Ron Paul: Obama Is Another Corporatist, Not a Socialist
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Ron Paul: Obama Is Another Corporatist, Not a Socialist

  1. #1

    Exclamation Ron Paul: Obama Is Another Corporatist, Not a Socialist

    So fascist may be a better title for Obama than socialist.

    Ron Paul: Obama Is Another Corporatist, Not a Socialist

    Ron Paul: Obama Is Another Corporatist, Not a Socialist | Print | E-mail
    Written by Steven Yates
    Tuesday, 13 April 2010 11:59

    The idea that President Barack Obama is a socialist is popular among many conservatives; all of us have seen automobiles sporting the bumper sticker reading, Don’t Blame Me; I Didn’t Vote For the Socialist — obviously referring to Obama. Not so fast, says, of all people, Ron Paul (R-Texas).

    Addressing the Southern Republican Leadership Conference during its third day, Dr. Paul told the audience, “The question has been raised about whether or not our president is a socialist…. I am sure there are some people here who believe it. But in the technical sense, in the economic definition of a what a socialist is, no, he's not a socialist.”

    Dr. Paul continued, “He's a corporatist. And unfortunately we have corporatists inside the Republican party and that means you take care of corporations and corporations take over and run the country.”

    What he means, and whether or not he is right, depends on what we mean by socialism and what by corporatism. In its classical usages (classical here meaning within classical Marxist usage and its derivatives) socialism means: an economic system that is abolishing or has abolished the private ownership of the means of production in favor of public (i.e., state) ownership, with all wealth shared.

    In this classical sense, Obama is clearly not a socialist. Nothing he has done, not even in the recent healthcare bill, seems aimed at abolishing private ownership of the means of production.

    Much of what he has done since taking office, however, has vastly increased government control over the means of production — e.g., when he personally demands that a CEO step down (think General Motors). Is this what we mean by corporatism? Ron Paul described the healthcare bill as containing many corporatist provisions: “We see [corporatism] in the financial institutions, we see it in the military-industrial complex. And now we see it in the medical-industrial complex.”

    Corporatism is often seen as monopolistic capitalism in which business and governmental elites partner with each other. This isn't too far from the mark. Business elites possess what we might call the power of the purse — they have the money. Governmental elites possess what we might call the power of the sword — they write the rules. We might debate which one, if either, is truly dominant since both scratch each other’s backs and benefit handsomely from having thwarted both genuine marketplace competition and a truly open political and electoral process.

    Corporatism hardly began with the current administration, of course, or its predecessor. In an article published in 2002, which deserves far more attention than it has ever received, commentator Robert Locke outlined the basic ideas behind corporatism and traced some of its history and influence.

    According to Locke, corporatism “has the outward form of capitalism in that it preserves private ownership and private management, but with a crucial difference: as under socialism, government guarantees the flow of material goods, which under true capitalism it does not.” (Emphasis in original.) Corporatism does not really trust the marketplace to provide. It manipulates the marketplace “to deliver goods to political constituencies [which now include] basically everyone from economic elites to ordinary consumers.”

    What has made corporatism so tempting is thus not hard to see. Locke explains further:

    Big business, whatever its casuists at the Wall Street Journal editorial page may pretend, likes big government, except when big government gets greedy and tries to renegotiate the division of spoils. Although big business was an historic adversary of the introduction of the corporatist state, it eventually found common ground with it. The first thing big business has in common with big government is managerialism. The technocratic manager, who deals in impersonal mass aggregates, organizes through bureaucracy, and rules through expertise without assuming personal responsibility, is common to both. The second thing big business likes about big government is that it has a competitive advantage over small business in doing business with it and negotiating favors. Big government, in turn, likes big business because it is manageable; it does what it is told. It is much easier to impose affirmative action or racial sensitivity training on AT&T than on 50,000 corner stores. This is why big business has become a key enforcer of political correctness.

    Locke traces the history of corporatism to the idea that the marketplace is not really self-regulating, since the "big boys" will not "play fair"; hence economic activity requires outside management, be it through regulation, subsidy, or control over the monetary system. The first major corporatist enterprise of the 20th century was none other than the Federal Reserve, a private corporation that is embedded within the federal government — as its own literature states, “independent within the government.”

    Then, in the 1930s, the (Fed-caused) Great Depression further eroded confidence in the marketplace to deliver material goods without government intervention. That period gave us Social Security and Medicare: the beginnings of the intergeneration redistribution of wealth we have been stuck with ever since. As political constituencies both large and small have grown, the corporatist edifice has grown along with them, often with the full support of the mainstream voting public both liberal and conservative.

    The Left likes corporatism for three reasons, says Locke: (1) it satisfies government’s (i.e., politicians’) lust for power; (2) its machinery makes redistribution of wealth to favored constituencies possible; and (3) it enables politicians to accomplish this while remaining personally affluent.

    The Right likes corporatism for three different reasons, says Locke: (1) big business can achieve enormous profits, capitalist-style, while unloading some of the cost and risk onto government; (2) the merger of business and government enables those at the helm of big business to influence government in ways favorable to themselves (e.g., thwarting true competition, which big business has seen as a nuisance since John D. Rockefeller, Sr. was heard to pronounce competition a “sin”); and (3) this merger seems able to minimize or dissipate whatever social unrest its policies create in the masses.

    Locke provides several examples of corporatist endeavors besides the Federal Reserve. Some are even more obvious in today’s post-bailout climate: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the insurance industry generally (especially evident given Obama/Pelosi-care!), real estate, federal financing of scientific research, agricultural price-supports, and many others; we would probably want to add to our list so-called "free trade" agreements (e.g., NAFTA, CAFTA, etc.).

    The point to all this is that if we going to criticize the Obama administration’s economic policies, we need to be sure we have its economics right — and if we are paying attention, we see far more continuity with past administrations than we do change. There have been no fundamental changes, despite candidate-Obama’s mantra about “change you can believe in.” (For this reason, many on the Left have grown as uneasy with this administration as any Tea Partier, even if for different reasons.)

    Isn’t corporatism just a form of fascism? Yes and no. The most famous quote attributed to Italy’s Mussolini (the quote appears to be apocryphal) is that “fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power.” Under fascism, unlike socialism, government did not assume ownership over corporations but controlled them, allowing nominal ownership. I would submit that if there is a difference, it is that in the English-speaking world more of a partnership between the two has emerged, and over a longer period of time — perhaps born of the quiet realization that many in the upper echelons of the corporate domain are as interested in power as any statist authoritarian has ever been, and that the two can achieve far more working together than they can separately. Working separately will, in fact, ensure that the two will butt heads more often than not.

    Corporatism may be thought of as “soft fascism,” which is oligarchic but not totalitarian. Part of its genius has been to win acceptance from the voting public through (1) having created a mass and organizing it into groups, or political constituencies; (2) delivering goods to those constituencies; (3) all the while creating a sense of security for them if they play ball; and (4) (although the idea calls for a separate article) corporatism has sponsored “public schools,” further encouraging its acceptance through consistent ratcheting down of education not just about our founding principles but absent clear thinking about economics and even personal finance, while ratcheting up the current mixture of pop culture and job skills training (e.g., school-to-work, no-child-left-behind, etc.). The vast majority of teenagers educated this way will not question the system; the few who do can be safely marginalized.

    Ron Paul has been the one Republican operating clearly outside the corporatist mindset. This might help explain why he and his supporters have been marginalized within the Republican Party, the mainstream of which serves corporatist interests. There are probably Democrats who are not corporatists. Dennis Kucinich might be an example.

    All of which brings us to the question: If corporatism really is the best name for the economic system currently throttling America, can it be fought — and perhaps undermined? Of course, we have to identify it first. Most people have never heard the term. Then we might argue that corporatism is, in the long run, unsustainable: Social Security and Medicare, those two 1930s corporatist standbys, are both technically broke and on the federal equivalent of life support. As Baby Boomers retire, the situation will grow progressively worse! It was not without reason that Keynes said, "In the long run, we are all dead." Corporatism incorporates Keynesian economics and encourages massive spending by both government and consumers as the key to rising prosperity without looking far into the future. When people will not spend, generally because they cannot spend, there is an incentive to get money into their pockets; otherwise the economy falls into crisis. Spending money one does not have creates debt. The temptation is to monetize government debt. The result is the slow erosion of our dollars' purchasing power. The dollar in fact has lost 10 percent of its value in just the past year. Massive and still-growing indebtedness has the potential to be our downfall and the downfall of corporatism.

    These considerations are all imminently rational, but the corporatist edifice we now live under has been built up under such a long period of time — several generations, in fact — that dismantling it all at once would precipitate chaos. Moreover, the public is now accustomed to it. They fear the loss of their safety nets, and might argue reasonably that they spent their lives paying into Social Security and are now entitled to benefit from it. Healthcare costs are indeed astronomical; moreover, without Medicare (or some type of government aid), they would be priced beyond the reach of many elderly people. These are the main reasons Social Security and Medicare are politically untouchable, and that any politician proposing to abolish them would be rejected immediately by the majority of voters except for libertarians.

    This issue is much larger than Obama. One way or another, he'll be gone in a few years. The problems will remain, and would have worsened even if McCain had been elected in 2008. How do we “turn back the clock”? Can we?

    Robert Locke offers these troubling thoughts:

    With these two different kinds of trust [in the self-regulating nature of the marketplace, and its ability to deliver material goods] gone, corporatism becomes not only worthwhile, but necessary. Crucially, it becomes psychologically necessary, independently of whether government can deliver on its promises, because people instinctively turn to government as their protector.

    Anyone who is serious about getting rid of corporatism must explain how they are going to restore these two kinds of trust or persuade people to live without them. In particular, it is almost certainly useless, as verified by the fact that government has grown under every postwar Republican administration, to try to nibble away at big government without renegotiating the social contract that underlies it. If we don't have a plan to renegotiate this social contract, we must face the fact that the electorate will demand that it be respected
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  3. #2
    mojo Guest
    you say tomato I say tomAto..........either way and what ever you want to call him he is BAD for America!!

  4. #3
    Nothing new here. Ron Paul is on the right side of the Constitution -- he's just on the wrong side of the 'bread and circuses' crowd. That this can be treated as news underscores, once again, just how undereducated and uninformed most Americans are.

    It's unfortunate that you can't post this in a place where those who need to read it will. They don't read.
    People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome.--River Tam

  5. #4
    One of the few times I have had to say I ADAMANTLY disagree with Ron Paul...

    Obama is a Socialist: In His Words...
    YouTube - Obama is a Socialist: In His Words

    YouTube - Obama - thinks Socialism is neighborly!

    Weimar Republic:
    Weimar Republic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The First Fundamental Principle of Constitutional Interpretation: Your Rights Don't Come From Government:

    Socialism, Marxism, Communism & Obama:
    Socialism, Marxism, Communism & Obama

    Does Barack Obama Believe in Socialism, Marxism, and Communism? Does "CHANGE" represent Barack Obama's long term goal of "ISM" for the US? Our Future?

    Why would I ask these questions? This is why:

    Part 1 - Obama's Ties to Socialism, Marxism, and Communism

    1. Obama's Father Wrote About Socialism
    - His father wrote a paper called "Problems With Our Socialism" that advocates 100% taxation of the rich, communal ownership of land and the forced confiscation of privately controlled land.
    Source: Greg Ransom, PrestoPundit

    2. Obama's Mother Was a "Communist Sympathizer" - " Friends describe her as a "fellow traveler", that is, a communist sympathizer, from her youth, according to a March 27, 2007, Chicago Tribune report" Source: Spengler, Asia Times "The values she taught me continue to be my touchstone when it comes to how I go about the world of politics - Barack Obama" Source: Tim Jones, Chicago Tribune

    3. Obama's Parents Met in a Russian Class (Back then it was the Communist USSR)- "His mother, Stanley Ann Dunham (her father always wanted a son), was white and just 18 when they met in a Russian class" Source: Sharon Cohen, St Louis Times

    4. Obama's Teen Mentor was Frank Marshall Davis (a known CPUSA member)
    - "...through Frank Marshall Davis, Obama had an admitted relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his poetry and getting advice on his career path. But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just Frank." Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in the Media "Kathryn Takara of the University of Hawaii, who wrote a dissertation on the life of Frank Marshall Davis, confirming Davis was a significant influence on Obama when the senator attended Punahou prep school in Hawaii from 1975 to 1979" Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Hawaii and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)

    5. Obama's Brother Roy and Cousin Odinga are Marxists - "Barack Obama's older brother, Abongo "Roy" Obama. He is a Luo activist. militant Muslim and a Marxist." Source: Barbara Busby, “The person who made me proudest of all,” Obama wrote, “was Roy Source: Bill Sammon, The Examiner "Odinga is a Marxist who reportedly has made a pact with a hard-line Islamic group in Kenya to establish Shariah courts throughout the country" Source: Invenstor's Business Daily

    6. Obama Attended Socialist Conferences at Cooper Union - "He went to socialist conferences at Cooper Union and African cultural fairs in Brooklyn and started lecturing his relatives until they worried he'd become "one of those freaks you see on the streets around here." Source: H Kennedy, NY Daily News

    7. Obama Was Hand Picked by Alice Palmer to Succeed Her in the Illinois State Senate - "Nine years before Palmer picked Obama to be her successor, she was the only African-American journalist to travel to the Soviet Union to attend the 27th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, according to an article Palmer wrote in the CPUSA newspaper, People's Daily World, June 19, 1986." Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)

    8. Obama's Run for the Illinois State Senate was Launched by a Fundraiser Organized at Bill Ayers' and Bernardine Dorhn's Chicago Home - Ayers and Dorhn are former terrorists from the Weather Underground who's SDS organization received financial contributions from the CPUSA. "Obama's run for the Illinois state Senate was launched by a fundraiser organized at Ayers' and Dorhn's Chicago home by Alice Palmer. Palmer had named Obama to succeed her in the state Senate in 1995, when she decided to run for a U.S. congressional seat." Source: Jim Corsi, WorldNetDaily based on Communism in Chicago and the Obama Connection (Cliff Kincaid and Herbert Romerstein)

    9. Obama Had a Close Relationship with the "Anti-Capitalist" Group ACORN - "Obama has had an intimate and long-term association with the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (Acorn)...Chicago Acorn appears to have played a major role in Obama’s political advance...Acorn’s radical agenda sometimes shifts toward “undisguised authoritarian socialism.” Source: Stanley Kurtz, National Review

    10. Obama Attended Several Meetings with the Democratic Socialists in Chicago and Was even Endorsed by Them - "
    Obama’s socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat. Later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the “champions” of “Chicago’s democratic left” and a long-time socialist activist. Obama’s stint as a “community organizer” in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed and backed him, has been generally ignored." Source: Cliff Kincaid, Accuracy in the Media "In its broadest sense, democratic socialism could refer to any attempts to bring about socialism through democratic means as opposed to violent insurrection." Source: Wikipedia

    11. Obama Endorsed Openly Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders
    Video "
    "Sanders is the first self-described socialist to be elected to the U.S. Senate." Source: Wikipedia

    12. Many Obama Supporters Idolize Che Guervara - Obama Campaign Worker Seen With Communist Cuba Flag Depicting Marxist Che Guevara on it. Source: David Benzion, Lone Star Times

    "Guevara later served as Minister of Industries, in which post he helped formulate Cuban socialism...Guevara played a key role in bringing to Cuba the Soviet nuclear-armed ballistic missiles that precipitated the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962. During an interview with the British newspaper Daily Worker some weeks later, he stated that, if the missiles had been under Cuban control, they would have fired them against major U.S. cities." Source: Wikipedia

    More "Che" fans from Obama's site:

    13. The Communist Party USA Endorsed Obama -"Our Party actively supported Obama during the primary election." Source: CPUSA Website (This line has since been removed from the CPUSA website) - Search for this quote. Also see THIS post on the CPUSA blog...

    Then we have this blog on (Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama):

    From the blog: "Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama - This group is for self-proclaimed Marxists/Communists/Socialists for the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency...We support Barack Obama because he knows what is best for the people! Source: Marxists/Socialists/Communists for Obama Source: Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily

    14. Obama's Church is Rooted in Liberation Theology which is Rooted in Marxism - " The vision statement of Trinity United Church of Christ is based upon the systematized liberation theology" Source: TUCC Website "Simply put, Liberation Theology is an attempt to interpret Scripture through the plight of the poor. It is largely a humanistic doctrine. It started in South America in the turbulent 1950's when Marxism was making great gains among the poor because of its emphasis on the redistribution of wealth, allowing poor peasants to share in the wealth of the colonial elite and thus upgrade their economic status in life." Source:

    15. Obama's Opening Band - The band that opened for Obama's Oregon rally (The Decemberists) is named after an 1825 revolt over the Imperial Russian succession (Decembrist revolt) that Meloy views as an attempted communist revolution. They also open many of their shows by playing the Soviet National Anthem... Source: Jeff Johnson, OneNewsNow Source: Jerome R. Corsi, WorldNetDaily Source: Oleg Atbashian, Pajamasmedia

    The Decemberists performing the Soviet National Anthem:

    Watch this press briefing by America's Survival on Obama's Communist Connections Presented by Cliff Kincaid, Herbert Romerstein, Trevor Loudon, and Max Friedman

    Part 2 - Barack and Michelle's Socialist, Marxist, and Communist Quotes

    "They don't want the whole pie," she told the women. "There are some who do, but most Americans feel blessed just being able to thrive a little bit. But that is becoming even more out of reach. If we don't wake up as a nation with a new kind of leadership, for how we want this country to work, then we won't get universal health care. The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more."
    - Michelle Obama

    "So we're going to provide a $4,000 tuition credit, every student, every year, but, students, you're going to have to give back something in return. You're going to have to participate in community service. You're going to have to work in a homeless shelter, or a veteran's home, or an underserved school, or join the Peace Corps." - Barack Obama

    So he wants to make "every student, every year" an employee of the state? And is this another step towards socializing higher education?

    "And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns, or religion, or antipathy to people who aren’t like them, or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiments as a way to explain their frustrations" - Barack Obama

    Karl Marx famously claimed that religion was an opiate of the masses. He was explaining his view that the wealthy bourgeoise cynically used religion as a device to keep the poor, simple proletariat happy in their misery and squalor so they would find it immoral to rise up and overthrow their capitalists oppressors.

    "We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK,"
    - Barack Obama

    Hmm, is this quote for Marxist or Fascist? I can't decide...

    "It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation." - Barack Obama

    "The great task before our founders was putting into practice the ideal that government could simultaneously serve liberty and advance the common good. and Government, he believed, had an important role to play in advancing our
    common prosperity." - Barack Obama

    Collective? Common prosperity? "the ultimate goal of socialism is common prosperity" Source: Yang Chungui, The Marxist

    "I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets." - Barack Obama (Dreams of My Father)

    "Political discussions, the kind at Occidental had once seemed so intense and purposeful, came to take on the flavor of the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union" - Barack Obama (Dreams of My Father)

    Nothing more to say here...

    "Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness." - Barack Obama

    No, not because it would increase revenue, but for "fairness". Yes that's right...punish success...

    Part 3 - Obama's Platform

    Comparing Barack Obama to Self Described Socialist Bernie Sanders on socialism related policies:

    Barack Obama (
    Self Described Socialist Bernie Sanders (
    Favors topic 5:
    More federal funding for health coverage
    (-3 points on Economic scale) Strongly Favors topic 5:
    More federal funding for health coverage
    (-5 points on Economic scale) Strongly Opposes topic 6:
    Privatize Social Security
    (-5 points on Economic scale) Strongly Opposes topic 6:
    Privatize Social Security
    (-5 points on Economic scale) Strongly Favors topic 11:
    Make taxes more progressive
    (-5 points on Economic scale) Strongly Favors topic 11:
    Make taxes more progressive
    (-5 points on Economic scale)

    Barack Obama was rated as the #1 most liberal senator in 2007 (even ahead of Self-Proclaimed Socialist Bernie Sanders!) - " Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was the most liberal senator in 2007, according to National Journal's 27th annual vote ratings." Source: Brian Friel, Richard E. Cohen and Kirk Victor, National Journal

    YouTube- Capitalism vs Socialism

    More at...

    "The people never give up their liberties, but under some delusion." - Edmund Burke

  6. #5
    Whether he falls in the camp of a fascist of a socialist the one thing for sure is he is not a patriot and he is an enemy of our constitution and the Republic our founding fathers fought to give us.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

Similar Threads

  1. Supreme court case pending???
    By festus in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: 01-25-2010, 09:03 PM
  2. E-mail I received concerning Orly Taitz
    By festus in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-18-2010, 06:02 PM
  3. Is Obama A Racist?
    By Tea For One in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-26-2009, 02:51 PM
  4. Wikipedia says Obama born in Kenya
    By festus in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-05-2009, 01:17 AM
  5. Don’t Believe Obama!
    By festus in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 09-16-2008, 04:18 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts