Is Obama a Socialist?

Penelope · Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:19 am

I don't know about intelligent, but I was brought up to care about other people.

I don't think we should all be equal, that would never work. I mean, give one person a £10 passage to Australia and they will make a good life for themselves, by intelligence, hard work and luck.

Give another person the £10 passage and lacking in any one of the three above, means they won't do so good. Life just isn't fair, I know that, but we can have a bit of compassion....can't we?

I think the problem is in coming to terms with how we display that compassion. George Bernard Shaw, railed against the wealthy of the parish, like Lady Bountiful, going around distributing blankets and soup to the poor, because he insisted that people be given the right to help themselves, without it being displayed as charity......which, in fact, is Socialism. I am a Socialist. I am not a Communist.

I have listened to Obama and I have agreed with everything he says. The Peace Prize has been awarded to worse men.

It is a bit early in his career to be given such an honour. I wonder if 'they' deliberately are making people question his worthiness?

catedog · Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:45 am

At a cookout in July a relative was ranting and raving about Obama and the ills of socialism.
This same person goes on to say he was about to take advantage of the Cash for Clunkers progam-mmm-interesting-guess he didn't see that having anything to do with socialism.
He traded in his pristeen Ford Ranger for a Ford Focus but hey, he's not for any kind of government help.
This is someone who has all kinds of bucks and yet saw nothing wrong with getting his piece of the socal pie.

CWT36 · Fri Nov 06, 2009 11:52 am

It's like the people who say "keep the government out of my health care" when they have Medicare.

Perception trumps reality every time for some people.

Penelope · Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:52 pm

Socialism is open to abuse by the unscrupulous, but I would rather see some people cheating the system than have no system at all. I don't want to go back to seeing people begging in the streets. I don't want to see people suffering because they can't afford to pay for health care or for a good education.

Anyway, some people in this country claim 'unemployment benefit' but do unofficial paid work and cheat the system by claiming benefit. The conservatives ask ordinary working people to sneak on their neighbours and 'tell tales' if they hear of this going on.

But I, think the rich cheat the system in a much much bigger way. The working man might cheat the country out of hundreds of pounds/dollars, but the bankers and officials have cheated the country out of millions. Thereby contributing immensely to this present economic crisis.

CWT36 says:


	Quote: Perception trumps reality every time for some people.

Well, it seems to me that I perceive socialism very differently than people in the USA. I was brought up to be proud to call myself a Socialist but Americans seem to perceive 'Socialism' as a dirty word.

Therefore, it is good to talk, my friends because it is the media, newspapers and broadcasters, who influence our perceptions. The press and other media is not unbiased because it is owned by rich people, in whose interest 'socialism' would not be beneficial. The great value of the internet is that it is not owned by anyone, so is not biased.

johnson1010 · Sat Nov 07, 2009 9:16 am

Socialism is definitely a word we have been told to fear in America.

I remember when one of my math teachers told us that socialism wasnt, in itself, a bad thing. In fact, socialism, if it were a thing that could really be pulled off, would be a great thing, but it has to pass through human hands, and those hands will bend any system to their own benefit.

I was scandalized when i heard even modest praise of socialism. I admit that i ran home to tell my parents about it. They had no opinion, but years later i see that he was right, and i had been programmed to fear and dread the very mention of socialism.

many people in this country have not progressed further in their assesment of socialism than a sixth grader, sadly.

leona · Sat Nov 07, 2009 4:58 pm

I don't think Obama is a Socialist. But the religious right should read all part of the Bible. I think Jesus WOULD have gladly been a Socialist! :up:

Penelope · Sat Nov 07, 2009 5:33 pm

Well according to the book of Acts the first Christians were Communists because they pooled all their resources.

However - the God of the old testament seems to have been a Socialist, in that it was (and still is) a law in the Jewish religion that they give a tenth of all of their income to the brotherhood. Supremely rich, or drastically poor, a tenth was to be donated to charity.

So some jews are allowed to be much more wealthy than others, but all are required to donate the same percentage of whatever their income. A good course of action imo.

It always strikes me as odd that one of the earliest Jewish laws was the forbidding of usuary, that being the loaning of money for profit. It seems to be a law peculiar to the jewish faith this one, and yet the Jews have been known throughout history as money lenders.

Aren't human beings a puzzle??

The Ritzy · Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:59 am


	johnson1010 wrote: many people in this country have not progressed further in their assesment of socialism than a sixth grader, sadly.

