatize the police force and nasa?? Thatll be fucking disastrous! Seriously, Obama is a black George Bush Jr.

Well I am on here a lot. But I would've pegged Obama as the black Clinton. Neo-liberal, New Democrat, DLC stooge posing as a progressive.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Well I am on here a lot. But I would've pegged Obama as the black Clinton. Neo-liberal, New Democrat, DLC stooge posing as a progressive.

At least the Clintons were closer to nationalizing the Health Care system than Obama has been.

[RadioRaheem84]

At least the Clintons were closer to nationalizing the Health Care system than Obama has been.

Yeah but as soon as there was some pressure from the right and a check written out, Hillary dropped the noble cause. I don't think Hillary had half of the feces slung at her as Obama did during her stint as a universal health care promoter. This is all a dog and pony show for the Democrats. They were never serious about true health care reform much less a single payer health system.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Well, Hillary fought it for a good while though, I'll give her that. But yeah, she dropped it once a big enough check was brought to her.

[The Idler]

While Sam Webb was going on Fox News to offer Obama the support of the CPUSA, I was listing all the 50+ left-wing articles critical of Obama (http://eng.anarchopedia.org/List_of_Left-Wing_articles_critical_of_Obama) before he got elected.

[GPDP]

For more criticism of Obama from a socialist POV, take a look at Paul Street's articles here (http://ruby.zcommunications.org/zspace/paulstreet).

[LeninistKing]

You people have to realize that Obama is not the US president. The President of USA is the corporate-monopoly-capitalist class (The 2% US population, American Oligarchy, along with the Israeli Lobby)

.

[Agnapostate]

Obama's liberal democratic capitalism is based in sustainment of the private ownership of the means of production, which is quite at odds with socialism. What's ironic, as I always point out, is that economic rightism would probably be more facilitative of socialism because it would cause instability in the capitalist economy.

[The Idler]

You people have to realize that Obama is not the US president. The President of USA is the corporate-monopoly-capitalist class (The 2% US population, American Oligarchy, along with the Israeli Lobby)

.
If the President wanted to stop funding to Israel, and pandering to corporations, he could. Obama should be held responsible.

[punisa]

Well, like Hitler, he played as the coming-savior of the Working Class. He was messiah-like to those of the Working Class, & even more towards those still suffering within the projects. So, he merely was a wolf in a Shepards clothing.

Very correct. But it also speaks volumes on the current mind set of the actual working class.
The propaganda machine had completed their plans - to dumb-up the working people up to the point where they would be willing to accepts anything that media throws at them in the form of a "savior".

I don't say this to discredit working men and women, but to point towards media as an enormous hypno-manipulative machine that we have against us.
So long as people discuss Tiger Woods's mistresses instead of their daily politics things will go wrong.
As of today, I wouldn't be surprised if the next elected president of the US was Santa Claus or an Alien (alluding to Mars, not Mexico)

[Klaatu]

let's prove to these people that Obama, the Corporatist Messiah, is clearly not a Socialist like us!


Why do we have to prove anything to those nut-wad neocons anyway.


Privatize NASA? What the holy fuck?

It's so Bill Gates can send a rocket to the moon, claim it as his own, then actually "promise the moon" to his girlfriend. :p

[GPDP]

Why do we have to prove anything to those nut-wad neocons anyway.

It's not the neo-con wingnuts we should be trying to persuade, but the working class base that may listen to them.

[RadioRaheem84]

You people have to realize that Obama is not the US president. The President of USA is the corporate-monopoly-capitalist class (The 2% US population, American Oligarchy, along with the Israeli Lobby)

.

At the end of the day I believe the political class has the last say. The mutual partnership of the business and political class against the working class isn't always perfect. The business community doesn't like the Cuban embargo, the Iraqi sanctions, the State Department's condemnation of Chinese policies. Back in the late 40s the Truman Administration stepped all over the business interests in Japan to favor broad political interests.

Pinochet ignored the Chicago Boy's advice about letting the economy recover from a serious depression and bailed out several fallen industries (ironically with funds extracted from public enterprises that were not touched by the regime's privatization schemes).

[Red Commissar]

Well, I am reminded about this political cartoon.

http://www.blackcommentator.com/281/281_images/281_cartoon_obama_puppet_hurwitt_large.gif

[LeninistKing]

Hello, hmm i really dont know much about the Economic-Embargo against Cuba, but i would disagree with you, on that the political-sector of USA has more power than the economic-corporate sector. You have to read the book "When Corporations rule the world" by David Korten, along with some other articles out there by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, economist Mike Whitney, Joseph Stiglitz, Noam Chomsky, James Petras and many more intellectuals to realize that the Corporate-Power via the corporate-lobbies in USA has more power than political parties.

So from my own humble opinion about USA, i think that The Democrat Party and The Republican Party are puppets of the 2% USA oligarchy

so the USA media tells people that all problems of America are caused by Bush and Obama, so that dumb people forget about the 2% oligarchy and instead blame the president

.



The business community doesn't like the Cuban embargo, the Iraqi sanctions, the State Department's condemnation of Chinese policies.

[RadioRaheem84]

Hello, hmm i really dont know much about the Economic-Embargo against Cuba, but i would disagree with you, on that the political-sector of USA has more power than the economic-corporate sector. You have to read the book "When Corporations rule the world" by David Korten, along with some other articles out there by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, economist Mike Whitney, Joseph Stiglitz, Noam Chomsky, James Petras and many more intellectuals to realize that the Corporate-Power via the corporate-lobbies in USA has more power than political parties.

So from my own humble opinion about USA, i think that The Democrat Party and The Republican Party are puppets of the 2% USA oligarchy

so the USA media tells people that all problems of America are caused by Bush and Obama, so that dumb people forget about the 2% oligarchy and instead blame the president

.

They mold policy to fit business interests because they believe that the business community is the source of real wealth and the politicians take advantage of their generous campaign donations. But there is still the issue of public accountability and the public will notice if things steer too much to the right. In the third world it is common to have the business and political interests just totally dominate but in a liberal democracy, the political class has a lot sway too.

[el_chavista]

The former congressman from Colorado and 2008 Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo blasted Obama, saying "people who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House. His name is Barack Hussein Obama." http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/05/tea.party.convention/ (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/02/05/tea.party.convention/)If after all that republican propaganda campaing using the world socialism to scare the American electors they did elect Obama, it may mean that the media's influence in the "public opinion" is not that overwhelming as to discourage us. Is American people less afraid of socialism now?

[The Vegan Marxist]

If after all that republican propaganda campaing using the world socialism to scare the American electors they did elect Obama, it may mean that the media's influence in the "public opinion" is not that overwhelming as to discourage us. Is American people less afraid of socialism now?

That was one of the main reasons why Obama got so many votes was because people were hearing that Obama was a socialist by the right-wing, so they got interested in the term & started actually learning about the term. I think it's practically the only thing that the right wing ever did for the working class, unintentional that is.

[RadioRaheem84]

That was one of the main reasons why Obama got so many votes was because people were hearing that Obama was a socialist by the right-wing, so they got interested in the term & started actually learning about the term. I think it's practically the only thing that the right wing ever did for the working class, unintentional that is.

I don't know about socialism but the progressive talk did get Obama a lot of votes. The country wanted a left wing course. Now people are mad because there has been no change.

[Klaatu]

Is American people less afraid of socialism now?

The average butt-dumb American conservative does not even know what socialism is, let alone anything at all about political science, nor where on the map Russia is located. Right wing talking heads have conjured this socialist boogey-man, in part, because they (A) do not understand socialism, and (B) they, being racist, cannot use the N word so they substitute the S word, when talking about Obama. As proof of this, consider some of the protest signs seen at the so-called "teabag" rallies: they look quite racist to me.

IMHO

[I.Drink.Your.Milkshake]

How would that be even profitable? Are they going to have space rides?


i think they are, arent they? I know Virgin were on about it, so i guess if there's money involved then it will only be a matter of time before a privatised NASA follows suit. Pretty sure its on the cards within the next 10-15 years....

CALLED!

[LeninistKing]

haha NASA could build a Space-Mountain roller-coaster like the one in Disney World, its actually pretty cool. haha but of course a nationalized Space Mountain roller-coaster ride would be a lot lower in price or free to the public. haha

.



How would that be even profitable? Are they going to have space rides?

[LeninistKing]

You are right, the people wanted a change from a Neoliberal-imperialist puppet (Bush-II) toward a social-democrat (progressive-centrist, how Obama sold himself). But what they actually got with Obama was another Neoliberal-Imperialist. You have to read an article by Paul Craig Roberts in http://www.counterpunch.org about how Obama morphed into a Dick Cheney

.


