Tag Archives: Socialism

Socialism and Racism, together under Obama

Obama is reversing one of the old land policies of the federal government, and will begin nationalizing land to transfer administrative control to Indian Reservations

In addition, officials said, the government will spend $2 billion to unravel the legendarily complex trust system, in which hundreds or thousands of people can own tiny fractions of a single plot of land. The government will try to buy back these fractions until it has sole ownership of the parcels, and then allow them to be used in ways chosen by tribal governments.

With racist-socialist policies like this, no wonder Obama is the least popular President in American history.

Obama the Socialist

“Planning and market forces are not the essential difference between socialism and capitalism. A planned economy is not the definition of socialism, because there is planning under capitalism; the market economy happens under socialism, too. Planning and market forces are both ways of controlling economic activity.”

Deng Xiaoping

In the traditional, European views of socialism, the government takes control of major industries and attempts to run them at a profit. With industrial profits going to the state rather than capitalists, so the theory goes, they can be better purposed to serve the general welfare and create public goods. Often this is done with an eye to controlling the commanding heights of a country’s economy, so that even issues such as resource utilization, infrastructure development, and labor force issues can be controlled by the state.

Obama is not a socialist in this sense. people who claim he is are wrong and misguided. It is unfair to Obama and to our country to claim the President is a European-style socialist.


In the contemporary, Chinese view of socialism, the government acts as both a regulator to and a competitor in major industries. For instance, Xinhua is a large news bureau and a regulator of news bureau. The old Ministry of Communications both ran a large national cell phone system, and regulated portable telephony. In this way, the government can subject the economy to national control while avoiding some of the inefficiencies (such as labor protection) that come from turning workers into public servants.

Obama is a socialist in the Chinese sense.

The US government is not a regulator and a competitor in industries as diverse as insurance, banking, and automobiles. Obama is planning to deepen the government’s rule both as a regulator and competitor in health care, and some even want him to expand this into the news media. As a country, we support single family public housing projects. Just as in China, the American government (and its apologists) use vague, opaque, behind-closed-door methods to regulate and compete in our increasingly socialist economy.

These methods allow apologists for the administration to defend its policies, by simply denying that non-existant bills have non-exisstant clauses. The health care debate is one example. Obama has provided only vague guidance for the new system. Therefore, when critics of the plan note that the only way you can increase coverage and decrease costs is through rationing, bloggers and columnists call these critics liars.

Socialism with Chinese characteristics is no more honest in the United States than in China.

Many reasons are used to support our Chinese Socialism. It is important to give jobs to Michigan. Health care to the unemployed. Fight terrorism. Keep people in their homes. It is not that these aren’t valid reasons, but that using socialism with Chinese characteristics as a tool is a new & dangerous trend in American politics.

And it is happening almost without public debate, except for misguided accusations against Obama for some EuroSocialism that he surely does not hold.

Obama is a socialist with Chinese characteristics.

In China, where Obama is not President…

tdaxp’s note: I normally don’t write rhetorical posts, but on consideration I will publish this one anyway. Regardless of his original intentions or beliefs, Barack Obama has rapidly transitioned our society to an authoritarian/socialist model. This has real consequences, even if some parts of the socialist agenda are accidentally initiated by others.

Computer literacy makes you a threat in the eyes of the American police. Using proxies (such as for partialing out different content on different internet service providers) and Linux (” a black screen with white font which he uses prompt commands on”) can be used to increase sentences and seize property. Fortunately, this is only true in the United Staets. In China, where Obama is not President, I regularly use both proxies and linux.

Being an employee of a trade syndicate helps you get a good position in the American government. Obama now has 5 RIAA lawyers working for him. Fortunately, this is only true in the United States. In China, where Obama is not President, lawyers who attempt to sue grandmothers often find themselves outed by protests and internet activism.

In the United States, Barack Obama continues to subsidize foreign oil and natural gas. In China, where Obama is not President, the gas price discourages purchases from unstable third-world country and incentivizes produces to look to alternate energy.

In the United States, more than half a million people lost their jobs. In China, where Obama is not President, the economy grew 6.1%. Part of the reason is that Chinese President Hu JIntao, unlike American President Barack Obama, is not persuing socialist policies. In China, car companies and banks are expected to make money, and not merely function as arms of the Departments of Health and Human Services and Treasury.

Fortunately, our Presidency is not entirely terrible. In some areas, Barack Obama is taking leadership from China. High-speed rail. Glad that he is taking some cues from the People’s Republic.

Socialism, until it comes to Obama’s Wall Street campaign fundraisers

When it comes to the auto industry, who is more socialist: the United States under Sweden?

The U.S., of course:

Sweden says no to saving Saab – International Herald Tribune
Saab Automobile may be just another crisis-ridden car company in an industry full of them. But just as the fortunes of Flint, Michigan, are permanently entangled with General Motors, so it is impossible to find anyone in this city in southwest Sweden who is not somehow connected to Saab.

Which makes it all the more wrenching that the Swedish government has responded to Saab’s desperate financial situation by saying, essentially, tough luck. Or, as the enterprise minister, Maud Olofsson, put it recently, “The Swedish state is not prepared to own car factories.”

The only place Obama seems unwilling to use nationalization is the one place that we have a tradition of using it: to seize insolvent banks and other financial institutions.

I am sure that Obama’s $150 million fundraising record has nothing to do with this.

Since Obama became President, he has consistently attacked “middle class” values by seeking to enrich both the poor and the super-rich at the expense of the Middle Class. From the expanded school year (which helps the poor, but hurt the middle class) to bailing out the zombie speculators (which helps the super-rich, but hurts the middle class), Obama’s hostility to the petite bourgeoisie has been shocking.

How can this be, when the Defense and State Department appear to be better and more harmoniously run under Obama than Bush? And how can this be, when I was looking forward to Obama’s incompetence?

My assumption is that while SecDef Gates and SecState Clinton are actually competent to do their job, Tim Geithner is even more of a naif than Obama is. Hence, in Treasury (and Treasury alone), we are seeing a reflection of what Obama actually wants.

We face a crossroads: we can have the economy that Obama wants, or we can have someone competent at Treasury.

The more Obama defends Geithner, the more I want him out.