President-Elect Obama Marxist?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bible-boy, Nov 12, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    In another thread Brother Martin argued that it is wrong for us to “malign” Obama as a Marxist. To which I responded:



    Following that Brother Martin took exception with my first sentence quoted above regarding Obama’s Marxist relationships and responded with:




    Notice Brother Martin focused his refutation on only part of what I said above. He focused on Obama’s connections and associations and neglected to address Obama’s obviously Socialist political agenda.

    Now consider what Winston S. Churchill had to say about Socialism and its connection with Marxist ideals:



    Before we go any further those who oppose the idea of referring to Obama as a Socialist or Marxist must answer one question.

    How many Socialist or Marxist ideals and/or policies regarding government must one espouse and/or support before it is acceptable to refer to them as a Socialist or a Marxist as opposed to a Capitalist etc.?
     
    #1 Bible-boy, Nov 12, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 12, 2008
  2. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    It is correct to say that Marxism sees socialism as a step towards Marxism which is what Churchill is describing. That does not mean that socialism will always lead to Marxism but it is definitely closer than say pure laissez faire capitalism. It is incorrect to say socialism is Marxism.

    I would challenge whether Obama's policies can even technically be classified as being socialist. I can agree with the view he has socialistic tendencies (which I see as a good thing, BTW), but he still has quite a ways to go before fitting into the strict definition of socialist. The strongest case for classifying Obama as socialist is his stance on health care and even there, his plan does not call for government ownership of the health care sector.

    Of course if you go by the definition of socialist on the street, most republicans could be considered socialist.
     
    #2 Gold Dragon, Nov 12, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 12, 2008
  3. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, how many Socialist or Marxist ideals and/or policies regarding government must one espouse and/or support before it is acceptable to refer to them as a Socialist or a Marxist as opposed to a Capitalist etc.?
     
  4. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,910
    Likes Received:
    295
    He is what he is.

    A socialist for sure and most likely a marxist. Their agendas overlap so much that it's hard to tell one from the other.
     
  5. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    "It is part of the Communist doctrine and drillbook, laid down by Lenin himself, that Communists should aid all movements towards the Left and help into office weak Constitutional, Radical, or Socialist Governments. These they should undermine, and from their falling hands snatch absolute power, and found the Marxist State" (Churchill, Vol. 1, The Second World War, 212).
    -------------------------------------------

    Just as a point of interest, Mr. Churchill, in 1945, was replaced by the socialist party in England, called the Labour Party.

    It must also be noted that not on thing was changed in the parliamentary system of government.

    The same is true in Canada. We enjoy socialist programs, but we are a democratic country with a freely elected government by the people.

    Whilst Marxist is an acceptable term for the type of government designed by Karl Marx and eventually adopted as communism...total governmental control over everything...we do not share anything close to even Marx's philosophy, yet we do employ socialism where it benefits all in the country.

    Cheers,

    Jim

    A socialist after the order of my Lord Jesus when He walked this earth.
     
  6. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Obama Affinity to Marxists Dates Back to College Days
    Barack Obama shrugs off charges of socialism, but noted in his own memoir that he carefully chose Marxist professors as friends in college.


    By Bill Sammon
    FOXNews.com
    Tuesday, October 28, 2008

    German philosopher Karl Marx, author of "The Communist Manifesto," advocated redistributing wealth in order to achieve a classless society.

    Barack Obama laughs off charges of socialism. Joe Biden scoffs at references to Marxism. Both men shrug off accusations of liberalism.

    But Obama himself acknowledges that he was drawn to socialists and even Marxists as a college student. He continued to associate with Marxists later in life, even choosing to launch his political career in the living room of a self-described Marxist, William Ayers, in 1995, when Obama was 34.

    Obama's affinity for Marxists began when he attended Occidental College in Los Angeles.

    "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully," the Democratic presidential candidate wrote in his memoir, "Dreams From My Father." "The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."

    Obama's interest in leftist politics continued after he transferred to Columbia University in New York. He lived on Manhattan's Upper East Side, venturing to the East Village for what he called "the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union."

    After graduating from Columbia in 1983, Obama spent a year working for a consulting firm and then went to work for what he described as "a Ralph Nader offshoot" in Harlem.

    "In search of some inspiration, I went to hear Kwame Toure, formerly Stokely Carmichael of Black Panther fame, speak at Columbia," Obama wrote in "Dreams," which he published in 1995. "At the entrance to the auditorium, two women, one black, one Asian, were selling Marxist literature."

    Obama supporters point out that plenty of Americans flirt with radical ideologies in college, only to join the political mainstream later in life. But Obama, who made a point of noting how "carefully" he chose his friends in college, also chose to launch his political career in the Chicago living room of Ayers, a domestic terrorist who in 2002 proclaimed: "I am a Marxist."

    Also present at that meeting was Ayers' wife, fellow terrorist Bernardine Dohrn, who once gave a speech extolling socialism, communism and "Marxism-Leninism."


    Obama has been widely criticized for choosing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, an anti-American firebrand, as his pastor. Wright is a purveyor of black liberation theology, which analysts say is based in part on Marxist ideas.

    Few political observers go so far as to accuse Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, of being a Marxist. But Republican John McCain has been accusing Obama of espousing socialism ever since the Democrat told an Ohio plumber named Joe earlier this month that he wanted to "spread the wealth around."

    Obama's running mate, Biden, recently contradicted his boss, saying: "He is not spreading the wealth around." The remark came as Biden was answering a question from a TV anchor who asked: "How is Senator Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?"

    "Are you joking? Is this a joke? Or is that a real question?" an incredulous Biden shot back. "It's a ridiculous comparison."

    But the debate intensified Monday with the surfacing of a 2001 radio interview in which Obama lamented the Supreme Court's inability to enact "redistribution of wealth" -- a key tenet of socialism. On Tuesday, McCain said Obama aspires to become "Redistributionist-in-Chief."

    Obama has managed to cultivate the image of a political moderate in spite of his consistently liberal voting record. In 2006, he published a second memoir, "The Audacity of Hope," that leaves little doubt about his adherence to the left.

    "The arguments of liberals are more often grounded in reason and fact," Obama wrote in "Audacity." "Much of what I absorbed from the sixties was filtered through my mother, who to the end of her life would proudly proclaim herself an unreconstructed liberal."

    National Journal magazine ranked Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. The publication is far from conservative, employing such journalists as Linda Douglass, who resigned in May to become Obama's traveling press secretary.


    [Bill Sammon is the Washington deputy managing editor for FOX News Channel.]
     
  7. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Jim,

    If you'd like I could start another thread based on what Margaret Thatcher had to say about the Socialist government in the UK from the late 1940s up until she became the PM in 1979. Her points about just how bad thing were under the Socialist government in the UK, for 30+ years, can be found in the introduction to her autobiography The Downing Street Years.
     
    #7 Bible-boy, Nov 12, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 12, 2008
  8. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    A minimalist definition of socialism is community ownership and control of some industrial sector(s) of society. Traditionally, socialism has been communal ownership of all industrial aspects of society. Modern socialism practiced in Western Europe and Canada is really social democracy that incorporates both socialism and capitalism by selecting certain sectors for communal ownership, particularly health care and education.

    A minimalist definition of Marxism is establishing a socialistic state via violent revolution by the working class.

    So I would say it only takes one policy for each group:
    Socialists espouse government ownership of some industrial sector(s) of society.
    Marxists espouse socialism via violent overthrow by the working class.
     
  9. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    Both Socialism and Communism have changed over the years. hey are not what thy once were and there is very little difference between the two these days. If you look through the CPUSA website you will find that Obama espouses most if not all of their principles.
     
  10. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best not to get started on Margaret Thatcher who turned the railway system over to private enterprise and what a mess it became. Try travelling in England to-day by rail, which was the most common form of travel in my days there.

    Wife was there three years ago and the train transferred her to a coach to complete her trip up into Scotland!! Some system!

    Best talk with a Brit to see the changes. An American won't begin to understand what we went through over time and changes.

    I am not faulting conservative parties. I have voted conservative all my life, but that doesn't prevent me from being a democratic socialist to boot.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  11. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again Jim,

    This thread is about Obama, not about the UK and its politicians etc. I don't want to lose focus here by running down a rabbit trail chasing UK related issues. I will gladly start another thread where we can talk about the UK.

    Peace to you,

    Bible-boy
     
  12. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not asking for a definition of Socialism or Marxism. I asked how many Socialist or Marxist ideals and/or principals regarding government must one espouse before it is acceptable to call them a Socialist or a Marxist?

    I think we can make a pretty good case that Obama and the leadership of his Democratic Party favor this.

    This is not the one and only way Marxists try to overthrow governments according to the quote by Churchill who is quoting Lenin.
     
    #12 Bible-boy, Nov 13, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 13, 2008
  13. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    But..

    did the trains run on time??

    :laugh:
     
  14. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0
    What are the obviously socialist objectives of Obama? First I need to clarify one thing. A graduated income tax by its very nature redistributes wealth. In fact, taxes of any kind redistribute wealth by taking money from individuals and spending it (hopefully) for the common (opps that's a communist word) good. Without redistribution of wealth the infrastructure of America would never have been built (roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, etc.).
     
  15. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Please answer the original question before we start trying to debate specifics.

    How many Socialist or Marxist ideals and philosophies of government must one embrace/espouse before it is acceptable to call them a Socialist or a Marxist? Until someone answers that simple question this discussion can go no further.

    To paraphrase from Braveheart Stephen the Irishman: "The Almighty says don't change the subject, just answer the question.":D
     
    #15 Bible-boy, Nov 14, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2008
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,332
    Likes Received:
    786
    Here is one better, how many ideas espoused on this page does Obama not hold to?
     
  17. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0

    Please reply to my post. I don't have to answer your contrived questions now do I?
     
  18. Bible-boy

    Bible-boy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,254
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well since I started the thread and would like to try and keep it focused on one point at a time, yes. I'd like for you to answer my simple question first before we go chasing other issues. It would be nice to have this discussion without me asking a question and you failing to answer it directly, and throwing out some other question instead.

    Remember, we are not talking about how the specific number of Socialist or Marxist ideals and philosophies regarding government Obama embraces or espouses, yet.

    We are only talking about how many Socialist or Marxist ideals regarding government anyone would have to embrace or espouse before it would acceptable to refer to them as a Socialist or a Marxist?

    To answer is simple. Just give a number. Is it 1, 2, 5, 10 whatever (within reason). I mean you can't say one must embrace or espouse 10,000 points og either Socialism or Marxism regarding government before it is acceptable to refer to them as either a Socialist or a Marxist because there aren't that many points. Or you could even name a percentage. Would it be 25%, 50%, greater than 50%, 75% or whatever? Just give me a number. ;)
     
    #18 Bible-boy, Nov 14, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2008
  19. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    3,837
    Likes Received:
    3
    I gave you an answer for both socialism and marxism. 1.

    The one policy to define a socialist is espousing government ownership of an industrial sector. You said Obama does that and maybe you are right. Please show it. And even if you can show it, that does not mean a whole lot because I see nothing wrong with being socialist.

    The one policy to define a marxist is espousing socialism via violent overthrow of the government by the working class. I do not think you can show that Obama ever espoused Marxism.
     
  20. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe I am a Marxist because I am beginning to think that this government might need to be overthrown. It is no longer a government of, by, or for the people- it has become a self-indulgent monster.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...