I don't know about socialism but the progressive talk did get Obama a lot of votes. The country wanted a left wing course. Now people are mad because there has been no change.

[Die Rote Fahne]

It was either suave black guy or giving the codes to the nukes to a freaky, frail old man and a psychotic, moronic person from Wasila Alaska.

[RadioRaheem84]

Obama could be our Carlos Menem. Menem was famous to his small town values, wore a bomber jacket and sported long side burns. After his first term, he was wearing Armani suits, dating a former Miss Universe and driving Ferraris. He is now wholly associated with neo-liberalism in Argentina.

[Klaatu]

Gramsci, I'm not sure I agree with that cartoon's message.

Certainly George "Who ME?" Bush fits that image well, but Obama? I think not so much.
He's smart. He is playing these overlords. For example, so far, he has tried to compromise with
Republicans on issues such as national health care, yet has run into brickwalls. The neocons
have been dubbed "The Party of "No." I do believe that he is now fed up with these ass-clowns,
and will from now on start getting tougher, twisting arms, getting bills passed. That's right, he
is playing them. I think so. Maybe it doesn't look like it right now, but I think I'm right on this. ;)

[Red Commissar]

Gramsci, I'm not sure I agree with that cartoon's message.

Certainly George "Who ME?" Bush fits that image well, but Obama? I think not so much.
He's smart. He is playing these overlords. For example, so far, he has tried to compromise with
Republicans on issues such as national health care, yet has run into brickwalls. The neocons
have been dubbed "The Party of "No." I do believe that he is now fed up with these ass-clowns,
and will from now on start getting tougher, twisting arms, getting bills passed. That's right, he
is playing them. I think so. Maybe it doesn't look like it right now, but I think I'm right on this. ;)

The only thing progressive Obama has attempted is the healthcare reform, but he was willing to abandon the single-payer method to save his political image.

His recent budget cut social spending, but increased defense spending.

His "stimulus" money seemed to mysteriously disappear. And he wasn't necessarily against the TARP initiative that Bush shoved through before he left office, and hasn't taken a hard stance against the corporations. He says it a lot in his rallies but he hasn't taken a serious move against them.

As for AIPAC, most American politicians have to follow them.

I for one hope that you are right but Obama hasn't really shown me to be any different from the Democrats who adopt third-way policies to please Republican opposition.

[Klaatu]

Yes you are correct, in what Obama has done so far. But what I am
saying is that I think he is growing tired of Republican opposition to
anything and everything.

Consider his speech last week, where he blasted that stupid Supreme
Court decision (unlimited campaign money from corporations) and
blasting Republicans for being obstructionists. Like I said, he has
tried to be "Mr Nice Guy" so far (as any respectable newcomer should)
but now it's time to kick ass. :cursing: We will see.

cheers

[Black Sheep]

i think i ll make a Youtube video with OP's info.

[The Vegan Marxist]

Yes you are correct, in what Obama has done so far. But what I am
saying is that I think he is growing tired of Republican opposition to
anything and everything.

Consider his speech last week, where he blasted that stupid Supreme
Court decision (unlimited campaign money from corporations) and
blasting Republicans for being obstructionists. Like I said, he has
tried to be "Mr Nice Guy" so far (as any respectable newcomer should)
but now it's time to kick ass. :cursing: We will see.

cheers

Hillary Clinton was the same way. She got fed up with the right-wing opposition & blasted their asses, despite the fact that she wasn't really the president (technically lol). But in the long run, it was all talk, &, of course, no walk.

[LeninistKing]

Dear friends: I suspect, i mean this is just personal speculation. That the world of governing a bourgeoise-state (Capitalist-government) is not a piece of cake, it is not a walk in the park, it is not like playing a computer video game. Politics is a jungle just like the world of political courts in the times of Nicholas Machiavelli in Italy. What i mean is that i think that because most bourgeoise-states are ruled by "The shadow government" (Corporations, lobbies and big money), if Obama decides to shift to the left, he and his family would be killed by CIA. That's i think is the real reason of why *ALL USA PRESIDENTS* stay in the right-wing, and never shift to the center-wing, or to the left-wing in their policies.

Because you just cant win elections in a capitalist-state and change the country to socialism by decree, like buying a pair of trousers at a store, or going to the supermarket to buy a gallon of milk.

.



Hillary Clinton was the same way. She got fed up with the right-wing opposition & blasted their asses, despite the fact that she wasn't really the president (technically lol). But in the long run, it was all talk, &, of course, no walk.

[RadioRaheem84]

Yes you are correct, in what Obama has done so far. But what I am
saying is that I think he is growing tired of Republican opposition to
anything and everything.

Consider his speech last week, where he blasted that stupid Supreme
Court decision (unlimited campaign money from corporations) and
blasting Republicans for being obstructionists. Like I said, he has
tried to be "Mr Nice Guy" so far (as any respectable newcomer should)
but now it's time to kick ass. :cursing: We will see.

cheers

All talk, man. Obama isn't going to step up to the plate and actually bat for his home team. He's an admitted "New" Democrat. Do you know what that means? That means he is a pro-growth, neo-liberal, less government Democrat like Bill Clinton. He's probably a bit more progressive than Clinton but that's not saying much.

I was hoping that perhaps, just perhaps, he was actually truly a closeted Marxist in the end like the right wingers feel he is. I was hopiing that everything they said was true and then he was going to come out with all sorts of social democratic measures, but in the end, they're full of crap like they've always been.

[Klaatu]

OK guys, I'm still going to defend Obama because, if nothing else, what is
the alternative? Another George W Bush? (egads) or Sarah Palin? (double egads)

Obama's not the worst we can get, you know! :crying:

[RadioRaheem84]

OK guys, I'm still going to defend Obama because, if nothing else, what is
the alternative? Another George W Bush? (egads) or Sarah Palin? (double egads)

Obama's not the worst we can get, you know! :crying:

Well he pacified the country during what could've probably have been a giant reawakening to the social conditions effecting our nation, with his promises of change. Clinton, who's Presidency reminds me a lot of Obama, was a disaster for the left in this country. With all of his sell out shenanigans to Wall Street and his tilting of the Democratic Party to the right, the mainstream left in this country still capitulated to his reign. Defending Obama is like defending Tony Blair, it does the left more harm than good.

[RadioRaheem84]

I mean Envirowhacko, you may see Obama as the lesser of two evils but really you just have to take your pic of whichever group of oligarchs you want running the country:

The Democrats; Wall Street, Corporate Law firms that represent Wall Street,

The Republicans: Big oil and energy, defense contractors, Tele-Communications

[GPDP]

OK guys, I'm still going to defend Obama because, if nothing else, what is
the alternative? Another George W Bush? (egads) or Sarah Palin? (double egads)

Obama's not the worst we can get, you know! :crying:

First of all, you know all too well what the alternative is: working class revolution, and the daily struggle to empower the working class to eventually wage it, which means, yes, supporting the occasional reform to further aid us in that struggle. Something we're not gonna get by defending poor little Obama from the mean old Republican wingnuts, especially when Obama goes well and beyond what's necessary to accommodate them as it is.

Second of all, your Obama apologetics are tiring, and have absolutely no place in a revolutionary leftist website. Boo hoo, he's not quite as bad as Bush or Palin! Like that's saying much.

At least during Bush's reign, there was an anti-war movement with some semblance of a spine. Where are they now that we have their darling Obama the Messiah in power? Oh, right, they don't wanna lift a finger against him, even though he's continuing, and in some ways escalating Bush's policies of empire and plutocracy.

Have a read at these articles for a glimpse into who Obama truly is, who and what he really stands for, and why it is futile to defend him:

http://www.zcommunications.org/obama-and-american-politics-by-paul-street

http://www.zcommunications.org/what-s-the-matter-with-the-democrats-post-massachusetts-reflections-on-popular-resentment-the-liberal-left-vacuum-and-right-comeback-by-paul-street

http://www.zcommunications.org/killer-obama-dr-king-and-the-triple-evils-by-paul-street

http://www.zcommunications.org/on-realism-and-revolution-by-paul-street

http://www.zcommunications.org/safe-haven-and-other-myths-in-obama-s-terror-war-reflections-in-the-wake-of-flight-253-by-paul-street

http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content/glen-ford-black-delusion-age-obama

http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content/eshu%E2%80%99s-blues-open-letter-president-obama-haiti

http://blackagendareport.com/?q=content/obama-state-union-guns-pentagon-butter-wall-street-spending-freeze-you

Edit: This one, too:

http://www.chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1907-critical-mass-dem-agenda-opens-right-wing-doors.html

[Klaatu]

your Obama apologetics are tiring, and have absolutely no place in a revolutionary leftist website. Boo hoo, he's not quite as bad as Bush or Palin! Like that's saying much.

Just being realistic, man. The Socialist Party in this country regularly garners what, like less than 1% of the vote? I beg to differ here, but "choosing the lesser of the two evils" is, at this point in time, the best that we can do. That is, unless more of us are willing to get out there and propagate the cause to the public (as I relentlessly do everyday) and not just ***** and moan about our own powerlessness and lack of influence on a public message board, which only like-minded people read.

A question for all comrades here: What have YOU done today, to get the socialist message out there? Write! Talk! Advertise! Persuade! Recruit!
This cause is not going to get anywhere unless we make it happen. Shifting away from conservatism is a start. That is the direction Obama's election was supposed to take us in. In other words, Obama himself is not important. It is this leftward shift that is important. This is what we need, leftist direction. Even if it is only one step at a time...

I guess I am not so much defending Obama himself, I am defending that leftward effort, that leftward impetus, so to speak.

[Raúl Duke]

Actually I don't see any realism in defending Obama at all...


This cause is not going to get anywhere unless we make it happen. Shifting away from conservatism is a start. That is the direction Obama's election was supposed to take us in. In other words, Obama himself is not important. It is this leftward shift that is important. This is what we need, leftist direction. Even if it is only one step at a time...

I guess I am not so much defending Obama himself, I am defending that leftward effort, that leftward impetus, so to speak. Yep, but Obama's failures might end up going the long right ward shift. Consider Jimmy Carter's inability or lack of action (perceived or real) to deal with the oil shortage and increasing gas prices. Progressives will be demoralized and not vote/etc while the right will gain momentum through every failing of Obama's administration. Either way, whichever party wins doesn't really accurately measure if there's a "right shift" or "left shift." Signs such as decreasing voter turnout are much more interesting measures (shows, in a sense, the level apathy of electoral politics as is, etc).

[Klaatu]

Signs such as decreasing voter turnout are much more interesting measures (shows, in a sense, the level apathy of electoral politics as is, etc).

Yes, and it is a shame how many people do not care at all about politics, maybe not realizing how much it really affects them, like it or not. And yes, voters always blame the party in power when things go wrong... It is true that if Obama were to fail, the rabid right wing would gain momentum again, because most people do not think too deeply about issues. Most neocons are one-issue voters (abortion, guns, jobs, etc) and do not fully research the candidate, the way educated people would.

I guess the better description of Obama is the "buffering effect" he has on clone-headed conservatism. (For now)

[Red Commissar]

Well there is a potential problem for us, if Obama's short-comings are continuously attributed to his "socialistic" nature it'll turn more people away from socialism, the same way the word "liberal" has a bad ring to the voters in America as a result of Carter's problems like Duke mentioned.

[Agnapostate]

Perhaps, though I'd say that since any beliefs in Obama's socialism are bred only of shallow misconceptions and ignorance of political economy anyway, it won't be that heavy a blow.

[RadioRaheem84]

Perhaps, though I'd say that since any beliefs in Obama's socialism are bred only of shallow misconceptions and ignorance of political economy anyway, it won't be that heavy a blow.


That shallow misconception of political economy has caused socialists to lose elections since the days of Norman Thomas. He was frustrated at how people considered FDR a socialist and voted for him because of his New Deal measures. Now this was before the US elite engaged in pre-Cold War super-propaganda Americans experienced during the boom years. By now anyone tilting to center-right is a socialist! Anyone even hinting at welfare programs and social benefits passed in Europe nearly fifty years ago is a closet Marxist Manchurian Candidate!

But politicians like Obama like to feed off of the rhetoric of appearing left. It makes them look more compassionate and less reactionary and they can mold the real left in this country to support them because an attack on them is seen as a victory for the right wing. So people like EnviroWhacko feel compelled to support Barack Obama because the alternative could be much worse.

I suggest anyone thinking that the alternative is much worse should watch Adam Curtis's brilliant documentary The Trap. In it it attempts to show how democratic, left parties shifted to the right and fundamentally restructured the political spectrum. While right wing politicians left the sections of the public sector they didn't privatize alone, the Clintons and Blairs of the world, applied free market principles to the state sector; welfare reform, quotas in the NHS, etc. This was to make the state sector more efficient but in reality the state sector suffered from the same manipulation and number fudging the private world was engaged in at the same time. This made it harder for people in the lower classes to find adequate social services and opportunities in the private sector.

Obama comes from this tradition.

[LeninistKing]

how dumb are the Obama family they have an anti-weight gain campaign in USA !! You cant fight weight-gain without destroying Mcdonalds, Burger Kings, pizza restaurants and cake corporations

only a total destruction of the American capitalist system, of all US fast food and junk food fattening corporations can lead to weight loss, coz young people will eat diet foods at schools and once they get out of school back to their houses they will be tempted by capitalist-burgers capitalist Digiornos and Dominos pizzas

.




Before anyone asks, this is kind of old & not updated to more information that leads into the facts that I'm giving in this. I made this to start a logical reasoning against the capitalist-supporters who began claiming that Obama is a socialist. So if there's anyone that would like to give out more information, then it would be appreciated. Let's get started.

For all my Socialists out there, & for all those that are awake to the fact that Obama is not a Socialist, let's prove to these people that Obama, the Corporatist Messiah, is clearly not a Socialist like us!

Obama gives taxpayer trillions to private capitalists while millions remain unemployed (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm). NOT SOCIALIST

He's making citizens pay taxes for private capitalist banks & industries throughout america (http://www.workerscompass.org/obama_bailout_cooke.html). NOT SOCIALIST

Now, there is two ways to deal with the federal reserve, either destroy it or nationalize it, which will make the elitists out of touch through their plans in the usage of the FR. BUT, Obama refuses to even nationalize it, & keeps it as it is (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/09/obama-wants-fed-to-be-fin_0_n_201234.html). NOT SOCIALIST

Here's a quote made by Obama, "People don't resent the rich. They want to be rich, and that's good. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/02/politics/100days/worldaffairs/main4914735.shtml)" Clearly not socialistic. Socialists believe in no rich & no poor. For everyone to be equal. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama doesn't want a government central planning for the infrastructure, & is keeping the same corrupted corporatism (http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/upgrade/4295028.html) that is runned by elitist capitalists. NOT SOCIALIST

He supports for taxpayers to fund religious charter schools (http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/09/do_not_publish_obama_to_promot.html) & religious social services, which clearly violates the intent of separation of religion & government clause in the constitution. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama had made the comment that he supports free market capitalism (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/15/obama-vows-support-for-free-markets/). NOT SOCIALIST

Obama is supporting a healthcare system where he would turn over authority back to private insurance companies with some public healthcare to create competition (http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/07/nation/na-sebelius7) between each other. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama has announced that he will be increasing the military in Afghanistan (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/17/obama.troops/index.html), Pakistan (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/26/AR2009032602135.html), & keep thousands of troops to stay in Iraq (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13108). NOT SOCIALIST

Obama took in $700 million total in funding (http://www.socialistaction.org/goodman22.htm) through his campaign. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama is wanting to privatize NASA (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2010922405_nasa29.html?syndication=rss), which is one of the most successful nationalized program in our country. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama also appointed former Senator Judd Gregg, who is a social security privatizer (http://www.correntewire.com/why_obama_putting_social_security_privatizer_charg e_commerce_department), in charge of the Commerce Department. NOT SOCIALIST

Obama is allowing the advancements of the privatization of police force (http://www.mexidata.info/id2279.html). NOT SOCIALIST

Obama had appointed Arne Duncan, a school-privatizer/militarizer (http://www.worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5340:obamas-privatizing-agenda-for-education&catid=129:obama-watch&Itemid=305), to be his Education Secretary. NOT SOCIALIST

It is apparent now that President Obama does not care what is being funded or developed, despite it's huge cost for it to happen. For example, NM Rothschild, an investment bank, is planning to raise £100 billion by privatizing the motorway network (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article6814923.ece). NOT SOCIALIST

This is just half of what all obama does that is clearly not socialistic. It's amazing how you see him as a socialist, whether you hate it or not, but clearly he is a capitalist & is promoting capitalism while the media white washes socialism (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egO4dFwdWfQ). Allowing the american people to promote the very thing Obama wants you to promote. CAPITALISM

I'd also like to add two videos made on the Glenn Beck program on Fox News. One will show you that even the Socialists say that OBAMA IS NOT A SOCIALIST! (http://www.youtube.com/v/gSqy3BmMBGs&color1=0x5d1719)

And another video here where, finally, Glenn Beck admits that America is not heading to Socialism (http://www.youtube.com/v/Pt9-IRjCpC8), which is what we want, but instead is heading to Fascism!

Now since Glenn Beck has been known to lie a lot recently, I don't think just his opinion will prove a point here. So I decided to give out this article where the top trends researcher, Gerald Celente, explains how we're heading towards Fascism & not Socialism (http://rt.com/Top_News/2009-04-19/_America_lives_in_a_fascist_state____Gerald_Celent e.html).

I'd also like to bring up two well known Socialists, giving the reason how they both have clearly stated that Obama is NOT a Socialist. The first person is Socialist Candidate Gloria LaRiva (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=32219). And the 2nd person is another Socialist Candidate, Brian Moore (http://www.nowpublic.com/world/brian-moore-barack-obama-not-socialist).

[Klaatu]

But politicians like Obama like to feed off of the rhetoric of appearing left. It makes them look more compassionate and less reactionary and they can mold the real left in this country to support them because an attack on them is seen as a victory for the right wing. So people like EnviroWhacko feel compelled to support Barack Obama because the alternative could be much worse.

You are being ideological and theoretical, while I am being realistic. I am only suggesting that
Obama is a buffer, a dam so to speak, to thwart conservatives. Maybe you do not understand what
I am trying to say? What then is your solution? How do YOU fend off the conservative cancer eating
at this country? Who should we elect? Personally I would like to see a bona-fide Socialist be elected
as U.S. president. That's not going to happen anytime soon. So, what then, should we do? What are
your suggestions?

[RadioRaheem84]

You are being ideological and theoretical, while I am being realistic. I am only suggesting that
Obama is a buffer, a dam so to speak, to thwart conservatives. Maybe you do not understand what
I am trying to say? What then is your solution? How do YOU fend off the conservative cancer eating
at this country? Who should we elect? Personally I would like to see a bona-fide Socialist be elected
as U.S. president. That's not going to happen anytime soon. So, what then, should we do? What are
your suggestions?

There were plenty of progressives during the 04 and 08 elections. Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader are just two off the top of my head with enough clout to have garnered enough support. They would've been a great buffer against the conservatives.

Like I said, Obama is sometimes worse than a conservative because Democrats like him silence left opposition within the party. Both Christopher Hitchens and Noam Chomsky agree that Bill Clinton's Presidency was probably one of the worst for the left in this country as he shifted the party to the right and the left capitulated to his reign as many feared a conservative alternative after Newt Gingrich and Co. won the Congress.

Tony Blair, Carlos Menem of Argentina, Every "Left Wing" President after Pinochet in Chile, Gordon Brown, Bill Clinton; all of them did not dare change the economic policies of the previous right wing administrations. Instead they created "New" coalitions that not only damged everything the left had worked for during the 60s, 70s and 80s as an opposition party but attached a sundry group of tycoons to the parties that marginilized the left elements. Now it's no big deal for hedge fund managers and big business types to vote Labour or Democrat or for "left wing" social democrats and socialists like Michelle Batchelet to promote free trae agreements.

Any notion to the contrary and you're labeled "far-left", "reactionary left", "anti-growth".

[Klaatu]

I agree, Ralph Nader is a man of principles who would never sell out!

We all knew Bill Clinton was a conservative anyway. I'm not sure that
anyone expected him to be left-leaning. But don't you agree that Obama
leans "lefter" than Clinton?

[RadioRaheem84]

I agree, Ralph Nader is a man of principles who would never sell out!

We all knew Bill Clinton was a conservative anyway. I'm not sure that
anyone expected him to be left-leaning. But don't you agree that Obama
leans "lefter" than Clinton?


Yes, I agree that Obama is to the left of Clinton but that's not saying much. He is a centrist that's for sure. It's just so weird that a centrist in this nation is considered a socialist-marxist-fascist-muslim super terrorist.

I find it strange though that so many people across the political spectrum actually like Nader. I think it's because he knows that he is an honest man. Nader though is about progressive as this country is going to get for a long time. Why isn't the socialist insult ever slung at him?

[Klaatu]

Yes, I agree that Obama is to the left of Clinton but that's not saying much. He is a centrist that's for sure. It's just so weird that a centrist in this nation is considered a socialist-marxist-fascist-muslim super terrorist.

I find it strange though that so many people across the political spectrum actually like Nader. I think it's because he knows that he is an honest man. Nader though is about progressive as this country is going to get for a long time. Why isn't the socialist insult ever slung at him?

Some very good points.

[LeninistKing]

THESE ARE THE MAIN TRAITS OF REAL SOCIALISM AND DEMOCRATS AND OBAMA HAVE NONE OF THAT IN THEIR PARTY

http://www.socialistaction.org

Class Struggle & Independence - We believe that the world is divided into opposing social classes, and that the main driving force of modern history is the struggle between the working class and the capitalist class. We are active partisans of the working class and believe in the need for independent working class politics – not alliances with the capitalists, or any wing of that class. That is why we call for workers to break from the Democratic Party to build a Labor Party based on the trade unions. In all of our political work we seek to get workers to see and think of themselves in terms of class, and to recognize that their class interests are diametrically opposed to that of the capitalists.

Revolution - We believe that the state and all of its institutions are instruments of the ruling class, and that therefore they cannot be used as tools of the working class, but have to be smashed. That is why we fight for revolution, instead of for seeking to merely reform or work within the system. When we fight for specific reforms we do so only with the understanding that in the final analysis real social change can only come about with the overthrow of capitalism, and the establishment of a workers’ government. We seek to link the demands for reforms with revolution through the Transitional Program (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1938-tp/index.htm) and its method.

The Specially Oppressed & Oppressed Nationalities - We support the struggles of those who are specially oppressed under capitalism – women, queers, national minorities, etc. We support and help build autonomous movements for the oppressed so that they can articulate their own demands, and develop political consciousness as a group. We support the right of self-determination for oppressed nationalities, including Blacks, Chicanos & Puerto Ricans.

Internationalism - While we support the nationalism of oppressed nationalities as progressive, we are internationalists, and as such we hold that the workers of one country have more in common with the workers of another than they do with their own nation’s capitalist class. We oppose the nationalism of oppressor nationalities as wholly reactionary. We seek to link the struggles of workers and oppressed across national boundaries, and to build an international revolutionary movement that will facilitate the sharing of experiences and political lessons from one country with revolutionaries in another. That is why we maintain fraternal relations with the Fourth International (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.socialistaction.org/fi.htm).

Vanguard Party - The capitalist class is highly organized, and to overthrow it the working class likewise needs organization. We believe in the need for a disciplined party of professional revolutionaries based on a political program that incorporates the lessons of past working class victories and defeats. The class struggle ebbs and flows – to maintain continuity and to be prepared for openings in the class struggle there is a need for an organization of always-active revolutionaries. We believe within such a party there must be complete and fair discussion and democracy, and the right to even form factions and tendencies to fight for your ideas. However, these democratically made decisions (the party line) must be binding on all members, and the party has to act as a common unit in carrying out the decided upon line in order to test if it is correct or not. This is called democratic-centralism.

United Fronts - Recognizing the divisions that exist on the left and within the workers’ movement, as well as the low level of class consciousness that exists among many workers, we seek to form united fronts, and united front type organizations, around specific issues where various groups have agreement with us. In this way we seek to maximize our impact and the number of forces that can be mobilized around a given issue, demonstrate the power and effectiveness of mass action as opposed to symbolic small-scale and individual actions, and expose others on the left and the workers’ movement to our method of functioning and our political program. We also see this as the way of achieving meaningful revolutionary regroupment – because it allows different groups to work together and see whether or not they have significant political convergence. It should also be said that while we support the tactic of the united front, we are opposed to popular fronts – multi-class alliances that subordinate the interests of workers to that of a wing of the capitalist class.

Permanent Revolution - This famous theory by Leon Trotsky holds that revolution in modern times, even in under-developed countries, has to be led by the working class and has to be a fully fledged socialist revolution – revolution cannot go through stages and cannot be made in alliance with any wing of the capitalist class. To be ultimately successful it also needs to be an international revolution. We believe that a successful socialist revolution will result in a workers’ government that is based on elected workers’ councils.

.