Obama a 'socialist'?

October 30, 2008
Fred Hutchison, RA analyst

Is Barack Obama a socialist?

Well, yes and no. If you mean by that what Americans used to call "creeping socialism" and the Brits called Fabian socialism, yes, Obama is definitely that. Creeping socialism and Fabian socialism is a movement towards socialism by gradual democratic means.

The pace of the creep towards socialism which Obama will call for as president will be determined by 1) how far to the left he actually is on the political spectrum — a secret known only to God, 2) how much cooperation he gets from the liberal-Democratic Congress, 3) the public popularity he enjoys, and 4) the political winds of the day. We can say with confidence that Obama is very sensitive to the prevailing political winds. No doubt a future political biographer will tell the Obama story as a sailor skillfully steering according to the shifting winds.

The Earmarks of creeping socialism are increasing government regulation of business, an increasingly graduated income tax, rapidly increasing government spending, and an increasing number of government social engineering projects. Obama's record and public utterances show that he supports all these things — except when the shifting political winds of are blowing contrary to these purposes.

What is socialism?

Tidy-minded political political philosophers define socialism as government ownership and management of business and the means of production. Government regulation of business is not full socialism, but regulation can be a serious step in the direction of full socialism.

In the present crisis, the government has bought preferred stock in banks, acquired huge blocks of bad mortgages from Fanny Mae, and taken over the management of AIG, a gigantic insurance company. If the government gives up these acquisitions when the crisis has passed, it is not socialism. If the government greedily hangs on to these treasures, it is socialism.

Is Obama another Clement Attlee?

Clement Attlee, British Prime Minister (1945-1951) nationalized the steel industry, and mines, railways, canals, cable, wireless, electricity, and gas. He also nationalized medicine and insurance and rationed food. By 1951, 20% of the British economy was in government hands. Attlee was a socialist.

Obama said — or seemed to say — that the socialization of medicine would be the first thing he would do as president, but because his positions are reinterpreted or revised every other week, he may yet renege on this policy. Socializing medicine in America will require political courage, and it is not clear from his record that Obama has it.

Apart from medicine, what else might Obama be tempted to nationalize? Since AIG, America's largest insurance company, is now in government hands, Obama might be tempted to nationalize insurance. He might establish permanent government ownership of Fannie May and other parts of the mortgage industry.

Obama might also restore the "Fairness Doctrine" of the FCC which had been used to silence the conservative voice. Since President Reagan abolished the Fairness Doctrine in 1985, conservative talk radio and Fox News have been a thorn in the side of liberal Democrats and a thorn in the side of Barack Obama — in contrast to the uncritical praise of Obama by the mainstream media, which was not much affected by the fairness doctrine.

Is Obama like Attlee in foreign policy?

Atlee closed down the British Empire very rapidly, even for the colonies which were not ready for independence.

After the partition of India, millions died. Atlee betrayed the new state of Israel by pulling out British troops and handing Israel over to the safekeeping of the United Nations, which proved to be Israel's least reliable friend.

Is Obama likely to adopt policies like this? Yes.

One of the few policies that he has consistently stated that he will pull our troops out of Iraq according to a rigid time table, whether or not Iraq is ready to defend itself and maintain social stability.

Will Obama protect Israel? He says he will, but as old Scotsmen like to say, "I hae me doots" (I have my doubts).

During the primaries, Obama said he wants to personally talk to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, without preconditions. He has, of course, changed his position on this many times as he sails according to the prevailing winds. However, considering that Ahmadinejad has frequently promised to destroy Israel, the fact that Obama would at any time consider giving Ahmadinejad the honor and legitimacy of a personal presidential visit suggests that Obama is less than zealous about defending Israel.

Does the fact that Obama's father was partly Arab and a Muslim influence Obama's attitude towards Israel? I don't know. But perhaps Obama's friend, the pro-terrorist professor Rashid Khalidi, knows the answer. Rashid's organization "mourns the establishment of Israel as a catastrophe." Obama sat on a board that gave a grant to Rashid's organization. Rashid was a fundraiser for Obama's political organization. A cozy arrangement indeed. These men are friends.

Now then, is Obama going to fight terrorists and defend Israel? I hae me doots.

Is Obama a Marxist?

We only know three things on this subject: (1) As a youth and a young man, Obama had two mentors, both of whom were Marxists — Frank Marshall Davis, and The Reverend Wright. (2) As a young man, Obama was influenced by the writings of the Marxist Saul Alinski. (3) Obama periodically makes comments that, to my ears, have a faintly Marxist ring such as "economic justice," "coalitions for redistributive change," "spread the wealth," and a comparison of the unsegregated fifties America with Nazi Germany.

There are many kinds of socialism, and Marxism is one. Therefore, Marxist ideas might well play a part in the development of a young socialist such as the young Obama plausibly might have been.

© Fred Hutchison