It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is Obama a really a socialist or a facsist in disguise?

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:43 PM
"Obama is a socialist!" "Welcome to the USSA (United Socialist States of America)" I hear these words ALL THE TIME. Here on ATS, on the radio, in op-eds.

My question is this: Is Obama really a socialist or is he a fascist in disguise? The respective definitions are as follows:

Fascism: From Britannica Online Encyclopedia

Although fascist parties and movements differed significantly from each other, they had many characteristics in common, including extreme militaristic nationalism, contempt for electoral democracy and political and cultural liberalism, a belief in natural social hierarchy and the rule of elites, and the desire to create a Volksgemeinschaft (German: “people’s community”), in which individual interests would be subordinated to the good of the nation.

The following quote from a transcript of Obama's speech on the senate floor before he was elected president supports the portion I emphasized in bold:


And understandably, people are frustrated and they're angry that Wall Street's mistakes have put their tax dollars at risk. And they should be. I'm frustrated and angry, too.

But while there's plenty of blame to go around -- and many in Washington and Wall Street who deserve it -- all of us -- all of us have a responsibility to solve this crisis, because it affects the financial well-being of every single American.

Virtually no hard working every day average Joe/Jane in this country wanted this bailout to happen REGARDLESS of the possible consequences, yet Obama asked everyone to put those interests aside for the good of the nation. Were being asked to put aside what we wanted based on principle alone, if nothing else, in order to save the wealthy because, ultimately, it would POSSIBLY effect all of us in the end.

Economics of fascism:

From Britannica Online Encyclopedia

However, the economic programs of the great majority of fascist movements were extremely conservative, favouring the wealthy far more than the middle class and the working class. Their talk of national “socialism” was quite fraudulent in this respect.

People keep calling Obama's plan to take over the auto industry as "socialist" but at a closer look, it is anything but.

Can Obama Be Called an Economic Fascist?

And economic fascism reigns supreme in Barack Obama’s America. Just look at the recent government handling of Chrysler. In a series of press conferences this week announcing Chrysler’s bankruptcy, Obama hit on all of the four P’s.

First, Obama stated that Chrysler’s product had to be revamped -- and that he knew how best to do it. “For too long,” Obama said, “Chrysler moved too slowly to adapt to the future, designing and building cars that were less popular, less reliable, and less fuel efficient than foreign competitors. That’s part of what has brought us to a point where they sought taxpayer assistance.” It’s easy for Obama to criticize Chrysler -- he’s never run so much as a lemonade stand.

Second, Obama announced that he would be setting prices on senior debt. Obama’s proposed plan for Chrysler involved destroying senior debtholders, paying them a whopping $0.33 on the dollar for their loans. When the senior debtholders refused to abide by such a plan, Obama excluded them from the Chrysler bankruptcy negotiations altogether, then labeled them “speculators” and blamed them for Chrysler’s downfall -- all the while kowtowing to the interests of four large banks (Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, and Morgan Stanley) that own 70 percent of Chryslers debt. All of them have taken government bailout cash.

Posing as a populist, Obama undermined the very basis of free enterprise in this country: the power of investors to lend money at return. Instead, he says he stands with employees, families, and communities -- all of whom would be bankrupt without the power of private investment. Preaching economic fascism in the guise of warfare on “speculators” -- this is how freedom dies.

Third, Obama stated that he would henceforth control the profit margin for Chrysler. He did this by putting the unions in control of Chrysler -- the new majority owner of Chrysler is the union retiree health fund, which has a 55 percent stake in the new company.

Fourth, and finally, Obama has decided that the government shall control the people who are hired and fired at America’s largest companies. After defenestrating the head of GM, Rick Wagoner, Obama forced out the head of Chrysler, Robert Nardelli. He then stacked the nine member board of the company with four government picks, three Fiat picks, one union pick, and one Canadian pick. Chrysler is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the federal government. And the same President who urged us to “buy American” in his Thursday speech handed over the levers of power to an Italian car company, Fiat.


[edit on 29-5-2009 by nunya13]

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:45 PM

Fascist Corporatism:

From Britannica Online Encyclopedia

The fascist economic theory corporatism called for organizing each of the major sectors of industry, agriculture, the professions, and the arts into state- or management-controlled trade unions and employer associations, or “corporations,” each of which would negotiate labour contracts and working conditions and represent the general interests of their professions in a larger assembly of corporations, or “corporatist parliament.” Corporatist institutions would replace all independent organizations of workers and employers, and the corporatist parliament would replace, or at least exist alongside, traditional representative and legislative bodies.

A whiff of Facsism from Obama's White House

Although there have been some incidents of government exercising minor control over industry during wartime, this aggressive assault on American capitalism is unprecedented and should give all Americans who care about freedom pause.

Strict government control over businesses is the essence of Fascism, or more precisely, Mussolini-style corporatism. As Mussolini said, "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." Corporatism boils down to this: government tells industry (and labor) what to do and they do it for the supposed good of the country. For the president of the United States to be able to, effectively, fire the head of a major corporation is not a road America has ever headed down before.

Lastly, when you take a look at what Obama really has planned for health care "reform" it's pretty scary and can be seen as fascist.


In October 1939, Nazi Leader Adolf Hitler issued an order, written in his own hand, ordering the extermination of those who were considered “unworthy of life.” The order, entitled “The Destruction of Lives Unworthy of Life,” stated that patients “considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, be accorded a mercy death.”

Today, the Obama Administration is beginning to descend down that same road, promising to make the “tough choices” to cut entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security to save money—at precisely the time in which an increasing number of Americans are forced to depend on them as the economy slides deeper into Depression. Obama is willing to spend trillions of dollars to bail out the financial markets, and pay for it by slashing programs which keep ordinary Americans alive.

Think we’re exaggerating? Take the case of a paper entitled “What Are the Potential Cost Savings from Legalizing Physician-Assisted Suicide?” It sounds like something that might have been written by Jeremy Bentham, or Aldous Huxley, or maybe Nazi doctor Karl Brandt, but it was actually co-authored in 1998 by “bio-ethicist” Ezekiel Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, a leading advisor to Obama’s budget director Peter Orszag, and a member of the 15-person Federal Coordinating Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research, the group which has been designated to prepare the list of which medical procedures will henceforth be permitted, and which will not. Emanuel’s co-author, Margaret Battin, has written other papers promoting suicide and selective refusal of medical treatment.

A thread regarding the promotion of recommending assisted suicide in place of life-prolonging medical treatment has been discussed here:

ATS Thread

So, is Obama really a socialist? I can certainly understand how many people will answer yes. But when you compare his ACTIONS against what he SAYS he will do, he is not.

So far, his ACTIONS have the markings of a fascist. But what he SAYS, have the markings of a socialist.

My simple minded conclusion? He's one tricky SOB.

Edited first and second post: Reordering key points and adding supporting links.

[edit on 29-5-2009 by nunya13]

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:46 PM
The simple answer is no he isn't... he is a moderate Democrat with left leanings and nothing more... if you really want to know what the left think of him check out staunchly liberal sites like etc.

Us true liberals know him to be a typical middle of the road Democrat.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:01 PM
reply to post by grover

Did you read all of my post? Do you not have anything to say to the contrary on the points I made as to why I feel he can be seen as someone who displays qualities of a fascist? Or just the typical blanket response of "no he's not"?

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:03 PM
Obama is a man. What he believes is even less relevant than what you believe.

Its the party we need to worry about. They and their masters are behind it all.

Sorry to be so brief, but I think in the end, most of our presidents since Wilson have been charismatic 'bagmen' for someone else's agenda.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:04 PM
Thats interesting, every liberal that i know , even the ones that voted for him consider him to be extreme left, and i know a lot of liberal people. I do not know ONE of them that doesnt regret voting this man into office, when asked in hind sight if they would have voted for him again with knowledge of what hes done thus far, the unanimous answer is a NO.

Even with most of the media you see on this guy democrats call him far far left. Im not sure where you are coming up with this middle of the road stuff.

In answer to the OP, I dont think hes in disguise at all (after the election that is), i think hes been pretty blatant about what hes doing.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:14 PM
reply to post by Maxmars

Facism, Socialism, Communism, Democrat, Republican, Nationalist:

What do these all have in common?

I'm not going to waste time with links, as if you know how to do a bit of research you can find this out for your self, the answer to my question and ultimately the OP's question is this:

They were all born out of the PTB agenda to further enslave the middle and lower classes whilst the Elite richen them selves in our missery.

Hitler: socialist - created by TPTB
Stalin: communist - created by TPTB

They were both fighting for the same commander in chief as you say in the states, and when they realised they were being used as pawns and tried to rebel they were setup face to face ready for combat (poland).

Bush: fascist - created by TPTB
Obama: socialist - created by TPTB

They were/are both fighting for the same commander in chief, just this time round they have swapped the seat of power within the same country, nothing has changed since WWI, II, now or WWIII when it arrives.

What *'ism or *'ist or *'at you feel they are, as stated once in this thread is irrelevant, the party is irrelevant, the voters are irrelevant, for it is not these people which we need too worry about, it is those who put these people into place of power, its those who provided unlimited funds to back these people, like hitler, like stalin, like all of our so called dictators, and like the current two party rule by the mob (democratic) system we are emersed in today.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:19 PM

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

In answer to the OP, I dont think hes in disguise at all (after the election that is), i think hes been pretty blatant about what hes doing.

Yes, he has been pretty blatant. But there are still a lot of people, on BOTH sides, who are sorely misinterpreting what he is doing. To some of us, it's pretty blatant. To others he's either a savior or a socialist.

What I'm trying to further prove, in a sense, is that he's most obviously just continuing on with Bush's legacy. Or should I say, the legacy of those in the shadow gov't that runs this country and controls it's presidents.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:47 PM
The new “Prime Directives”
You will be Assimilated into Socialism
Resistance is Futile
Sterilize – Sterilize – Sterilize …..

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:53 PM
Obama is a facsist dictator who is just waiting for the right moment to attempt to institute martial law. And the so called "TPTB" have nothing to do with it. It is our fault. It is the fault of the voters who are unwilling to tolerate short term pain for long term gain. The voters have learned they can vote themselves welfare, medicaid, and numerous other social programs that relieve them of any responsibilty for themselves. This not the work of some mysterious cabal known as "TPTB," the NWO, or the illuminati. It is the fault of people who don't want to solve their on problems. It, simply put, is our own damned fault.
It has been said that people usually get the government they deserve. In this case, I fear it is true, in spades.

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 07:01 PM
It doesn't matter if he's left or right, in fact the Facist party we all think of was the Nationalist Socialist Party. What matters is that politicians are all for creating a big totalitarian government who is getting their hands into everything and everyone.

No one remembers freedom is from government. It's not specific issues of speech or arms or taxes or forfeiture, the temptation to trivialize those freedoms are a symptom of an oversized government.

I'm not as worried about Obama as I was before he was elected. He was most extremist leftist in Congress, but it seems his eyes opened up after getting 'read-on' as President and he couldn't deliver on any of his campaign promises. He's just a temp. The real power lies in the lifers in Executive office of the President, not the temp figurehead who they're not about to read onto every project they're running.

new topics


log in