Marxism, Socialism, Communism, and Obama
Tracing the president's behavior and opinions back to the source.
October 8, 2010 - 12:00 am
“I don’t get it,” my friend said, shaking his head. “Obama is supposed to be so smart and such a brilliant politician … ”
“Right,” I said. “So?”
“So everything he has done or wants to do is a disaster! It’s all opposed by the majority of the American people. Even Democrats are running away from him as fast as they can. If he’s such a great politician, why does he keep doing things most people hate? And that’s not the worst part. When people complain, he calls them too dumb to appreciate what he’s doing for them!”
Why indeed. The answer is deceptively simple: Barack Obama, the president of the United States, is a committed, doctrinaire socialist, and because Marxist philosophy is the foundation of socialism and communism, a Marxist. Many Americans are reluctant to accept this idea, despite overwhelming evidence, for two primary reasons: they don’t want to accept that they helped to elect him, and they’re not really sure what socialism and communism are, or what all the fuss about communism was about. After all, the Swedes are socialists — aren’t they all blondes in bikinis with charming accents?
To begin, as a public service, a Marxist primer: Karl Marx (1818-1883), a German, was the originator of Marxist theory, which was adapted by the leaders of the now defunct Soviet Union as Marxist-Leninist thought. Marxism is essentially a method of analyzing history through the vehicle of economics. In Marxist thinking, there are two classes of people who will always be engaged in what Marx termed the “class struggle”:
The Bourgeoisie: The rich, those who own land, the owners of factories, the capitalists who only get richer by exploiting the labor of the workers. In capitalist societies, they are the owners of the “means of production.”
The Proletariat: The workers who are always helpless and exploited.
The Marxist view of history contends that man has no “natural” rights or tendencies. He is self-making. He is constantly changing due to his need to develop new technologies (new means of production). There is accordingly no “natural” political order, only that created as a consequence of the constantly evolving means of production. To that end, Marx saw the following historical chronology, which communists believed (and believe) to be inevitable:
Step One — Violent Revolution: Capitalism is better, according to Marx, than feudalism, but both are hopelessly corrupt because of the exploitation of the workers by the bourgeoisie. As the gap between the very rich and the very poor widens (Marx did not foresee the dramatic rise of the middle class), the workers will be forced to revolt and seize the means of production. This revolt must be bloody, brutal, and total, with the noble final goal being the seizure of all power for the workers who will then labor to establish the next step on the historic path. This will take place on a country-by-country or region-by-region basis, but Marx believed that this historic “class struggle” would absolutely overwhelm the world.
Step Two — The Dictatorship of the Proletariat: This was the perpetual state of the Soviet Union. Having seized the means of production, the workers will purge society of all traces of capitalism. They will reeducate — or kill — all capitalists. Because it is impossible to secure the ultimate blessings of communism in this phase of the historic process, the workers must be “guided” (in actual practice, ruled) by an elite group of “scientific communists” who alone know how to keep the revolution moving steadily on the historic path. While these scientific communists are purportedly part of the proletariat, in actual practice, they resemble the capitalists they deposed. Marx recognized this as an evil necessary to achieve the final goal. Many communists were — and are — quite fond of this particular part of the doctrine, as they get all the goodies while the workers exist in misery and despair.
Step Three — True Communism: Before true communism can be achieved, all democracies (which tend to be capitalistic) must be wiped from the face of the planet. This is historical destiny; it must occur. Therefore, any means are justifiable to make it happen. (Communists often have been called “socialists in a hurry,” in that they’re more than happy to kill anyone who even looks like they might be thinking about standing in their way. Historically, this has translated to the deaths of tens of millions of their own citizens. Many communists were very fond of this part of the doctrine, too). It was only the existence of Western democracies which kept the Soviet Union interminably in the second phase. When true communism was attained, a “worker’s paradise” would exist around the Earth, and there would be no need for government of any kind. The maxim “from each according to his ability; to each according to his need” would apply. The people would own and operate all of the means of production and absolute social justice would prevail.
Any failures along the path to the manifest destiny of true communism are always attributable to the idea that true communism has not yet been achieved, therefore Marxist theory cannot be falsified. It can never be proved wrong. There can never be, by definition, enough communism, and the remedy to the problems caused by insufficient communism is always more and more fervent communism.
Socialism is communism-lite. It differs from communism primarily in that socialists are generally less willing to torture, imprison, and kill those who oppose their goals than are communists, and at least pay lip service to some ideals of democracy. In socialist countries, some private ownership of property and industry is generally allowed, but government taxation, regulations, and oversight are generally so onerous that the freedoms allowed individuals are slight and barely distinguishable from a state where no individual freedoms exist. Since government is essentially all-powerful, the few and pathetic freedoms which exist may be diminished or taken away by government at any time. But over time the people become so enervated they seldom complain, trusting instead in the beneficent, all-knowing, all-caring government. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had it exactly right when she said:
The problem with socialism is you always run out of other people’s money.
Socialism and communism are identical in many ways. Socialism too is non-falsifiable. Any problems that arise can never be understood to suggest that socialism, or the “scientific socialists” who administer it, are faulty in theory or application, just that the public doesn’t understand and more fervent socialism is required.
When socialists accept that any means are justified to achieve their ultimate goals, they have become communists, and purges of those less-educated and unenlightened begin.
Armed with this knowledge, it’s easy to see why so many are alarmed about Mr. Obama. A brief, by no means all-inclusive, list of his alarming behavior:
(1) Mr. Obama’s many disturbingly communist propaganda-style posters.
(2) The communist cult of personality built around Mr. Obama from his campaign to the present.
(3) His vow to “spread the wealth around” (income redistribution is a hallmark of socialism/communism) to Joe the Plumber.
(4) His blithely uncaring flaunting of public opinion in living very, very large on the collective dime, with posh parties, command performances, golf excursions, frequent flights for “date nights,” and pricey vacation spots worthy of a member of the Politburo.
(5) The unashamed praise of Mao Zedong, a mass-murderer who made Hitler look like a neophyte, by Obama advisor Anita Dunn.
(6) The appointment of 9-11 truther, black racist, and avowed communist Van Jones as “Green Jobs Czar.” Let us not forget the cooing schoolgirl longing from Obama advisor and slumlord Valerie Jarrett in describing Jones.
(7) Obama’s seizure of the means of production in taking over two-thirds of the domestic auto industry, and his lawless dispossession of the shareholders of those companies to the benefit of corrupt unions.
(8) Obama’s reckless and unnecessary shuttering of countless auto dealers, which threw all of their employees and many in related, supporting industries out of work — done, no doubt, to help “the workers.”
(9) Obama’s constant meddling and thuggish tactics in dealing with the financial and insurance industries, and other business, and Republicans, and Democrats, and doctors, and everyone else who disagrees — or looks like they might be thinking about disagreeing — with his policies.
(10) Mr. Obama’s assertion that “at some point, you’ve made enough money,” and his ceaseless class warfare against the arbitrarily chosen “rich” class of those making $250,000 a year or more.
(11) Mr. Obama’s statement to journalist Bob Woodward that America can “absorb” another massive terrorist attack because 9/11 made us “stronger.” (One of the hallmarks of any socialist/communist government is a great deal of lip service paid to “the people,” but no caring whatsoever about individuals. A second is their willingness to expend the lives of millions of their citizens to achieve their goals.)
(12) HHS Secretary Sibelius’ comment that Americans were in for “reeducation” over their obvious lack of appreciation for ObamaCare (communists have “reeducated” untold millions to death). Let’s not mention the grossly false propaganda her agency has released on that topic — blatantly false, big lie propaganda being another communist hallmark.
Why doesn’t Mr. Obama behave as the brilliant politician he is supposed to be? Why doesn’t he move to the center when it’s obvious that he is collapsing his faux Greek-columned temple around the ears of himself and his party? He’s a socialist. He’s a Marxist. Virtually all of his associates, mentors, and friends have been one or the other or both. Who would even think, let alone say and do the things he has done and that he is absolutely dedicated to doing unless they were a single-minded, dyed-in-the-wool, committed socialist?
Socialists and communists always take the long view, which is a result of their unshakable belief that their beloved philosophy cannot possibly fail, and that the only prescription for what others might mistakenly see as failure is more, and more fervent, socialism or communism. Thus public outrage over discovering that every feature of ObamaCare used to sell it was a lie is merely a failure of “messaging.” The proper message delivered to the masses will convince them! The underlying policy cannot be wrong, nor could the masses fail to appreciate it and “The One” if they were only smart enough to understand the proper messaging.
Mr. Obama cannot move to the center. For him, the center is always wherever he is, in that mythical worker’s paradise he so diligently labors to perfect despite the inability of those far less intelligent than himself — everyone — to understand or appreciate his labors.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, European nations diligently labor to flee the worker’s paradises that are falling to ruin all around them. They can see a center where Mr. Obama cannot.