Sadly, I think this is very true. No one could even explain to me what socialism was until college when I read Marx and Engels.

When I did read about it, it sounded great on paper but in practice, it's not going to work fully.

Socialism and capitalism, for that matter, should both be done in moderation.

CWT36 · Mon Nov 09, 2009 1:29 pm

I recently read Michael Shermer's The Science of Good and Evil. He talks about provisional morality. He ascribes a morality scale of 0 to 1 in tenths with 0 being completely moral and 1 being completely immoral.

Example: Helping an old lady across the street is a 0, completely moral. Murdering the old lady is a 1, completely immoral. But seeing the old lady in trouble in the middle of the street and doing nothing about it may be a .5 or a .6.

I think applying that same philosophy to government and social structures is helpful. We may not want completely socialism, but a .2 of socialism might be a good think (ie: socialized medicine).

It's similar with the libertarian philosophy. As a practical matter a completely libertarian society would be rife with problems and disorder. But a libertarianism at a scale of .3 might have substantial benefits.

DaoJones · Thu Feb 11, 2010 9:27 pm


	Chris OConnor wrote: It is capitalism that brought you the computer technology you're enjoying right now to share with us your opinion that you prefer socialism.

Actually it was NASA if you really are interested.

Penelope · Fri Feb 12, 2010 10:58 am


	Quote: New post Re: Chris OConnor wrote: It is capitalism that brought you the computer technology you're enjoying right now to share with us your opinion that you prefer socialism. Dan Wrote: (I'm editing this because I've just noticed your DaoJones not Dan Jones- - You might have no agenda - but you do have an index??) Actually it was NASA if you really are interested.

If this country were still completely Capitalist- we would have computer technology, but only the wealthy would be able to afford to use it.

It is not really a case of prefering socialism to capitalism, but of believing in the attempt to create a fairer society. Not in the equal distribution of wealth, but in a more humane society, with equal quality of education and health care. Because, it doesn't matter how you look at it....the best of health care should not depend on ones wealth, and neither should ones opportunity for the best education possible.

Welcome Dan!!

bleachededen · Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:06 pm


	Frank 013 wrote: Chris summed up my thoughts on socialism quite nicely… I do not want handouts… I can earn my own keep… If someone else cannot then they deserve less… plain and simple.

This is an unfair generalization. People with disabilities or who fall upon hard times through no fault of their own deserve to have some help from the country they live in, because once they do, they can help their country in return by becoming/remaining functioning members of society. It is arrogant, selfish and mean to say that because you can fend for yourself and do well and someone else can't that they are less deserving.

Penelope · Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:11 pm

Bleachededen said:


	Quote: People with disabilities or who fall upon hard times through no fault of their own deserve to have some help from the country they live in

Well said, Bleachededen...but it seems some people prefer the law of the jungle and 'every man for himself'- and they are entitled to that opinion.

Some of us prefer a more humane approach, since we don't like to see people begging in the streets, making the place look untidy......

It does seem,that never the twain shall meet.

geo · Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:02 pm

Penelope wrote:

Bleachededen said:


	Quote: People with disabilities or who fall upon hard times through no fault of their own deserve to have some help from the country they live in

Well said, Bleachededen...but it seems some people prefer the law of the jungle and 'every man for himself'- and they are entitled to that opinion.

Some of us prefer a more humane approach, since we don't like to see people begging in the streets, making the place look untidy......

It does seem,that never the twain shall meet.

A line needs to be drawn somewhere between helping the unfortunates and the hard-line stance of every man for himself. Presumably only a few would want to do away with social services altogether. In America, many school children would go hungry at lunch time if it weren't for various government-funded lunch programs. Unemployment, financial aid etc. Some people need a helping hand from time to time.

Charles Dickens did a great job in many of his novels in showing the life of the downtrodden. I think you're right, Penelope, no one really wants to see people begging in the streets even if it's because they just don't want to see it.

bleachededen · Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:05 pm

In my experience, those who claim they can "fend for themselves" are the first to demand that someone solve their problems immediately when they do, for whatever reason, come upon rough times. It's never as simple as "I can do it myself." There will always be a time when they want something from someone else (be it the government or someone else with money/power) and will be mad as hell if they don't get what they "deserve."

It is also impossible to help everyone who needs it, but help at least needs to be available.

As for capitalism vs. socialism, no government is "better" or "best" or even "pure." Human nature corrupts even the best-intentioned system. The trick is to work with what you're given. And it is quite a trick.

Forum rules

Is Obama a Socialist? Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!