Published: Monday, June 29 2009 12:05 a.m. MDT
Of course President Obama is neither a Marxist nor a socialist. Anyone who
would claim that he is obviously doesn't know the meaning of the words. Some
basic education seems to be in order. I was born and raised in a
socialist country, East Germany and actually laughed to read those terms used to
describe the current US president. By the way, being either a
Marxist or a socialist is not a crime. Neither is being a capitalist.
Obama is both a Marxist and a socialist because they are the same thing only
perhaps in differing degrees. Obama believes he is justified in confiscating
money from one person and redistributing it to someone else= what Marxists and
socialists do! "From each according to their ability and to each according to
their need". There are several problems with that idea however!#1: It
punishes achievement, innovation,investment, hard work and self control and
rewards inefficiency, lazyness, and the irresponsible. When those riding in the
entitlemen wagon out number those who are trying to pulling the wagon, the whole
system collapes,as it always has and always will.America is close to that
collape now and no "bailout" will help!Another problem with Marxism and
socialism is that who decides who gets what and who loses the efforts of their
work? Socialism and Marxism always produces dictators who enforce the
redistribution with tanks and machine guns. The cost of socialism and Marxism is
freedom and prosperity! The results are poverty, suffering and death. No thank
you Karl Marx, you can keep your socialist "utopia". We saw it in USSR, Cuba,
China and everywhere else people bought into your lies!
I think most people think of a Marxist, as a communist and a socialist as
someone within the capitalist system who wants to give to those who have not
earned a benefit something paid for by those who have worked hard to get
something.In those terms Obama was trained by Marxist thinking
professor and is now taking us deep down the road to socialism., through his
spend and spend and spend and spend and spend philosophy. He thinks throwing
money at a problem will solve it. I can give a person a fish or teach them to
fish and they they can feed themselves in the future. At what point does he not
understand the economy?
Greetings:I think the administration of Barack Hussein Obama is more
akin to the National Socialism of the Third Reich.The same can be
said for previous administrations, whether Republican or Democrat, for they are
all equally guilty of betrayal.Under National Socialism, the
government exercises total control over all private industry, finance, and
commerce.Isn't that what we have now, and have had for some time
past?Let's look at some other comparisons to the Third Reich:Deciding who is worthy to live, and who must die, i.e., abortion and
euthanasia.Laws mandating racial preferences and racial quotas.Thought control, manipulated and enforced by legislating "hate speech",
"hate crimes", "politically correct" speech, and revisionist history.And, of course, gun control.What if those six million Jews had
been armed?So, knowing this, what do WE do?If it's not
too late, we might begin by no longer voting for Republican or Democrat
candidates.We should also carefully study the Holy Bible, the
Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States.Arm yourselves, and pray.Thank you.John Robert
MallerneeArmed Forces Retirement HomeWashington, D.C. 20011-8400
The first poster is correct - it is not a crime to be a Marxist. I think the
millions of people who died around the world at the hands of Communists in
China, Russia, Cambodia and elsewhere might think it should be a crime to be a
follower of the teachings of Karl Marx. Regardless of what we call Barack
Obama it is apparent that the notion of individual responsibility that has been
the norm in this Country (at least until FDR came along) doesn't sit well with
Barack. I just call him a big-government statist who thinks the Federal Govt
should micromanage the economy and control the most important aspects of the
economy. He's also an admitted "wealth redistributionist"
The underlying belief is that somehow capitalism equals freedom of choice, but
the problem is that the natural outcome of free markets and capitalism is that
it brings about consolidation and oligopolies that dominate key industries.
With few massive companies dominating such industries, it naturally brings about
reduced competition, reduced choice for consumers, and reduced pressure to
reduce prices. Think of so many industries that fit this model -- from
automobiles to energy to healthcare to retailing. The consequence
is that consumers don't have the freedom to get the products and services that
want -- for example, consumers have been demanding an alternative to oil for
decades, but the auto industry refused to deliver. When it did in the mid-1990s
(GM's EV1 electric plug in), the industry lobbied to kill regulations requiring
it and took it off the market just before oil prices skyrocketed at plug-ins
would have reduced our dependence on Iran and other oil dictatorships. Again,
OLIGOPOLY reduced our freedom and hurt consumers.The bottomline is
that government MUST step in to bring about solutions that the free market and
capitalism CAN'T deliver due to oligopoly.
Socialism is the step between freedom and communism. Corporatism is the step
between freedom and fascism. Obama is a corporatist. He was raised by communists
and fed nothing but Communism. His books reek of his love of communism read
them. Obama is a corporatist which puts us on the road to fascism. Fascism is
just the right fork of totalitarianism that is communism and fascism.Just
because one former East German thinks that he is not a communist does not make
it so the Chinese government knows that he is a communist and so do thinking
Whomever controls the language - controls the world.The far-right
has made large enrodes by denigrating the words "liberal" and "socialism" for
the last 30 years, but America is wise to them today as we all witnessed in the
elections of 2006 and 2008.
To "Maxist=socialist", if they are the same, throw in United Order as well. My,
the nut cases are out early today....
You're right. The far-right has also hijacked and corrupted the word
"conservative" to mean the views held by radical far-right authoritarian
extremists. True conservatives are now considered to be moderates. Sad.
"Obama is a corporatist. He was raised by communists and fed nothing but
Communism."That's easily the silliest thing I've read in the paper
today.Are you saying that Harvard Law School teaches its students
"nothing but Communism?"
"Obama believes he is justified in confiscating money from one person and
redistributing it to someone else= what Marxists and socialists do!"What do you think taxes in any form are? Taxes take money from people and use
it for other purposes. So if that's what makes Obama a marxist and socialist,
then all of our presidents have been socialists and we've been a socialist
country for a long, long time.
Part of the problem is that few know who Marx was. Marx was a philosophy PhD of
the continent who was an expat in Britain for most of his life. He believed he
solved the riddle of capitalist accumulation with his theory of surplus value
which was largely based on Ricardo's labor theory of value. He attempted to
answer the question - in a system which mostly sees the exchange of equilavents,
from whence come profits? His answer? Surplus value. To Marx human labor is
everything. Labor is that unique commodity which can create more value than is
necessary to sustain it. This excess is surplus value which is the source of
profits and capital. He anticpated the efficiency of capitalism.Marx was in fact a western economist, the last of the classical economists.
To understand Marx one must live in a capitalist system. The Chinese Communists
and the Soviet economists understood Marx not at all.Marx had
nothing directly to do with either the 1917 revolution in Russia or the rise of
Mao in China. Marx is still worth study because he deals upfront
with the relationship of labor with capital.
To "Capitalism = Freedom? | 6:36 a.m." yes, capitalism does equal freedom. If
the government decides that it will produce all automobiles in the US. Do you
have a choice? How about if the government takes over health insurance and
taxes you for your insurance preminums, do you have a choice to be covered by
health insurance any more? If the government takes over all banking
institutions and mandates interest rates and minimum qualifications for loans,
is there any choice left to make?What you are forgetting is that
freedom requires that you have choices. Freedom is lost once you eliminate
choices.If, as you say, "OLIGOPOLY reduced our freedom and hurt
consumers." What will happen when we have a government mandated/supported/owned
Tell me again why the Danes rate as the happiest people in the world?
There's nothing wrong with Marxism. It's just another economic theory. It
would work too, if implemented perfectly and if the people in that society were
perfect, selfless and only cared about the common good and not their own
familie's welfare.Problem is... there hasn't been a population yet
in the world that can live it perfectly. Somebody (usually in the government)
always thinks their family deserves more than another family and they accquire
it and then other people covet what he has and want it for their family, so
unrest and displeasure starts and the black market grows until the mafia
controls the goods and services people want and what the government dols out to
the people is considered shody and second-class and the system breaks down.
People get tired of working harder in the hopes of improving their familie's
condition, just to realise that their family only benefits from that extra work
if they can find a dishonest way to hide that income from the government.Check his background Obama_fans! He was raised by guys who embraced the
marxist theory (his college advisors). Read Obama's writings. Check his
here we go again. don't you dems just love throwing that argument here in utah?
the united order is a perfect society in which one chooses to live in and is
governed by god. if there was such a thing as perfect human beings then maybe we
can talk mrxist, but we don't. obama is far from perfect, and despite you
defense of your "savior" president, the majorty of america does not support
marxism, even the majority of those who voted for obama. i agree completly with
Nothing wrong with Marxism | 8:48 a.m. June 29, 2009 above. obama is a marxist
and the only reason he won the election was because the economy was bad and he
talked the sweet talk. if he had said he was a marxist, he wouldn't have come
anywhere near the white house.
Mr.Mallernee, do you pay for your stay at the Armed Forces retirement home or
does our National Socialist government?
Thanks for writing, Erik, but your rationality and common sense are lost on a
crowd like this one. The typical DN reader is the perfect example of Stephen
To "Nothing wrong with Marxism | 8:48 a.m." assuming you believe in the Bible,
there is one instance where a population was able to willingly share everything.
If you look up the story of the City of Enoch, they were able to share the
wealth and eliminate poverty. THe trick was that they were led by a prophet,
not elected officials. They were led by God, through a prophet.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments