Marx and Obama

Posted by j_IR1776wg 10 years ago to Government
66 comments | Share | Flag

Karl thought three phases would be needed to achieve Utopia. "...Marx described three necessary phases toward achieving his idea of utopia.
•Phase 1: A revolution must take place in order to overthrow the existing government. Marx emphasized the nee­d for total destruction of the existing system in order to move on to Phase 2.
•Phase 2: 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.
•Phase 3: 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. In a Marxist utopia, everyone 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. (You can see the full text of the manifesto at this Web site.)..."

Which of the three phases do you think Obama would say we're in?
SOURCE URL: http://people.howstuffworks.com/communism1.htm


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by mdk2608 10 years ago
    Good post. To understand Obama is to understand Marx. For this reason I do not believe he will move to the middle or compromise. It is against his philosphy
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Yes since there is only token opposition from the Republican party and too few Ted Cruzes, Obama has no need to compromise.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by m1tmc 10 years ago
        Unfortunately, the Republicans have been political cowards on several issues and since our media is in collusion with the 'useful idiots', its' influence contributes to their political expediency. o is working on phase 1, but I'm more concerned with where he will land when he leaves office. UN?, ?....
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Kerryo 10 years ago
          I wasn't too worried about where he was going to land when he leaves office. I always figured he'd do something for himself (like play golf)since that's what he's been doing since he's been in office. But you make a good point. Now I have something else to worry about...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • -7
        Posted by dartagnaneb 10 years ago
        http://www.businessinsider.com/ted-cruz-...
        You mean this (^) guy? You think he's possibly part of the solution?
        What is the issue with Obama anyway? Sure he may have overstepped constitutional bound because the House of Representatives has decided to remain politically stagnant, but under the Obama administration, America is doing better in a lot of ways than it ever has been(http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/readers/2014/11/07/obama-election-republicans-gop-democrats-senate/18606217/), no thanks to any legislation passed by the republicans you think are doing anything to help advance this country. I don't know how many people here are libertarians, but as one, I find that I have the perspective to take an unbiased look at the two parties- and all of you idiots who think that because you read Ayn Rand you're now an expert on objectivism and conservative philosophy- you're wrong. When you can begin to move on from the propaganda spewed by Fox news, and quit associating Obama with any form of Marxism, you will finally be able to reach a state that others might call "reasonable."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by plusaf 10 years ago
          http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/reade... (add a space after the url and it will be clickable, btw...)

          Well, someone's definitely enjoyed the Kool-Aid... We're better off BECAUSE of Obama? You're confusing cause and effect with coincidence and serendipity and 'despite his best efforts...'

          Crediting the Recovery to Obama is silly, since there are and were so many other variables, AND any government (or Executive) prods to an economy take 12-24 months for their effects to be seen, and the "Recovery" (one of the weakest on record) started WELL after O got in office.

          imnsho, BOTH 'major political parties' are coming from the same philosophical position: the desire for Control Over Citizens, so neither the Right NOR the Left should be held blameless OR righteous in this alleged battle. They both want to control The People, just in different ways... and that's why both 'sides' are equally unacceptable to people like me.

          And you've got every right to your opinion, and so do I.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
          I don't care what others think is reasonable. They also think that, as the wolves discussing dinner plans, that consuming me is also reasonable. I am usually one of the friendlier people in the Gulch and am more tolerant of trolls than I should be, but you clearly don't belong here.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Zero 10 years ago
          So Dart, just out of curiosity - exactly how far to the left does a guy have to go before he's no longer a million miles away from a Marxist.

          Just wonderin'.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by UncommonSense 10 years ago
    Good article. I noticed the article didn't mention that the League of Just Men were the group that approached KM with high-level material that was the basis for the stupid manifesto and that they wanted KM to be the spokesperson for it. And in doing so, kept the attention off of them and put any focus of anger/disgust/disagreement on KM. It's all about the deception. The devil is always in the details.

    Obama is just following what has already been planned, but it won't end with him, IMO.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Right Obama is just the latest to follow Teddy Roosevelt's lead in implementing Marx. I cant think of a President who could have read Galt's speech and meant it, not even Reagan.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • -1
        Posted by dartagnaneb 10 years ago
        Do you mean FDR? Get your facts straight before you try to be intellectual.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 10 years ago
          Putz to which facts do you refer?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by dartagnaneb 10 years ago
            In what way was Teddy Roosevelt even remotely Marxist?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 10 years ago
              Teddy Roosevelt in an article he wrote for The New York Times http://wouldyoulikeborderswiththatsocial...
              "..One is that in their actual workings the old doctrines of extreme individualism and of a purely competitive industrial system have completely broken down. Another is that if we are to grapple efficiently with the evils of to-day, it will be necessary to invoke the use of governmental power to a degree hitherto unknown in this country,..
              ... The character of the individual is vital, and yet, in order to give it fair expression, it must be supplemented by collective action through the agencies of government. ...
              "...The growth in the complexity of community life means the partial substitution of collectivism for individualism, not to destroy, but to save individualism. ..
              "...The goal is a long way off, but we are striving toward it; and the goal is not socialism, but so much of socialism as will best permit the building thereon of a sanely altruistic individualism, an individualism where selfrespect is combined with a lively sense of consideration for and duty toward others, and where full recognition of the increased need of collective action goes hand in hand with a developed instead of an atrophied power of individual action..."
              "...The supreme duty of the nation is the conservation of human resources through an enlightened measure of social and industrial justice. We pledge ourselves to work unceasingly in state and nation for:—
              Effective legislation looking to the prevention of industrial accidents, occupational diseases, overwork, involuntary unemployment, and other injurious effects incident to
              modern industry;
              The fixing of minimum safety and health standards for the various occupations, and the exercise of the public authority of state and nation, including the federal control over interstate commerce and the taxing power, to maintain such standards;
              The prohibition of child labor;
              Minimum wage standards for working women, to provide a living scale in all industrial occupations;
              The prohibition of night work for women and the establishment of an eight-hour day for women and young persons;
              One day's rest in seven for all wage workers;.."

              Karl Marx in his and Engels Communist Manifesto wrote
              "...Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

              1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

              2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

              3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

              4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

              5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

              6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

              7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

              8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

              9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

              10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc..."

              These are only a partial list of the similarities but both advocated for a strong central government to control the populace, were anti-capitalist, pro-altruistic, and anti-individual.rights. Please take the time to read both.


              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Zero 10 years ago
                Interesting comparison.

                But y'know, even among the cherry picked quotes you provide he pays homage to the individual several times - something Marx and his kind never do.

                Also, I think we 21st century OBJ's have a rosie view of America's "golden age" in the 1800's.

                A sweat shop is better than poverty - but it is still a sweat shop. Dickens' view of industrialism had a foundation of truth.

                I don't fault TR for not being AR.
                She was one of the greatest minds in history. He was just a guy trying to figure it out.

                I have never felt he was malicious, nor in truth anything less than an honorable man.

                He was no Roark, but we've had a damn sight worse many times since.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by 10 years ago
                  Teddy Roosevelt wrote "...The supreme duty of the nation is the conservation of human resources through an enlightened measure of social and industrial justice..."
                  This is pure Socialism. The self-appointed elite look at you and me as "human resources" .
                  For me, the supreme duty of the nation is to protect the lives and property of each and every citizen with equal justice for all.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
    Obama would not be so bold as to suggest we are in any of these phases, yet he is directing us with an Imperial effort in the direction. He will ultimately fail as all others before him have, because human nature cannot be changed by imperial edict. In the mean time, until critical mass is reached, many will suffer.
    Good discussion j_IR1776wg,
    O.A.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Thanks OA. Their main tactic seems to be to push through their ideas (Income tax, SS, Medicare, Obamacare, Common Core, etc.) when they are in power and struggle mightily to hold onto their gains when they are thrown out of power. So while Obama will not turn America into a Socialist Utopia, I fear that I may live long enough to witness a majority giving up their rights to vote, to own property, to live for their own sake never grasping the horror they will be unleashing upon themselves.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Kerryo 10 years ago
    Great post. Thanks!

    It made me wonder what was going on in 1848 that created the support of this manifesto? I suppose it was the large number of monarchies that were in power then. But I always have problems with the logic, which of course is replaced with emotion (hate, anger, self-pity) which justifies everything it seems. But how people can read Marx and not see that this is purely a power grab is beyond me. I see people today blindly supporting any Obama decision as if their lives depend on it. Socialists need and depend on sheep and how they can turn normally intelligent people into a galloping herd is beyond comprehension. I understand why the moochers follow, their lives truly do depend on it, but I'm talking about people that we all know who are highly "educated" otherwise intelligent people. They do all have one thing in common, though. They like to be right. They strive for power yet deny that they do.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      And thank you for your comments Kerryo. The more people we can draw into a discussion of the evils of Marx's ideas and Obama's actions, the closer we come to a critical mass needed to put the Socialists out of business in America.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Kerryo 10 years ago
        It's a strategy that we lack. Education alone isn't going to get it done. And we need to be careful in thinking that we ever actually win. It's a constant problem to manage that will never actually go away.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 10 years ago
          Socialists have gotten where they are by controlling education. However, I agree that we lack a coherent policy to achieve a complete rollback of Socialism and that vigilance must be eternal.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years ago
    I do not think we are in any of the Marxist phases named above, though we are progressing in that direction. I think that 'erosion' is probably a more accurate description than 'destruction' for what is currently occurring in the US.

    Discussions on AS have made me aware of the difference between 'top down' and 'bottom up' changes. We have inherited a system that represented the wishes of a society that lived 200 years ago, and there is sufficient inertia to that philosophy that it has not been totally destroyed. But if you ask young people today what they believe in, they will unhesitatingly endorse global warming, conservation, welfare, globalization and working in groups rather than as individuals. So we are growing our own 'bottom up' revolution to effect the destruction mentioned in Phase 1.

    Let me segue a bit on the 'working in groups' theme because I think that this is root, and overlooked. Have y'all noticed that in grammar school, kids work on projects in groups, and there is a single output (paper, project) for which the entire group receives a grade (irrespective of their degree of contribution to the project)? This continues up through college, now. I think this is a crucial step in the erosion of the individual and that it lays the groundwork for the other social themes I mentioned (global warming, conservation, etc) because it emphasizes that the group is more important than the individual.

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      Jan the absolute essence of our Constitution with its Bill of Rights and the DOI is whether the Individual as Individual should be allowed to exist in a society. Plato, Marx, and Obama not only want to deny that existence, they go further in that they want eliminate even the concept of individuality from the minds of all humans on Earth forever. My great hope is that in the face of a 100+ years of groupthink in our schools, you, I, Rand, and most of the 18,000 in the Gulch and millions more in America have not given up our individuality and that our determination will destroy Plato, Marx, and Obama forever.

      Joe
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jlc 10 years ago
        Do you really think this started 100+ years ago, Joe? When I was in school, it was all about individual accomplishment; working in groups (other than to study) was called 'cheating'.

        I agree with you, but damn - groupthink is pervasive...and really nice (young) people do not seem to even notice that this is how they assume 'one behaves'. (And one of these guys won an award for an AS themed essay once...Since he graduated from college, it has all been about 'working with the group'.)

        Jan
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 10 years ago
          Jan I did not mean to imply that the attempted destruction of the individual, as well as, the concept of the individual was a fait accompli 100+ ago years but rather the beginning of the effort to do so by the Marxists of the NEA and John Dewey.
          I took the following excerpts from this site a while ago http://www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/chronol... but it seems to be longer on that server.

          "...A quotation from “My Pedagogic Creed,” written by John Dewey in 1897, would indicate that, even at that early date, his ideas on education were radically opposed to those then current in the field of education:
          • “The only true education comes through the stimulation of the child’s powers by the demands of the social situation in which he finds himself. Through these demands, he is stimulated to act as a member of a unity, to emerge from his original narrowness of action and feeling, and to conceive of himself from the standpoint of the welfare of the group to which he belongs....
          • “We violate the child’s nature and render difficult the best ethical results by introducing the child too abruptly to a number of special studies, of reading, writing, geography, etc., out of relation to this social life.
          • “The true center of correlation on the school subjects is not science, nor literature, nor history, nor geography, but the child’s own social activities....
          "Thus, even at this early period in his teaching experience, John Dewey emphasized the predominance of the group over the individual..."

          Joe
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo