Obama is Not a Socialist – He’s Something Worse
A Democracy Corps (left-leaning group started by James Carville) poll found that 55% of Americans polled believe that “Socialist” accurately describes the President. That seems low and if the question had been changed to, “Does Capitalist describe our President?” I believe the number would have been darned-near zero.
While the Socialist moniker has been tossed about when discussing our anti-free-enterprise leader, I don’t think it’s as accurate as it could be. Looking back through the history of Socialism, there are many things that point to Obama missing the mark. Is it because he doesn’t understand the economic principle or that he understands that it is a great distraction or possibly a transition for the framework he feels should actually be put in place in America?
The Cloward-Piven strategy was intended to create an atmosphere ripe for Socialism, but I believe it’s being used to create what even Lenin lamented on his death-bed. Lenin had witnessed his dream of a true Socialist government turned into nothing more than, “a bourgeois tsarist machine… barely varnished with socialism.” – the same classist elitism Lenin had struggled to end.
If Obama were a true Socialist, he would be looking for the Utopian society of ultimate equals that Lenin sought – he is not. In Verdery’s, What Was Socialism and What Comes Next the author creates a term that describes well one part of what I feel Obama is after: “Bourgeoiscracy” or well-connected party members that use their political office and connections to enrich themselves.
When the press or citizenry hit a nerve, Obama responds (or at least sends Gibby out to respond). When criticism was leveled at health care reform, Jeremiah Wright or Professor Gates there were speeches, interviews and media events. The media, pundits and majority of Americans have been calling Obama a Socialist for quite some time.. no reaction, no defensiveness, nothing – why? It’s the perfect distraction. He’s not trying to put a Socialist economy in place, he’s focused on the destruction of what is here so he can replace it with something much worse than Socialism: Entitlism (yeah, I had to make-up a new word for this idiocy).
At least Socialism either places value on the amount of work that goes into producing a thing or the end-use value of a product. Entitlism figures that a person or entity deserves resources or wealth based solely on the favor of the government. In other words, people should get services, food, housing, cars, money because they do what Obama feels they should be doing or have suffered some ill that the ruling class feels is deserving of reward. It isn’t about what the populace needs (Communism), nor what the country needs (nationalism, fascism or statism), not even what the world needs (One World Government) – it’s about what Obama and his ruling elite feel the commoners deserve.
It seems obvious that the Obama dream is a “Bourgeoiscracy” as a governing framework and Entitlism as the economic framework. This fundamentally redefines the common good. While fascist regimes determine what is good for commoners, entitlism allows the elitist Bourgeoicrats to decide who is common. Perhaps the rest of us will be fortunate enough to work for the good of the selected, chosen or preferred citizens – the deserving.
What’s worse is that even supposed conservatives are falling into Obama’s trap. House Minority Leader, John Boehner, was paraphrased in a Washington Times article as suggesting that Social Security could be fixed by , “..curbing benefit growth by tying cost-of-living increases to the consumer price index rather than growth in wages, and providing benefits only to those who need them”. Providing goods or services to a citizen based on need, oddly familiar – but still just a stepping stone to where Obama would take us – or a sleight of hand so that we focus on the specter of European socialism while he works to put something else in place.
If Obama was following the communist play book, the first step would be a Socialistic transition: Socialism concentrates on ownership of the means of production and creating a meritocracy. The phrase, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution” illustrates that contributing to national production merits reward. And step two would be the Communistic end-game, destruction of property rights, removal of value from goods and services, and modifying the phrase to, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. Need has nothing to do with his plan.
Obama’s goal define the entitled – the deserving – and make a gradual transition to “from each according to his ability, to each according to his favor with the ruling elite” – enslavement. Any system of government that decides who gets what based on any criteria will by it’s nature create inequality. As Orwell portrayed in Animal Farm, “All animals are equal, some are more equal than others”.
Consider just a few of the Obama administration’s policy stances of late:
- Illegal Immigration: Electing not to enforce laws against a set of people regardless of merit (productivity).
- He has decided that illegal immigrants deserve the benefits of American citizenry because they act in a way desired by the rulers: they vote Democrat
- Health Care Reform: Brass-ring style health care insurance at roughly similar costs regardless if someone has taken care of themselves or not.
- This will make more Americans dependent upon the government for yet another service.
- Those who depend on government services overwhelmingly vote Democrat: deserving
- The ruling elite are planning to push the Union’s corrupt enlistment plan, card-check, during the upcoming lame-duck Congress
- Unions are an anti-capitalistic force that will help bring about the transition Obama needs on the way to his entitlist dream: deserving
- Unions vote heavily Democrat: deserving
- When Obama took over GM, he abandoned contractual agreements and put Unions above primary bond holders during the bankruptcy
- The bond holders actually had taken a risk and invested in the company and were not treated fairly in the settlement. Investors at this level tend to not vote Democrat: not deserving
- Unions vote heavily Democrat: deserving
- Unionized labor is an excellent tool for the creation of crisis (strikes, destruction of industry, condemning capitalism): the deserving
- Department of Justice dropping the New Black Panther suit against all but one of the poll place intimidation convicts and lowering the remaining convicts punishment substantially
- The DOJ is alleged to have a new policy that prevents the prosecution of cases where the defendant is black (deserving) and the victim is white (undeserving)
- The NBPP believes that it stands to seek reparations for it’s members simply because other groups got them: the deserving
- Repeal of the “Bush Tax Cuts” that relieve some of the extremely-progressive tax structure on the most-productive in our society
- Those that will be hit with the Obama tax increase are largely Conservative voters: undeserving
- The wealthy in our society have already been rewarded for their work: undeserving
Obama’s true goal is not to push us into Socialism. It isn’t Communism, fascism, or any other currently-defined -ism – it’s somewhere near the authoritarian mess that was Communism during it’s downfall in Russia. Not Marxism, but something similar to what Stalin put in place when Marx’s ideas failed to create the Utopia it promised.
This is simply my belief of where Obama would like to take the country and the world. I also believe that real Americans will see this for what it is and turn things around. 2010 is more important than just preventing Cap-and-Trade or card check – it’s about protecting that which made this country great: individual liberty, free-market capitalism, and equality of opportunity. Capitalism is not a dirty word. Capitalism is simply being rewarded by a free-market for the product or services offered. Those that color it negatively desire wealth for which they have no desire to work or take the necessary risks. They feel that they are entitled to it.
Redistribution of wealth according to favor of the ruling elites is precisely the type of Tyranny the founding Fathers worked so hard to prevent. Obama’s disregard for the Constitution appears to be a purposeful plan. Depending upon our status with the leadership we will either be relieved of our property or given someone else’s. Deserving or undeserving, how will you rate?