«

»

May 21

Print this Post

Question for Obama Supporters #1

I’ve noticed that many people scoff at the idea of certain conservatives calling the current direction the Obama administration and the Democratic leadership are headed, “socialist.”

Personally, I think it’s a bit hypocritical for most elected Republican officials to use the term “socialist,” since the past 8 years were filled with government expansion, an idea often closely associated with “socialism.” However, I have no real problem with the semantics of applying the socilaist term to many of the policies being presented by the current administration. While they may not directly mirror the textbook definition of “socialism,” they do contain many of elements of “nationalization” and involve the intervention of the Federal government in the private sector.

It got me to thinking, if any use of the word “socialist” or “socialism”, as it relates to the current administration, will be viewed as simply a pejorative, what adjective, or what form of government, best describes the intentions of this current administration?

A few facts:

The previous administration began a policy of using the Federal government to engage in problems confronting the financial sector, part of the private sector. This policy was continued and expanded on by the current administration, including the use of Federal funds to prop up privately held financial institutions.

One sector, the automobile industry, received a lot of “hands on attention” from this current administration. Depending on where you get your news, this administration either forced one company (Chrysler) into bankruptcy or strongly suggested they consider it. Either way, the Federal government injected itself into the day-to-day business operations of a company in the private sector.

This administration and Democratic leadership has made clear its intentions to pass legislation regarding health care in the United States, specifically involving the Federal government in seeking out solutions for the uninsured or “under-insured.” Again, depending on where you get your news, this administration either wants to completly nationalize the health care industry or it seeks to establish some form of government run health care for those in need. Either way, it appears this administration and current Democratic leadership will attempt to expand the role of the Federal government in the health care indsutry.

While this may not fit your definition of “socialism,” it certainly does not fit the definition of “free-market capitalism.” My question to those sensitive to the word “socialism,” how do we describe these policies. Is there a particular term or phrase you would choose to use?

Permanent link to this article: http://geoausch.com/2009/05/21/question-for-obama-supporters-1/

2 comments

  1. futiledemocracy

    The American definition of Socialism, is bewildering at the best of times.

    1. geoausch

      That may well be the case, but it still doesn’t answer the question at play here.

      If the Obama administration’s policies are not socialism as many claim, what exaclt are they?

      It isn’t free-market capitalism and you say it isn’t socialism.

      Am I to believe that Obama’s policies are so nuanced that they rise above labels?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>