According to Lenin, Marxism is comprised of three main source components:
...materialist philosophy, critique of political economy and socialist politics.
Specifically, the materialism Obama does seem to have- Based upon his own spending habits, to say nothing about his wife's shopping sprees. Interestingly enough, though, this is not the materialism Marx/Lenin spoke of.
Prosveshcheniye No. 3 said:
The main achievement was dialectics, i.e., the doctrine of development in its fullest, deepest and most comprehensive form, the doctrine of the relativity of the human knowledge that provides us with a reflection of eternally developing matter.
While Obama does seem to go for the eternally evolving bit, the fact of the matter is he's not fond of revealing information or "knowledge" about anything. Moreover, he has not really done anything that contradicts himself; in other words, he does not believe in the Marx philosophy of contradiction, E.G. dialectics.
Obama, when on the campaign trail, has done quite a bit of economical criticism. Not so much this this time around, because the reigns have been firmly in his hands, but the critique is still there. Marxist critique literally looks like this:
Prosveshcheniye No. 3 said:
Capital, created by the labour of the worker, crushes the worker, ruining small proprietors and creating an army of unemployed. In industry, the victory of large-scale production is immediately apparent, but the same phenomenon is also to be observed in agriculture, where the superiority of large-scale capitalist agriculture is enhanced, the use of machinery increases and the peasant economy, trapped by money-capital, declines and falls into ruin under the burden of its backward technique. The decline of small-scale production assumes different forms in agriculture, but the decline itself is an indisputable fact.
By destroying small-scale production, capital leads to an increase in productivity of labour and to the creation of a monopoly position for the associations of big capitalists. Production itself becomes more and more socialhundreds of thousands and millions of workers become bound together in a regular economic organismbut the product of this collective labour is appropriated by a handful of capitalists. Anarchy of production, crises, the furious chase after markets and the insecurity of existence of the mass of the population are intensified.
I.E., the true Marxist looks to undermine Capitalism- But by destroying large companies, industries, etc., and boosting the individual worker and small business. Obama, however, has done just the opposite; enacting laws that make it harder to be in business for oneself.
The claim that Obama is a Marxist is looking shaky.
Now we move on to socialist politics. There can be no doubt that Obama is socialist, correct? Well, let's see what the Marxist ideology has to say about this aspect.
Prosveshcheniye No. 3 said:
The genius of Marx lies in his having been the first to deduce from this the lesson world history teaches and to apply that lesson consistently. The deduction he made is the doctrine of the class struggle.
People always have been the foolish victims of deception and self-deception in politics, and they always will be until they have learnt to seek out the interests of some class or other behind all moral, religious, political and social phrases, declarations and promises. Champions of reforms and improvements will always be fooled by the defenders of the old order until they realise that every old institution, how ever barbarous and rotten it may appear to be, is kept going by the forces of certain ruling classes. And there is only one way of smashing the resistance of those classes, and that is to find, in the very society which surrounds us, the forces which canand, owing to their social position, mustconstitute the power capable of sweeping away the old and creating the new, and to enlighten and organise those forces for the struggle.
Marxs philosophical materialism alone has shown the proletariat the way out of the spiritual slavery in which all oppressed classes have hitherto languished. Marxs economic theory alone has explained the true position of the proletariat in the general system of capitalism.
Now, Obama has certainly set in motion what needs to take place for there to be "class struggle;" there is no denying that! However, he does not encourage criticism of his policies- Marxism encourages the seeking out of ulterior motives and "interest of class" behind everything. A true Marxist holds the philosophy and theory of Marx above everything; but Obama has lifted himself to the messianic, not Marx.
Obama, in short, is no Marxist. So what is he? Some might say that he is Socialist, and indeed, he has done things which can be described as "socialist." However, when one looks at the more common definition of socialism:
Socialist Labor Party said:
Socialism is the collective ownership by all the people of the factories, mills, mines, railroads, land and all other instruments of production.
Socialism means production to satisfy human needs, not as under capitalism, for sale and profit.
All persons elected to any post in the socialist government, from the lowest to the highest level, will be directly accountable to the rank and file. They will be subject to removal at any time that a majority of those who elected them decide it is necessary.
Obama does not want accountability- Not for those who support him, and certainly not for himself. He does not want a system wherein he is able to be removed anytime a majority decides; he has enough issues with the concept of free elections four years apart! Obama's not working for a true socialist society...
Socialist Labor Party said:
Socialism does not mean government or state ownership. It does not mean a closed party-run system without democratic rights. Those things are the very opposite of socialism.
If Obama is not Marxist
OR Socialist, but seems to implement certain aspects of both, what the heck is he?!
It was suggested that he is Facist, so let us look at that claim.
AFM said:
MERITOCRACY OR TIMOCRACY:
The degree of which men and women manifest honor and merit in the service of their country is determinant of their place in civil society.
SACRIFICE:
"Fascism now and always believes in holiness and heroism, that is to say in actions influenced by no economic motive, direct or indirect."
NATIONALISM:
"Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state." OR "Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country!"
COOPERATION OR STATE CORPORATISM:
Though private property and free trade must be upheld and defended, business ultimately serves the greater good of the state, and must be guided towards JUST and NOBLE purposes.
VIRTUE:
If there is such a thing as "good" and "evil", if there is such a thing as a right and a wrong way, is the right way always the popular way, the way a majority votes? No! Usually not. The majority votes the easy way. The path of least resistance, and is thus exploited by the current elite. Fascism alone has the moral courage to do the right thing. For the state, no matter what. Above all a Fascist believes in virtue and will thus tell you the truth, and not just what you want to hear! Truth, courage, integrity!
It would seem, by these points of platform, that Obama fails at Fascism as well. He does not believe in private property or free trade- He has stated his opinions on free trade many times in the past, as well as in his books. He appointed not one, but two SCotUS judges who have publicly stated that the concept of "private property" is "an antiquated notion." Moreover, he fails the "sacrifice" section, because he is nearly entirely motivated by economic wants and desires.
So... What is he?
Communist is the next cry, usually, so we'll look at that.
Alia Hoyt said:
...communism is the idea that everyone in a given society receives equal shares of the benefits derived from labor. Communism is designed to allow the poor to rise up and attain financial and social status equal to that of the middle-class landowners. In order for everyone to achieve equality, wealth is redistributed so that the members of the upper class are brought down to the same financial and social level as the middle class. Communism also requires that all means of production be controlled by the state. In other words, no one can own his or her own business or produce his or her own goods because the state owns everything.
Communism took the ideas of Marxism and Socialism and instituted an additional feature: State control, an element of Fascism. The idea, of course, is that the state itself is fair and balanced and wonderful, giving equally to everyone. However, to achieve that dream... Well, I'm getting ahead of myself. Here are the three phases for Communism:
Alia Hoyt said:
- A revolution must take place in order to overthrow the existing government.
- A dictator or elite leader (or leaders) must gain absolute control over the proletariat. During this phase, the new government exerts absolute control over the common citizen's personal choices -- including his or her education, religion, employment and even marriage. Collectivization of property and wealth must also take place.
- Achievement of utopia. This phase has never been attained because it requires that all non-communists be destroyed in order for the Communist Party to achieve supreme equality. ...[E]veryone would happily share property and wealth, free from the restrictions that class-based systems require. The government would control all means of production so that the one-class system would remain constant, with no possibility of any middle class citizens rising back to the top.
There are also tenets of a Communist society. See if you recognize any of these in some of the things which have been enacted over the past term:
- Central banking system
- Government controlled education
- Government controlled labor
- Government ownership of transportation and communication vehicles
- Government ownership of agricultural means and factories
- Total abolition of private property
- Property rights confiscation
- Heavy income tax on everyone
- Elimination of rights of inheritance
- Regional planning
While Obama does not even fit the idea of Communism to a T, it is a far closer fit than claiming a pure Marxist, Socialist or even Fascist stance.