Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Ben H
Lv 4
Ben H asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 decade ago

What do you mean when you call Obama a socialist?

Before Obama took office, we already had income tax, farm subsidies (huge ones), social security, medicare/medicaid, finance and security laws, and TANF. But did you think we were a socialist nation in 2001?

If not, then you have to admit that there's a continuum between laissez-faire capitalism and government-controlled socialism.

Now Obama wants to raise income taxes to a level lower than they were at in January 2001. And he wants to regulate (not tax, no matter what Limbaugh says) carbon emissions. With policies like those, you could call him left of center or even liberal, but socialist? Are you just saying that any person advocating any policy that falls to the left of your personal political beliefs is an all-out socialist?

Update:

I think people need to realize that socialism refers to a system of government, not a political direction. If a legislator or executive makes any move to the left, that doesn't mean we live in a socialist state. It's like if I start in Seattle and walk 40 miles east, you can't call me a New Yorker. Until Obama advocates for governmental ownership and management of all the means of production, and an end to private property, I don't consider him socialist. (And no, federal bailouts of the banking or auto industry don't constitute controlling the means of production. If they did, then every administration that allowed farm subsidies to persist, including the GOP's posterboy Reagan, would be a socialist. Same goes for income tax vis a vis abolishing private property.)

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Those in government, no matter if they are on the Left or Right, are still two sides of the same coin. Both represent the capitalist class and private ownership of the means of production and distribution. When capitalist screw up the government steps in to clean up the mess through the taxpayer. We could call George Bush a socialist for bailing out the banks and other financial institutions. The term "socialist" is a overused scare tactic that no longer brings fear to most of the population. Too many people still believe that collective ownership of the means of production and distribution is something political government does considering that it was the model of the former Soviet Union. We all know Lenin was dead wrong and even Karl Marx was wrong about things as well.

    Collective ownership of production and distribution is not done by those in political power. Politicians are inept to run industries. Collective ownership is done by everyone in society who organizes along industrial lines to produce and distribute products for consumption. We could call it an industrial government of labor in which the people would elect qualified individuals (who know why and how products are made) to plan production and respond by increases or decreases to what is consumed by the populace. Political government, on the other hand, would maintain free speech, freedom of the press, religion, the right to bear arms, civil liberties, civil rights and to protect the citizenry from individuals who would do physical harm to them and be separate from the industrial government of labor unless it needs to be regulated in some form.

  • Anonymous
    5 years ago

    Being a socialist or communist has not something to do with race, with the exception of a few misguided souls. Obama has reported, in public, on various distinct events, how he will take money from others to grant to others, i.e., redistribution of income. call it what you will. Why do you link those 2 innovations with race and then attempt to greater wholesome others right into a neat little area of interest which you have labeled bigotry? i think of there are some innovations which you do not completely comprehend.

  • 1 decade ago

    NO! What people are saying is anyone which takes over the private sector, Housing,auto,pay,banks,insurance,etc.etc. Beats people like Joe the plumber down attempting to suppress freedom of speech,borrowing trillions at your expense to fund his agenda which benefits no one, hanging out with, terrorist,Black Panthers, Rev. Anti-White and the list goes on and on and on and on. I, think that's what they mean.

  • 1 decade ago

    Dear BEN H,

    Look up the defination of socialist then look at what obama is doing ,

    then you can answer your own question!

    P.S. Socialism is the process in which communisim is the result!

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Ynot!
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Take your head out of you know where it would take a book to show you all the examples, but hers is a simple one that you can understand when Hugo chavez and Fidel Castro joke about that Obama is starting to make them look too conservative i think that pretty much sums it up

  • Eric
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    He wants to advance socialism in the United States, that makes him a socialist.

    Conservatives want liberty, socialists want "Big Brother."

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Take from one class of people and give to another class of people. I don't know what they call it in your book but in mine it's called socialism. Dress up that pig any way you want but....it's still a pig.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    He is a socialist...He wants everyone to TOTALLY depend upon the government to take care of them...Are you really delusional as you sound?

  • cap
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    they dont even know why.....they are repeating the filth that is spread on the airways....

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.