Christine Smith's Blog

Obama doesn’t hide his adherence to socialistic ideas such as collectivism, interventionism, regulation, and the nationalization of private sector business and its financial institutions.  It’s shown in so many of his recent actions.  He appears to want to vehemently avoid the word “socialism” while going full speed ahead in its development in every area of American life.   

His actions are not those of an American who believes in free markets and respects free enterprise, even though he likes to intertwine such ideas into his speeches.  Giving lip service to the phrases Americans respond to, he simultaneously suggests and pursues the very action which are the antithesis of those foundations of this nation.

So while he may not use the word “socialism”, his actions as well as his words proclaim his real intentions. “Global” pursuits, “job creation,” and repeated use of the word “reform” rather than abolishment (reform simply means a continuation of the government intervention which causes the crises to begin with, and which will continue said crises).  Government control fails and will always fail, as the many socialistic programs already in place in our nation are failing, but all Obama suggest is more of it.

Obama and his cohorts will activate “growth” alright – the growth of the government.  With bigger government there’s enormous more spending of taxpayer money.  And with bigger government comes more government regulations resulting in significantly less liberty.

To whose “ideals” is Obama committed?  And what liberties will be destroyed as he devotes himself to “collective action”?

For the security he is trying to promise or promote is but a smokescreen for the tyranny of the socialistic agenda I believe he is committed to.

As an American who believes in the principles this nation was founded upon, I view it as a sad day to see the U.S. President so brazenly speak of his devotion to the “global” society versus a love and commitment to America and our well being. 

It is as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote in The Communist Manifesto, “The Communists are distinguished from the other working-class parties by this only: 1. In the national struggles of the proletarians of the different countries, they point out and bring up to the front the common interests of the entire proletariat, independent of all nationality.  2. In the various stages of development which the struggle of the working class against the bourgeoisie has to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole.” 

Obama has distinguished himself as a U.S. president more devoted to “collective” and “global” interests rather than the principles this nation was founded upon.  His aim is to focus upon so called common interests, at the expense of the American people, and while increasing the power of government over our people. 

Within the United States he claims to represent the people’s interest by enticing them with promises of all manner of security: better education, healthcare, job creation, and societal infrastructure…but never does he mention the price nor the real results of such policy.

The first step to achieving a Communistic society, according to Marx and Engels, is to “raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy.”  Once such a political position is attained, they will then use their power of political supremacy to “wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the State…” with measures including among others: “A heavy progressive tax…Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels…Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly…Centralization of transport in the hands of the State…Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State…Free education for all children in public schools…” 

Central to this, is an end to liberty and its property ownership and the prosperity only a free market produces. 

Justice is only applicable and must be restricted to matters of law, but when (as socialists often do) it is supposedly applied by government in matters of humanitarian help, education, medical care, employment, the environment, and other social concerns, it is adulterated into a tyrannical force which makes a people weak, dependent, and ironically, a people who suffer more.  In seeking provision, their very existence and way of life both economically and socially, becomes controlled by the mandate of the State. Any real justice is long gone as law is perverted and used against the people rather than in their defense.

But such rhetoric promising much can be effective, it’s why Obama, in his Jan. 31, 2009 address, stated “… my administration is dedicated to alleviating your struggles and advancing your dreams…” Not his nor the prerogative of the U.S. government whatsoever, but nevertheless popular persuasive words.

Government exploits the suffering by focusing upon “class” differences, pitting one against the other, fueling their dissatisfaction and subsequent anger, they give lip service to the struggles of the people and then promise they have the answers.  The frequent use of the term “free market” in a context which assumes we currently have one serves both the “liberals” as well as “conservatives” in their agendas.  Only libertarians challenge the false assumption. 

We’ve seen this for some time in the United States.  The extensive regulations controlling private enterprise and trade, production/industry regulations/licenses, the income tax, welfare (including Social Security and Medicare), immigration laws, and, of course, public education have been in existence for decades; the United States turned away from true free enterprise long ago and is reaping the consequences now.   Now foreign markets, the buying of goods from overseas, and even foreign companies operating here, are criticized with yet more calls for government intervention to bailout American production but never questioning the inherent injustice of the regulations which burden enterprise and trade. Government itself has no business involved in any of these areas, only the consumer and producer. The popular demonization of foreign markets (be it for oil, automobiles, or the numerous products made overseas) and producers is yet another pitting of people against one another.  Rather than more government interference, a lot more prosperity (and greater satisfaction among American enterprise and workers) and harmony would be had if only government got its greedy self-serving hands out of the way of our life, liberty and property.  No longer does the U.S. government stand for defending our rights, instead it has perversely presumed a control to decide what degree it will allow us those rights all in the name of protecting us.

Though the American people, as a whole, have always had a rejection of the concepts of socialism and communism, they’ve been ensnared to believe we’re still operating in a capitalistic free enterprise economy and society, and though we are certainly more so than many nations, socialism pervades our government programs and mandates.

The examples are numerous, all presented to the American people as for their good (the “drug war” comes to mind as one of the most egregious examples) but which in actuality strip the people of their liberties, property, and freedom.  Violence and all manner of suffering result from such government intrusion, and it is this which the government then claims is all the more reason to increase government involvement.  Trace any “crisis” to its origin, and you’ll find the government is not only to blame, but has profited from.

But what is new is the presence of a president, and a supporting Congress, who proclaims proudly, by their actions, their commitment to advancing socialism.  Mandatory service as Obama seeks and the senate approves of would have been unheard of and seriously rejected and opposed  in years past.  The so called “green” movement and “global warming” issue is nothing but a socialistic plan to increase regulation and taxation upon private enterprise and a way to gain more control over people’s lives; I say this as one who cares deeply about the environment and thus as one who opposes the government being involved in any way in its protection.  Issues of concern to a people should never be areas in which government should be involved.  It is those very issues which the government should take a hands off approach to so that the people, socially and economically, can devote themselves to what works for them.  Abandoning  liberties for supposed security from the government makes matters far far worse. 

The terms “socialist” and ‘communist” have throughout history been used against political figures, what matters is what said politician not only says but what do they try to accomplish, for in what they do their true colors are shown.  What is clear is that while Obama ingratiates himself with various groups, feigning compassion and concern and even American values, his actions, in my opinion, are most certainly those with a most un-American if not perhaps more accurately an anti-American agenda (if  “American” is defined as evincing the principles upon which we were founded).

For Obama to use the phrase “our ideals” should be a clear warning to all.  The “ideals” of which he speaks sounds much more like those of Marx than Jefferson.  I consider his actions, and that of Congress, to be moving this country into a far greater socialism than we’ve ever known.  The question only is how much will the American people tolerate before they decide they’d rather trust themselves rather than a dictatorial government?

The following are but a few short quotes from Obama’s Press Conference after the G-20 Summit, emphasis (words in bold & occasional italicized comments) added as my commentary:

“…our pursuit of global economic recovery.”

“…we are committed to growth and job creation.”

“The United States is also partnering with the private sector to clean out the troubled assets, the legacy assets that are crippling some banks, and using the full force of the government to ensure that our action leads directly to loans to businesses large and small, as well as individuals who depend on credit.”

“…bold action to support developing countries,”

“This cooperation between the world’s leading economies signals our support for open markets (! – open markets?) , as does our multilateral commitment to trade finance…”

“…committed to comprehensive reform of a failed regulatory system.”

“…our efforts began with the approach that Secretary Geithner proposed last week, the strongest regulatory reforms…”

“…and capital protections for financial institutions. We are extending supervision to all systemically important institutions, markets and products, including hedge funds. We will identify jurisdictions that fail to cooperate, including tax havens, and take action to defend our financial system. We will re-establish the Financial Stability Forum with a stronger mandate. And we will reform the IMF and World Bank…”
” I intend to work with Congress to provide $448 million in immediate assistance to vulnerable populations — from Africa to Latin America — and to double support for food safety to over $1 billion so that we are giving people the tools they need to lift themselves out of poverty.  We will also support the United Nations and World Bank as they coordinate the rapid assistance necessary to prevent humanitarian catastrophe.”

“…this is not just charity.” (It’s not charity at all, charity is voluntary giving, not being forced by government to give up one’s money through taxation in order for that money to be given others.  Government assistance to anyone is not charity at all, it is compulsory legal thievery.)

“We’re going to have to be proactive in shaping events…”

“But we also discussed coordinated actions on a range of issues:  how we could reduce the nuclear threat; how we could forge a coordinated response to North Korea’s planned missile launch; how we can turn back terrorism and stabilize Afghanistan; how we can protect our planet from the scourge of climate change.” (in other words: warmongering…more unjust foreign military interventions, and more regulations on free enterprise)

“…that is how we will advance and uphold our ideals (whose ideals?) in the months and years to come…”

“The challenges of the 21st century cannot be met without collective action.”

and in his answers to press:

“…the market is the most effective mechanism for creating wealth and distributing resources to produce goods and services that history has ever known, but that it goes off the rail sometimes; that if it’s completely unregulated, that if there are no thoughtful frameworks to channel the creative energy of the market, that it can end up in a very bad place.”

“…We talked about a whole range of other issues related to, for example, energy, and how important it is for the United States to lead by example in reducing our carbon footprint…”