Is B. Hussein Obama a socialist?

yes or no?

No, he’s not.

Obama is a conventional bourgeois politician, dependent, like his rivals, on lavish financial support from corporate interests and the wealthy. He is not the product of any sort of genuine movement from below in American society, but rather the latest in a long line of demagogues employed to foster illusions that the big business-controlled political system can serve the interests of ordinary people.

These are the real relations that are being forged behind the scenes as Obama delivers left phrases from the podium. Those like Volcker see the Illinois senator as a useful vehicle for effecting major changes aimed not at ameliorating the conditions of life for masses of working people, but rather at securing the global interests of American finance capital.

No doubt, they believe Obama, who would be America’s first African-American president, is best suited to confront the dangers posed by continuing economic crisis and rising social tensions. Who better to demand even greater sacrifices from the working class, all in the name of national unity and “change?”

The Obama campaign is not the vehicle of a leftward movement in the United States—as proclaimed by liberal groups such as MoveOn.org and publications like The Nation. It is a preemptive attack by the ruling class against such a movement. Its function is to delude the American people and divert their growing opposition to war, economic crisis and attacks on democratic rights back into the dead-end of the Democratic Party.
It was millions in “startup money” from wealthy backers that made it possible for a very junior senator from Illinois, a man who four years ago was serving in the Illinois state legislature and unknown nationally, to become a viable presidential candidate.
Obama’s mantra of bringing everyone together may appeal to the naïve illusions of youth who are making their first political experiences, but Obama and the Wall Street bankers and media moguls who are promoting him know exactly what they are doing. Theirs is a conscious policy of blurring social and political differences and denying class divisions in a society more deeply divided along economic lines than ever before in its history.

Obama’s talk about closing the gap between “winners and losers” in the economy is entirely empty. He proposes a relative pittance in tax rebates and government spending to encourage private investment, an amount that would have no significant impact on the monumental social need that exists. In other words, the “change” constantly referred to turns out to be nothing more than “small change,” mostly nickels and dimes, for the working class, while the wealthy elite continue to pocket vast personal fortunes.

The reason for the gross disparity between reformist rhetoric and actual policy is plain: Obama, like McCain and Clinton, is a capitalist politician who defends the profit system. He will propose only those measures which are compatible with the interests of the giant corporations and billionaires who are the real rulers in American society.

The defense of the interests of working people requires a break with the corporate-controlled political framework, the two-party system, and the building of an independent mass political party that will fight for the working class, in America and worldwide, on the basis of a socialist program.

Well, it depends on what form of socialism you would use, plenty of Democratic Party members &quot:freak&quot: when they get the socialist label but they do have a tendency to support socialist democracy programs. They aren’t quite so far gone as the extreme socialist programs and I understand why they scoff that label.

i am shocked that you can spell socialist, you do not know what the word means, come to Europe and start a business, if you think obama is a socialist then you will think most of Europe is communist

What’s your definition of a socialist? There are a lot of people on YA who throw that word around without knowing what it means.

Yes. Everything he stands for would bring about an American socialist regime.

Yes he is: no need to list the middle name he doesn’t use though. Barrak Obama is a socialist in my thinking though.

No. They is no socialism in US. In other countries, yes.

Read this and judge for yourself:


This is a sad, sad state of affairs. The US was not built on the principle of taxing the snot out of people who succeed. The &quot:American Dream&quot: is being destroyed.

Is J. Sidney McCain (YES that is his REAL middle name) a fascist?

Has he called for the US government to buy and take over any industries – such as airlines or car manufacturing, such as France did ?

No, so he is not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *