For the full story click here.
Since the election season started heating up last year, one of the biggest cries against Obama by many is that he is a Socialist. Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Anne Coulter, Glenn Beck. The list goes on. McCain, during an interview, said that he didn't believe Obama was a Socialist. Of course, McCain isn't exactly the most Conservative of Right Wing politicians, and far from the farthest Right of the Republicans, but surely his words should have attracted some sort of dissuasion regarding Obama's Socialist Credentials?
Not necessary. One of the first rules of propaganda is that the more you repeat something, the more people will believe it is true. So let's take a quick look at Obama's policies so far and see how they stack up against Socialism.
First, a definition:
From wikipedia:
Socialism refers to any one of various economic theories of economic organization advocating state or cooperative ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equal opportunities/means for all individuals with a more egalitarian method of compensation based on the full product of the laborer.
From dictionary.com:
–noun
| 1. | a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole. |
| 2. | procedure or practice in accordance with this theory. |
| 3. | (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles. |
Now to the topic.
This is taken from an article by the editor of The Socialist magazine, Billy Wharton.
The funny thing is, of course, that socialists know that Barack Obama is not one of us. Not only is he not a socialist, he may in fact not even be a liberal. Socialists understand him more as a hedge-fund Democrat -- one of a generation of neoliberal politicians firmly committed to free-market policies.
Even more interesting, "Nationalization is simply not in the playbook of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and his team." Why would/wouldn't it be? Timothy Geithner is from the Federal Reserve (which is a topic of debate in and of itself). The Federal Rese
rve is a corporation that is heavily influenced by the Government but is still separate from the Government. While it is a great thing to believe that where a player comes from won't influence the new role they might have, that is somewhat naive. So what would the Fed and their cohorts gain from a socialist system? Nothing. Their main interest is money - maintaining money and wealth so they can maintain control.Although, the Fed has been accused of being a socialist organization last year during the Bear Stearns crisis, it doesn't seem likely that the charge is serious or will stick.
So what exactly has Barack Obama been up to since taking office? Here is a brief list of actions taken:
Executive Orders
13489 - Revert Bush Presidential Secrets E.O. to the Reagan version
13491, 13492, 13493 - Reviewing detention policies, torture, and Gitmo.
Others include reviewing Faith Based Initiatives E.O. from Bush, Protecting the Chesapeake Bay, and removing limits on Federal Funding of certain types of Stem Stell Research. Click on "Executive Orders" at the top of this section for a full list of his E.O.s to date.
The Auto Industry
Great article from the Wall Street Journal about how Obama has given a lot of authority to a handful of ex-Wall Street chums the powers to handle the GM bankruptcy.
"A congressional abdication of authority of historic proportions has left the executive branch with nearly complete discretion over how to handle GM and Chrysler's restructuring. President Barack Obama has further delegated authority, giving effective control to this task force, which operates under the titular authority of a top-level interagency group headed by National Economic Council Director Larry Summers and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner."
Larry Summers looked to Milton Friedman for views on the Economy, and Summers wrote that while Friedman made real contributions to monetary policy, his real contribution was "in convincing people of the importance of allowing free markets to operate."
Hardly a group of Socialists at the helm of the whole crisis.
Health Care
From the previous article by Billy Wharton (Socialist Magazine)
"By mandating that every person be insured, ObamaCare would give private health insurance companies license to systematically underinsure policyholders while cashing in on the moral currency of universal coverage. If Obama is a socialist, then on health care, he's doing a fairly good job of concealing it. "
Further Thoughts
While there has been Government interference in recent events in the economic center, Obama is far from advocating government takeover of the economic system. Means of production are remaining firmly in private control, with perhaps some more government meddling. And you only need look at the actual individuals running these policies to see that Socialism isn't anywhere on their agenda- these are money men who believe in the Capitalistic society we have.
