posted on May, 7 2012 @ 10:31 PM
reply to post by pirhanna
Socialism primarily is public ownership of wealth, property and the means of production. So, of course Obama is a socialist, at least in part. I
don't think it has to be all or nothing. He has expressed sentiments of this type on many occasions. This does not mean he doesn't have ideas that
fall out of the realm of socialism though. Also, no, I wouldn't call him a pure socialist though that doesn't mean he doesn't believe in socialist
Obama's ideas can be described as communism, corporatism, fascism and yes, socialism. Though I agree, and not to be redundant, he can't be called a
"pure socialist" but really I think that is just splitting hairs. People that call him a socialist aren't 100% right but they are not 100% wrong
either. He could be described as any of the four above "ism's" and people would be correct, at least in part. One thing he is not though, is a
Obama’s stated intention has been for redistribution of wealth as a means to help the poor, the underprivileged and so on.
Obama is a supporter of social security, medicare and similar obvious socialist programs. America is in many ways a socialist country and anybody who
supports the socialist programs could be called a socialist rightfully even if the majority of their ideas could not be described that way.
This includes the majority of people in D.C. calling Obama a socialist. Just my thoughts though. Obviously many would disagree I am sure but a
socialist program is a socialist program and a supporter of such a program can be rightfully called a socialist because of that support.
I think people that get upset at Obama being called a socialist are simply trying to be too specific. There is no special word for a
communist/corporatist/fascist/socialist. any of those should be accepted as at least partly true.
I imagine you are not likely to agree with me, such is the world. Personally I like calling him a corporate communist. He is certainly a
collectivist (as opposed to an individualist) which is close enough for me to be fine with the term "socialist" being applied to him.
7-5-2012 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)