Actual Socialist Not Exactly Pleased With Obama

[Facial_King]

Must be baffling for those of you who were so sure Obama would make the USA a socialist state. Why aren't socialists

Great little article and interview:

http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/bill-moyers-talks-actual-socialist-h

Nuggets:

We've been hearing a lot from the likes of Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck that President Obama and the Democrats are imposing "socialism" on America.

Which tends to make anyone who knows much about socialism -- beyond, that is, the bumper-sticker political awareness of a 13-year-old -- wonder what the hell they're talking about. It's pretty obvious by now that these are unrepentant capitalists in the Obama Administration -- just not laissez-faire capitalists. Socialism? Please.

Bill Moyers wondered the same thing. So he went out and found an unrepentant socialist -- a Cal-Riverside prof named Mike Davis -- and interviewed him. As Moyers put it in the interview:

Moyers: You know, Mike, there's so much talk from that side of the spectrum raising the specter of Socialism. And I thought I might as well talk to a real Socialist about what the term means. I mean, I cannot find anyone in this country advocating the abolition of private markets and the wage systems or nationalizing all the major industries, I mean, no one's arguing for supplanting capitalism, are they?

Davis: I am.

But Davis, as he makes clear, stands in contradistinction to Barack Obama, as well as to most Democrats. Like most actual socialists, he considers Keynesian economic measures like this administration's to be half-solutions at best.

 

[GiannaIsMyGod]

This is shocking. Faux News told me Obama was a Socialist. The truth is we do not live in a 100% capitalist country and no way near a 100% socialist country. We need to apply aspect of each system where it would be most effective. We all need a little socialist in us.

 

[bodie54]

Nothing new. Just another in the long line of actual socialists who scoff and bristle at the suggestion Obama is one of them.

 

[Jagger69]

American taxpayers became the primary stockholders in AIG and others of their ilk back when GWB was still president when the original bailout plan was put into action last September. Government ownership of what would typically be considered to be the domain of private business enterprise is the very definition of socialism. So, was (is) GWB, in fact, a socialist?

"Socialism" is an emotionally-charged buzzword that evokes a panicky knee-jerk response from those who are pre-conditioned by their political bias to react in such a manner. Like it or not, socialism has been a huge part of American government/business for many decades and will continue to manifest itself where and when it is applicable and deemed appropriate to address certain economic issues and challenges as they occur. How it is interpreted and the resulting ramifications it presents are totally a matter of subjective perception, interpretation and opinion.

In the final analysis, the ends will justify the means....it's as simple as that. We need to quit freaking out over semantics and judge the results of specific philosophical political actions based on their merits or deficiencies as they apply to the particular issue at hand, not their connotations at large as they may be perceived by a specific political persuasion or dogma.

 

[shayd]

American taxpayers became the primary stockholders in AIG and others of their ilk back when GWB was still president when the original bailout plan was put into action last September. Government ownership of what would typically be considered to be the domain of private business enterprise is the very definition of socialism. So, was (is) GWB, in fact, a socialist?

"Socialism" is an emotionally-charged buzzword that evokes a panicky knee-jerk response from those who are pre-conditioned by their political bias to react in such a manner. Like it or not, socialism has been a huge part of American government/business for many decades and will continue to manifest itself where and when it is applicable and deemed appropriate to address certain economic issues and challenges as they occur. How it is interpreted and the resulting ramifications it presents are totally a matter of subjective perception, interpretation and opinion.

In the final analysis, the ends will justify the means....it's as simple as that. We need to quit freaking out over semantics and judge the results of specific philosophical political actions based on their merits or deficiencies as they apply to the particular issue at hand, not their connotations at large as they may be perceived by a specific political persuasion or dogma.

I agree with you. Unfortunately, I think little reminders of the cold war still appear today, and this is a perfect example. I think the thing that a lot of anti-Obama political analysts etc... often don't understand one of the fundamental principles of socialism, and that is the value of work. In order for socialism to function, EVERYONE has to work. Not only do they need to do their job, but they need to do their job to get access to goods and services, and simply put, that isn't going to happen.