Total Posts:56|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Obama - No Ordinary Socialist?

Microsuck
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?
Wall of Fail

Devil worship much? - SD
Newsflash: Atheists do not believe in the Devil! - Me
Newsflash: I doesnt matter if you think you do or not.....You do - SD

"you [imabench] are very naive and so i do not consider your opinions as having any merit. you must still be in highschool" - falconduler
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 6:59:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

That article is anything but objective. "First, let's examine Socialism. One of Socialism's central tenets is demonization of the wealthy. Sound familiar?"

...is that the logic that convinced you that Obama is a Socialist? Obamas policies are no stranger to the presidency than cheating on one's wife. An article injected with spiteful rhetoric really shouldn't convince you otherwise.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 7:07:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
He's not a socialist. He doesn't support total government takeover of corporations. Instead, he's simply a corporatist with war-mongering and fascist tendencies. He's a corporatist as his healthcare plan gives corporations even higher control of people's health (people are forced to buy healthcare from one of them) and he's in line with the progressive conception of regulation which cartelizes already large businesses and creates higher start up costs to smaller ones.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist. Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US) A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 8:31:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 7:07:26 PM, socialpinko wrote:
He's not a socialist. He doesn't support total government takeover of corporations.

Socialists don't have to push for a total take over of the private sector. Proposing the take over of one industry, such as oil, automotive, or railways is enough to be a socialist. There are many forms of socialism. Any ideology which proposes economic collectivism is a form of socialism. Take National Socialism for example; they believed in creating a national union, and believed the unions should be in charge of private companies, and should not only help workers, but plan the economy. Through the German Labour Front, Nazi Germany planned their economy, and built things such as the autobahn. It was because of the union that Germany was able to coordinate all their resources towards the war effort, and it was through the rape of their European neighbors that they were able to fund their programs through stolen resources. By the end of the war, Nazi Germany's prosperity severely diminished because they couldn't steal anymore resources.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
MrBrooks
Posts: 831
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 8:48:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Obama and his ilk are socialist in the American sense, but are still to the right of say a South American socialist. For example; a South American socialist would be for nationalizing factories and companies, while an American socialist would simply be for stronger regulation of certain industries.

Obama's brand of socialism is still bad for the economy however, as has been proven by the lack of any meaningful economic recovery. While there shouldn't be a total seperation of the economy and the government, there should be as little government interference and regulation of the private sector as possible. Mandating for people to buy certain products only benefits the providers of those products and service, (car insurance, health insurance, etc.)

It's like I always tell people though: the funny thing about socialism is that socialist policies always hurt the poor more than they hurt the rich.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 8:52:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist. Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US) A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

Somewhat true. I don't know if you can call social welfare socialist, even though it does have social/ economic goals. You know what you're talking about when you describe the word Socialist. I like it.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 9:05:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 8:52:30 PM, Contra wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist. Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US) A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

Somewhat true. I don't know if you can call social welfare socialist, even though it does have social/ economic goals. You know what you're talking about when you describe the word Socialist. I like it.

That's DanT's thing you know.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 9:07:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 9:05:40 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:52:30 PM, Contra wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist. Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US) A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

Somewhat true. I don't know if you can call social welfare socialist, even though it does have social/ economic goals. You know what you're talking about when you describe the word Socialist. I like it.

That's DanT's thing you know.

Yep, only DanT's allowed to define words, and his definitions are the only possibly correct one. The definition of words are set in stone.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 9:10:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 9:07:33 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 6/16/2012 9:05:40 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:52:30 PM, Contra wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist. Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US) A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

Somewhat true. I don't know if you can call social welfare socialist, even though it does have social/ economic goals. You know what you're talking about when you describe the word Socialist. I like it.

That's DanT's thing you know.

Yep, only DanT's allowed to define words, and his definitions are the only possibly correct one. The definition of words are set in stone.

Hey now I disagree with many of his definitions, but you have to admit that IS the thing he brings to conversation. Every conversation of his is filled with elaboration of definitions, right or wrong and I'd say that's his main characteristic of conversation.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 9:20:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 7:07:26 PM, socialpinko wrote:
He's not a socialist. He doesn't support total government takeover of corporations. Instead, he's simply a corporatist with war-mongering and fascist tendencies. He's a corporatist as his healthcare plan gives corporations even higher control of people's health (people are forced to buy healthcare from one of them) and he's in line with the progressive conception of regulation which cartelizes already large businesses and creates higher start up costs to smaller ones.

Corporatism is Fascism. :P
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 9:23:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 9:20:33 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 6/16/2012 7:07:26 PM, socialpinko wrote:
He's not a socialist. He doesn't support total government takeover of corporations. Instead, he's simply a corporatist with war-mongering and fascist tendencies. He's a corporatist as his healthcare plan gives corporations even higher control of people's health (people are forced to buy healthcare from one of them) and he's in line with the progressive conception of regulation which cartelizes already large businesses and creates higher start up costs to smaller ones.

Corporatism is Fascism. :P

I'm using fascism here in the personal sense. Obama supports huge encroachments on personal freedoms. Corporatism is fascistic economics.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/16/2012 9:33:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 9:23:48 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/16/2012 9:20:33 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 6/16/2012 7:07:26 PM, socialpinko wrote:
He's not a socialist. He doesn't support total government takeover of corporations. Instead, he's simply a corporatist with war-mongering and fascist tendencies. He's a corporatist as his healthcare plan gives corporations even higher control of people's health (people are forced to buy healthcare from one of them) and he's in line with the progressive conception of regulation which cartelizes already large businesses and creates higher start up costs to smaller ones.

Corporatism is Fascism. :P

I'm using fascism here in the personal sense. Obama supports huge encroachments on personal freedoms. Corporatism is fascistic economics.

ahh I see. However, why not just say Fascist?
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
Purch
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2012 3:43:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
He's not a socialist.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2012 3:57:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/18/2012 3:43:21 PM, Purch wrote:
He's not a socialist.

There was general agreement in the thread regarding the claim. I don't think any politically or philosophically aware person actually thinks he is.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Aaronroy
Posts: 749
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2012 11:35:21 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Green Party and the Democratic Socialists of America have stated that Obama is not a socialist. They believe he is a political moderate that believes in the free market, which they do not like.
turn down for h'what
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2012 11:37:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/18/2012 3:43:21 PM, Purch wrote:
He's not a socialist.

Well, that settles it.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2012 11:37:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/18/2012 11:35:21 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
The Green Party and the Democratic Socialists of America have stated that Obama is not a socialist. They believe he is a political moderate that believes in the free market, which they do not like.

Ditto to my previous comment.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2012 11:45:57 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/18/2012 11:37:25 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:35:21 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
The Green Party and the Democratic Socialists of America have stated that Obama is not a socialist. They believe he is a political moderate that believes in the free market, which they do not like.

Ditto to my previous comment.

I would think the actual socialists would be excited if one of their own was President.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 12:02:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist.

Too bad he didn't do that, he only required everyone to buy from PRIVATE companies.

Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US)

No, creating a government run bank AND outlawing private owned banks is socialist, simply creating a public bank that competes for customers like private banks is not even close.

A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

I'll just say "lol" to these. lol
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 12:02:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 12:02:17 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist.

Too bad he didn't do that, he only required everyone to buy from PRIVATE companies.

Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US)

No, creating a government run bank AND outlawing private owned banks is socialist, simply creating a public bank that competes for customers like private banks is not even close.

A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

I'll just say "lol" to these. lol

Wow, botched that quoting system.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
thett3
Posts: 14,345
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 12:11:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is something that irks me greatly. While I'm no fan of Obama, or socialism for that matter, why the hell does it matter if he's a socialist? That word is just thrown around as a political insult with no regard or respect for the ideas of socialists themselves... no doubt there are a great number of socialists in the Democratic and Republican parties, who cannot declare their beliefs because it would be political suicide. It's something that I will always find absurd.

The only reason one should be upset with Obama if he is a socialist is because he didn't have the guts to come out and say it, but lets get real. That isn't cowardly, it's common sense for a politician.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 12:15:27 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/18/2012 11:45:57 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:37:25 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:35:21 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
The Green Party and the Democratic Socialists of America have stated that Obama is not a socialist. They believe he is a political moderate that believes in the free market, which they do not like.

Ditto to my previous comment.

I would think the actual socialists would be excited if one of their own was President.

I don't think he is a strict socialist, though I do think he has socialist values.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
thett3
Posts: 14,345
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 12:18:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 12:15:27 AM, OberHerr wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:45:57 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:37:25 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:35:21 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
The Green Party and the Democratic Socialists of America have stated that Obama is not a socialist. They believe he is a political moderate that believes in the free market, which they do not like.

Ditto to my previous comment.

I would think the actual socialists would be excited if one of their own was President.

I don't think he is a strict socialist, though I do think he has socialist values.

His talk of giving everyone a "fair shot" and his anti-wealthy rhetoric certainly doesn't indicate otherwise
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 12:39:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
President Obama clearly does not meet the traditional definition of socialism wherein government takes over and runs productive enterprises. One problem is that it's not clear that even socialism are adhering to the traditional definition any more. I had a conversation with a Frenchman recently about a self-proclaimed socialist being elected in France. "So he's going to nationalize industries, right?" "No, that's old socialism. Socialists don't do that any more." Hmmm.

President Obama's concept is to leave private industry in private ownership, but control what they do through regulations, penalties, and incentives. Thus an electric utility is private, but they have to have a high percentage of green energy, they have to provide special low rates for preferred activities (like charging electric cars), they have to charge some users very high rates to subsidize low rates of other users, the government determines what they can charge and determines what profit they are allowed. The government also controls who can be hired and fired, what benefits are provided to employees, and many of the minute aspects of day-to-day operations.

The goal is to exercise control over virtually everything that goes on, while at the same time avoiding the responsibility of failure.

Socialism is an economic system, but the new form of whatever it is does not especially care about prosperity. Socialism never actually brings prosperity, but advocates used to claim that it would. The Obama vision has a long list of non-economic objectives that have a high priority: determining what you eat, what car you drive, how much you recycle, being politically correct, and so forth. Bureaucrats are making 10,000 pages of new rules per month. Now swimming pools must have elevators -- no one can guess what's coming next month.

The detailed control with social objectives most closely parallels a theocracy. I think "secular theocracy" is a good description. Maybe that's neo-socialism.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 1:19:03 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 12:39:48 AM, RoyLatham wrote:
President Obama clearly does not meet the traditional definition of socialism wherein government takes over and runs productive enterprises. One problem is that it's not clear that even socialism are adhering to the traditional definition any more. I had a conversation with a Frenchman recently about a self-proclaimed socialist being elected in France. "So he's going to nationalize industries, right?" "No, that's old socialism. Socialists don't do that any more." Hmmm.

President Obama's concept is to leave private industry in private ownership, but control what they do through regulations, penalties, and incentives. Thus an electric utility is private, but they have to have a high percentage of green energy, they have to provide special low rates for preferred activities (like charging electric cars), they have to charge some users very high rates to subsidize low rates of other users, the government determines what they can charge and determines what profit they are allowed. The government also controls who can be hired and fired, what benefits are provided to employees, and many of the minute aspects of day-to-day operations.

The goal is to exercise control over virtually everything that goes on, while at the same time avoiding the responsibility of failure.

Socialism is an economic system, but the new form of whatever it is does not especially care about prosperity. Socialism never actually brings prosperity, but advocates used to claim that it would. The Obama vision has a long list of non-economic objectives that have a high priority: determining what you eat, what car you drive, how much you recycle, being politically correct, and so forth. Bureaucrats are making 10,000 pages of new rules per month. Now swimming pools must have elevators -- no one can guess what's coming next month.

The detailed control with social objectives most closely parallels a theocracy. I think "secular theocracy" is a good description. Maybe that's neo-socialism.

French system is a matter of competing Gaullism with Socialism, which disagrees on different issues. Socialism doesn't aim to nationalise because around the country it's more about eurosocialism or eurocommunism, combined with socialism. In other words, european integration.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 1:39:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 12:15:27 AM, OberHerr wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:45:57 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:37:25 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 6/18/2012 11:35:21 PM, Aaronroy wrote:
The Green Party and the Democratic Socialists of America have stated that Obama is not a socialist. They believe he is a political moderate that believes in the free market, which they do not like.

Ditto to my previous comment.

I would think the actual socialists would be excited if one of their own was President.

I don't think he is a strict socialist, though I do think he has socialist values.

Anyone who believes in any government has some (albeit small) socialist values. More people believe in government run utilities, roads, defense, law enforcement, etc. then will admit that they're socialists. But it's basically the same thing. Socialism describes a certain relation. I'm not attaching normativity to it here. I'm not saying anyone is wrong because they're a socialist. I'm just saying people are generally ignorant of their socialist values. It's what pisses me off about people calling Obama a socialist as an insult when they usually support monopolized utilities.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2012 11:00:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/19/2012 12:02:17 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 6/16/2012 8:19:55 PM, DanT wrote:
At 6/16/2012 6:52:33 PM, Microsuck wrote:
Many people from the far right have accused Obama of being a socialist. After reading this post (http://www.lp.org... ), I am convinced that Obama definitely is a mixed breed of Socialism and Fascism mixed together to make him our most dangerous President ever.
Is Obama a socialist? Why or why not?

Socialism is economic collectivism. Socialism is the nationalization or redistribution of capital. The nationalization of the healthcare industry is socialist.

Too bad he didn't do that, he only required everyone to buy from PRIVATE companies.

Congress required everyone to buy from Private companies. If Obama had is way the provision of creating a government insurance agency would not have been dropped.
Furthermore, the fact that those who cannot afford to pay, are being paid for by the government is economic collectivism.

Establishing a government run national bank is socialist. (creating a privately owned national bank is economic nationalist, such as the Bank of the US)

No, creating a government run bank AND outlawing private owned banks is socialist, simply creating a public bank that competes for customers like private banks is not even close.

Not true. Any move towards economic collectivism is socialist. A capitalist industry is one which is 100% privatized, a state capitalist industry is one that is at-least 51% privatized, a state socialist industry is one that is 51% nationalized, and a socialist industry is one that is 100% nationalized.

If a industry is capitalist, and politicians make it state capitalist, they are creating socialist organizations to compete with capitalist organizations. State Capitalism leads to State Socialism, and State Socialism leads to Socialism. Democratic Socialists first create competing government programs, than they increase the influence of the government programs, than they outlaw private programs.

A planned economy is socialist. Collective bargaining by unions is socialist. Social-Welfare is socialist.

I'll just say "lol" to these. lol

If employee A is worth $20 an hour and employee b is worth $10 an hour, and they both belong to the union; the union may negotiate a wage of $15 an hour for all their members working on a specific construction project. In this case, the employer would agree because the higher quality workers and the lower quality workers would average out to $15, so the employer would not be losing money. The one who is losing money, is the worker who had their salary redistributed.

A Planned economy, by it's very nature is socialist. If one redistributes resources from one industry to another, that's socialist.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle