Is Barack Obama a
socialist? And does it matter? Certainly the president’s most ardent
supporters publicly bridle at the suggestion.
They consider it an insult hurled at them for partisan purposes. So far as they are concerned, he, and they,
are merely compassionate progressives seeking to move the nation into the 21st
century.
Sometimes the president and
his allies characterize themselves as Social Democrats. They compare their policies with the left-of-center
parties that regularly preside over European welfare states. As they see it, it is long past due that we
catch up with the government-based programs pioneered by their heroes.
While it is true that some
European countries have nationalized economic interests in the name of
fairness, their American admirers do not propose emulating Britain’s Labor party
by taking over our steel or coal industries.
These, they say, are free to remain in the hands of their current
owners.
Generally speaking, American
leftists seem to believe that as long as the government does not literally confiscate
private property and as long as its machinery remains officially democratic,
the term socialist does not apply.
So let us take a look at history. Surely Karl Marx qualifies as a
socialist. He obviously thought of
himself that way. Indeed, he described
himself as a “scientific socialist.”
According to him, it was inevitable that a proletarian revolution would
one day confiscate capitalist holdings, then operate these for the benefit of
all.
Still, we must dig deeper
into Marx’s thinking to evaluate how he understood socialism. Central to his theory was the belief that at
nearly every stage of history two social classes contended for control over the
means of economic production. Then the
victors used their superior power to exploit the losers.
Thus, during the Middle Ages
the nobility, who owned the land, suppressed the peasants and bourgeoisie for
their own benefit. Next, after the
Industrial Revolution, it was the capitalists, who owned the factories, who did
the same vis-à-vis the proletarians.
Obama and his allies are
quick to point out that they, unlike previous ruling classes, have appropriated
no private property. They may tax the rich
so as to assist the poor, but this is not the same as seizing the means of
production.
What we must remember,
however, is that Marx spoke of “controlling” the means of production—which does
not require ownership. He who determines
what is done with property, irrespective of its legal possession, has it within
his power. He is in control despite what a certificate of ownership might say.
And isn’t this what Obama
and his co-conspirators have done with respect to health care? They make no pretense to owning this
one-sixth of our economy, yet they insist on calling nearly all of the
shots. Ergo, they get to say what
insurance policies must cover. And they
get to impose what they call the “best practices.”
Or how about what the Obama
administration is doing by way of the Environmental Protection Agency. Thanks to idiosyncratic interpretations of
the clean air and water statues, this outfit is in the process of running
coalmines out of business and will soon be dictating what private citizens can
do in their backyards.
Nor is that all. These acts of economic aggression have often been
perpetrated in the dead of night.
Contrary to promises of total transparency, bribery, intimidation and
subterfuge have been the tactics of choice in implementing what are frequently
unpopular policies.
In other words, just like
many socialist regimes, Obama’s is sliding toward totalitarianism. He and his fellow travelers intend to have
things their way no matter what Congress or the American people may think.
This is not democracy, as we
have known it. Nor is it the free market,
as we have known it. The Obama
administration and its friends in the media may use every propaganda trick at
their disposal to convince us they are not heavy-handed socialists, but if it
walks like a duck, and quacks like duck….
Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.
Professor of Sociology
Kennesaw State University
No comments:
Post a Comment