What *is* socialism , exactly? Is Obama really a Socialist?

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

I have ben encouraged to write as a person and not a spokesman for the Green party, and been told tha I dissect some great issues.
So cop this one folks - Is Obama ~really~ a Socialist; What Socialism is and if it has any effect on society. My own opinions coming right up.

First, lets define what we mean. I will let the egg heads go for a dictionary definition , but here is the working man's definition.

Socialism is where Society, usually thru' an elected government, does things.
Now, all Communists are Socialists by default, but not all Socialists ae communists. How come/
Well, Communism does not allow private property. A men may own a suit or a car under a communist system, but the land and all the means of production , including businesses that create wealth thru providing services like transport - these are all owned by the state.

Now, Socialists cover everyone who wants some sort of state intervetion , be it total or partial.

By this yardstick, if the State has an education policy and nothing else, it is partly Socialist and partly run on Capitalist Private Enterprise - and we could call it a Mixed Economy. but ist isn't really that mixed. Now suppose the State builds and runs hospitals as well?
Then the economy is getting even more mixed, with more Socialism, more state control.

Now, a country like the UK has currently got State Education and State Healthcare running alonside capitalist, private alternatives. It's a mixed economy.

Now, I have heard Americans on Youtube videos saying that Obama is a Communist, a Socialist and a Muslim. that he isn't even an American citizen. lets check some facts , shall we?
he was born in Hawaii. A US State when i went to school, and probably still is. if he were not allowed to stand for Prez, I am sure somebody would have told him so by now.

But is he a Communist? Evidently not - he has never advocated that all land , and all business concerns in America be turned over to State Ownership. So that claim is wrong . Period, as Americans might put it.

But, is he a Socialist? weell, how far does he want State control to go?
Are there State Schools in America? to that extent, he has got Socialist credentials.
To be frank, I think that Americans have been taking tax dollars to educate their kids for longer than most americans know.

Yet, State funded Education is a Socialist principle. Obama is therefore as much a Socialist as George Bush was. Not much, in other words. A country can only rid itself of the' taint' of Socialism when it can honestly say that the schools and hospitals are all privately funded. like thesewage system and the railroads. Thatcher said that in England "we buried Socialism". she lied. she cut it back, but never managed to kill it.
so long as the State controls any aspect of goods and services to the public, you have state controllled industry.

Now, as I have said before, the State can often run a good service. Nobody complains about the London Fire Brigade, nobody is running to buy up the sewers and even if they bought up the postal services, they would not be able to run a service to the outer hebrides and make a profit.

The best solution is a mixed economy. it is noteworthy that although Obama dragged thousands of people into the healthcare system in America, it is seems it's still funded by private insurance. it isn't truly socialist.

Comments

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

First your definition is Socialism is flawed as it is so overly broad pretty much anything shy of Anarcho-Capitalism can be called a mixed socialist system.

A more accurate description of the term is...

"An Economic-Political system in which control of decision making and ownership of the means of production is centralized with the national government."

The main difference between Socialism and Communism is that Communists are at least in theory also Anarchists in that they replace 'government' with 'the people' and at least in theory no government at all.


Outside of possibly Cuba there are no true socialist countries left anymore because it has become self evident that real Socialism simply cannot work and always results in endemic poverty and chronic shortages of resources.

As far as Communism, that has never existed on a national scale. Even the Russians and Chinese never attempted to implement Communism holding it as a supposed end goal in their struggle against Capitalism but not something that could be implemented 'yet'.

Now. before we look at Obama lets look at the so called blended economies of Europe and see what they should properly be called.

In European Socialism we have a system which contains centralization of 'essential' resources within the government and a strong governmental regulatory control over the means of production in the remaining industries which are not socialized. There is also a a strong welfare state which is not technically a part of socialism

Well this certainly has strong socialist elements, however the level of regulatory control over industry and private enterprise with the extent of welfare policies means it is not blended with actual capitalism but something else. These economic policies fall somewhere between Fascism and Mercantilism without really matching either because they are not outright protectionist necessarily but there really is no good historical name for the economic system, if the name Corporatism had not already been used to mean something else it would be a perfect term to use here. The strong welfare state is also something which in modern colloquial usage is called Socialism but really isn't as there are far more Socialist countries than anything in Europe which have no welfare state elements at all(China until Tienanmen Square for example).

So now lets look at Obama. First before we can say what President Obama is we must recognize that there is a difference between what he would do were he Supreme Emperor of the US as opposed to merely the President because for all the power the office of the President of the United States has it is rather limited (by design even).

On an actual policy level lets look at his defining legislative actions

1) While he didn't pass it he supported and backed the economic bailout in the waning days of the Bush administration that benefited large corporations at the expense of the people and nationalized their debts.

2) He nationalized several key Industries most importantly 2 of the 3 largest employers in the country with GM and Chrysler.

3) Pass an economic 'Stimulus' Bill which focuses 100% of the stimulus on Government programs

4) Pass a Health Care reform Bill, which centralizes control of of health care decision making and funding with Federal bureaucracies and benefits corporations at the expense of the people.

5) Nationalized Higher Education funding.

6) Expanded federal control over primary and secondary eduction.

In other words at every step of the way he has worked to centralize control in Washington or a handful of heavily regulated corporations. While this is not technically 'Socialism' per se, it is exactly in line with what passes for Socialism in the blended economies of Europe and about as far from the Free Market economy most Americans wish to retain.

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

However, that was Obama as filtered through the lens of realpolitik and not what he would do if he had unlimited control. Reading his writings and listening to his rhetoric when surrounded by 'friends' it is clear that he would go much further towards Soviet Style Socialism than Europe currently has (not all the way probably but closer) because in his own words he considers the 'Free Market' to be the enemy.

So is he a Socialist? Certainly not a pure one, probably no closer than Glen Beck is to a Libertarian but he is probably more of a socialist than any mainstream politician out there short of possibly Hugo Chavez and Castro in Cuba but his desires are tempered by the fact that he would never get legislative support for more centralized control.

[telemann.livejournal.com]

[torpidai.livejournal.com]

You're on the wrong side of the road, that's not too far off standard practise here in blighty, Some stranged shaped vehicle must have been parked there when it came to the second line, or more likely the stone chips for the road behind :)

Give em a pass, at least they tried :D (it'll become law soon too, Though shalt not extract the urine from those who benefited from a state funded education, it will just lower their morals morale)

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Ok, God.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

Ah - glad to see that someone with a sufficient technical grasp of politics has come forwards.

Also, you know a lot more of the inner working of American Society than me , i will admit.

my assesment of him is purely on what I know of his healthcare reforms - and he has not brought everyone in , just expanded healthcare to many that The Free Market did not want to take care of at all.

i applaud him for that - he took the only advanced nation on earth to lack a social health system and gave it something better than it had under Bush - no mean feat. but , this of itself, does not extablish his credentials as a Socialist. Not in Britain anyway. you want to see what a socialist looks like, take a look at Harold Wilson...

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Is that how the British press spun it? We're still lacking a social health system, and it's not better than what we had. All it did is make everyone customers of the insurance companies rather than only those people who chose to do so.

[torpidai.livejournal.com]

5) Nationalized Higher Education funding.

Given Texas attempts to skewer the truth recently (and not so recently) Maybe you too should try our wonderfull new ideas, Now They're trying to privatise the schools, call them acadamies and remove all blame from government for our great nation of stupid Children who can't read, write or count!

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

We really should have let Texas be their own country - it would have saved us from any number of chucklehead politicians.

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

Well, they have been a Republic, so I guess we could let them do that again....While we are at it, Calif was once a republic too, however given the present state government, if we were to become A Republic again, I think I'd have to move to Texas.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

The only unifying fact in California is that the conservatives AND liberals in this state are equally insane and out of touch with reality. But we don't let Young Earth Creationists dictate textbook contents so we're not all bad.

But, but, but.......

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

I'm a young earth creationist....so I guess I resemble that remark (Insane and out of touch with reality) Guess it's time to up my meds.

Re: But, but, but.......

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

No I actually think you're not.

You believe in the Spaghetti Monster. I know it. A bird told me.

What was her name?

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

(not sure if you have to be British, or an Early Beatle fan to get that)

All seriousness aside, It's funny (peculiar, not ha ha) when I first heard of the (flying) Spaghetti Monster, from my agnostic nephew, I was deeply interested (being as how I had spent a number of years in my youth studying theology). The thing I was soon to discover was that the majority of theologians and adherents were usually involved with non-perscriptive meds (aka recreational drugs). Since my drug of choice is nicotine I was never able to understand all the fine points of the belief, and soon had to discontinue my studies. While interesting, I figured one untenable position was all I was willing to invest myself in, and I find YEC to be vastly more believable, but I admit that's just me.

Re: What was her name?

[htpcl.livejournal.com]

Frankly, I prefer the cult to the flying teapot which presently orbits Saturn. If you've really been into theology you'll instantly get that. ;-)

Re: But, but, but.......

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

I have trouble knowing if you're being serious... I guess I have a hard time reconciling you with the 'howling at the eclipse and sacrificing a neighbor' crowd.

Re: But, but, but.......

[geezer-also.livejournal.com]

That's because I'm always reasonable, and usually rational :D (altho I have to say I don't know anyone personally who is in the 'howling at the eclipse and sacrificing a neighbor' crowd)

I am a Creationist by belief, and a "young earther" by choice. I have said several times I may be, even probably am, wrong, but everyone is entitled to an untenable position, and I don't proselytize, so meh :D

Re: But, but, but.......

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Personal viewpoints I don't have a problem with. People have all sorts of crazy but basically harmless places of irrationality in their psyches. I used to hang with a serious conspiracy theory crowd - an interesting but strange bunch of people.

[blorky.livejournal.com]

re: 2 of the 2 largest employers - you're not even close to right. http://nyjobsource.com/largestemployers.html

[rasilio.livejournal.com]

Yes, that was a typo, mea culpa.

It should have read simply '2 of the nations largest employers'

[blorky.livejournal.com]

"Nationalized Higher Education funding." When the fuck did he do that? He eliminated banks serving as an intermediary, not eliminated the ability of banks to make college loans.