Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

What the Heck IS Obama?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In response to the OP, I found a quote from Ayn Rand that seems remarkably apt in this situation.

"It is true that the welfare-statists are not socialists, that they never advocated or intended the socialization of private property, that they want to 'preserve' private property--with government control of its use and disposal. But that is the fundamental characteristic of fascism."
Link to post
Share on other sites
Marxist implies an epistemology and metaphysics.

Not really, no. Marxism only really addresses politics and social philosophy.

EDIT: Let me correct myself, it takes a clear stance on atheism, but I see no ethics or epistemology

Edited by Black Wolf
Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me correct myself, it takes a clear stance on atheism, but I see no ethics or epistemology

Marx talked about "dialectical materialism". That's a theory in epistemology. Remember how Marxists dismiss criticism as mere "bourgeois logic"? That commitment to class-based polylogism is a theory in epistemology. Marx's view that a person's ideas are caused by the system of economic production in which he lives is a theory in epistemology. Marx was an economic determinist; determinism is a theory in epistemology. Etc.

Marx criticized selfishness as evil and upheld the goodness of sacrifice for the public good. Those are ethical positions. Marx held "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." That's an ethical position. Etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think his Philosophy would look something like this.

Metaphysics: Reality is whatever I repeat enough times.

Epistemology: You can eat your cake and steal another one from whitey

Ethics: Man exists to serve others.

Politics: Give me free internet, an Xbox 360 with Gold subscription, Nike High Tops etc. or give me death.

Oh my god thats great!

You can eat your cake and steal another one from whitey! Nice. +1 to Geoff's wit attribute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the end, though, Obama is a thorough statist and collectivist, utterly hostile to the principle of individual rights. That's the fundamental. Whether he's a fascist or a socialist or a Marxist is derivative.

Damn right. The fundamental alternative to point out regarding politics is Individualism (i.e. individual rights) vs. Collectivism (i.e. violation of individual rights).

Calling him a statist is also accurate, but doesn't help much in political discussions with many people. His various premises & policies are all over the map with various "-isms" (all, except laissez-faire capitalism, of course). They are all accurate to various degrees.

I think it is best to call him a collectivist. A spineless, collectivist parasite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
One or two of those ideas was a little extreme, but all the rest are the 'wishlist' of most democrats. They have also been instituted in most other nations. Can someone please tell me how Canada even survives? They have a lot of that nonsense, how do they pay for it?

I've been wondering about this myself lately. I think it has to do with the fact that most people still just want to work and try and make a living, and just don't realize how much they're chained up to to serve everyone else. They just don't think about it. But when you point it out, people will often just spout out the usual stuff about it being good to help others etc.

It's really the incrementalism that's killing the country. Every year there's a couple more things to be regulated, a couple more taxes to be paid, a couple more social programs to be funded. But then there are times where things get freed up just a tiny bit, like our cellular telecommunications industry, and people get excited about cell phone plans lowering by a few cents. And then attribute that positivity to government...even though the same government is responsible for new taxation that will raise our television bills.

It goes back and forth by slight degrees, but inevitably in the direction of more government interference in peoples' lives. That's why it's important to get the word out about parties like Freedom Party of Canada. The problem there is that voters are so apathetic and disinterested in politics that voting is in the drain, which leaves politicians open to do whatever they want here. I don't really have much hope for this country if the current generation of 18-25 continue to threaten violence on public speakers like Ann Coulter and deny her freedom of speech due to our hate speech laws. Worst idea ever, that.

Anyways, I think America might be in a deeper mess than we are up here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So many answers that I have a tendency to agree with.

Doesn't it come down to the individual though? I don't recognize where he has any belief in the individual as the righteous and moral reality of human existence. Appears as though his whole rationality is for collectivism, groups, social justice. He's a true mystic. Pragmatist? Sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In the end, though, Obama is a thorough statist and collectivist, utterly hostile to the principle of individual rights. That's the fundamental. Whether he's a fascist or a socialist or a Marxist is derivative. That only identifies the particular form of totalitarianism he is working towards, and from the point of view of the victims -- us -- does that really matter?

I think this nails it down pretty well. He's a thorough statist who has little respect for individual rights. You can call someone an embezzler, a swindler, or a robber, but they are all thieves. This man is a thief and he believes that what you own should go to someone who is more "deserving". The fact that you worked to earn it means nothing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He's an American, yes, but not in spirit. In spirit he'd be more at home in Nazi Germany or Communist Russia. The guy is pathetic.

What does it mean to be American "in spirit"? I've always heard that expression, and never quite understood what it really means. What does it mean to be anything "in spirit"? Why is it even necessary to use that expression? I'm just curious.

Edited by 0096 2251 2110 8105
Link to post
Share on other sites
What does it mean to be American "in spirit"? I've always heard this expression, and never quite understood what it actually means. What does it mean to be anything "in spirit"? Why is it even necessary to use that expression? I'm just curious.

I take it as a reference to what Rand called "sense of life".

Link to post
Share on other sites
What does it mean to be American "in spirit"? I've always heard that expression, and never quite understood what it really means. What does it mean to be anything "in spirit"? Why is it even necessary to use that expression? I'm just curious.

At least an implicit -- sometimes explicit -- belief in individualism and the idea that pursuing your life and happiness is a good thing. It's a benevolent, life-loving and freedom loving spirit. His spirit is very down on humans and achievement. He's got a downer psychology, not a benevolent, life-loving psychology. He's a dour, pouty person. He's also a con man.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama probably views himself as a crusader for "social justice". His stock in trade is "community organizing", writ large. To understand him, look at the premises underlying the notion of "social justice" -- economic egalitarianism, progressive taxation, income redistribution, etc. He wants a greater equality of outcome, is willing to effectuate a "dictatorship of the proletariat" to achieve it, and in that sense his views are consistent with Marxism. This is basically a child's view of equality wherein unequal power is viewed as "unfair" -- which also explains his unease with the projection of American military power abroad. It isn't "fair" that a country like the United States has disproportionate power, it isn't "fair" the the rich have disproportionate wealth, etc. There is no appreciation for capitalism or American exceptionalism with Obama. Those are ideals that require an adult understanding of the world that is beyond his naive grasp.

So what is Obama? Obama is childlike in key respects. His actions reflect his immature level of understanding. I do not think that Obama is merely using "progressive" politics to effectuate some hidden agenda; he really believes the stuff that he spouts. I do think he wants to control people's choices, and his fascist tendencies flow from that.

Is he a Marxist? Probably. A fascist? Tending in that direction. A communist? Not necessarily. A statist? Certainly. A bully? Most definitely, though he doesn't see it that way. A liar? Yep. We see what he is trying to do and the misdirection he uses to accomplish it.

What accounts for all this, however -- especially the lack of thinking that alone can explain how an adult in age could be a child of the mind -- is a profound irrationality that must be rooted in a rejection of reality.

Ayn Rand had the word that I think best describes Obama: Obama is a mystic. As Ayn Rand said:

A mystic is a man who surrendered his mind at its first encounter with the minds of others. Somewhere in the distant reaches of his childhood, when his own understanding of reality clashed with the assertions of others, with their arbitrary orders and contradictory demands, he gave in to so craven a fear of independence that he renounced his rational faculty. At the crossroads of the choice between “I know” and “They say,” he chose the authority of others, he chose to submit rather than to understand, to believe rather than to think. Faith in the supernatural begins as faith in the superiority of others. His surrender took the form of the feeling that he must hide his lack of understanding, that others possess some mysterious knowledge of which he alone is deprived, that reality is whatever they want it to be, through some means forever denied to him.

From then on, afraid to think, he is left at the mercy of unidentified feelings. His feelings become his only guide, his only remnant of personal identity, he clings to them with ferocious possessiveness—and whatever thinking he does is devoted to the struggle of hiding from himself that the nature of his feelings is terror.

When a mystic declares that he feels the existence of a power superior to reason, he feels it all right, but that power is not an omniscient super-spirit of the universe, it is the consciousness of any passer-by to whom he has surrendered his own. A mystic is driven by the urge to impress, to cheat, to flatter, to deceive, to force that omnipotent consciousness of others. “They” are his only key to reality, he feels that he cannot exist save by harnessing their mysterious power and extorting their unaccountable consent. “They” are his only means of perception and, like a blind man who depends on the sight of a dog, he feels he must leash them in order to live. To control the consciousness of others becomes his only passion; power-lust is a weed that grows only in the vacant lots of an abandoned mind.

As a corollary, we can say with certainty one thing that Obama most definitely is not: an intellectual.

Edited by Seeker
Link to post
Share on other sites
One or two of those ideas was a little extreme, but all the rest are the 'wishlist' of most democrats. They have also been instituted in most other nations. Can someone please tell me how Canada even survives? They have a lot of that nonsense, how do they pay for it?

As a Canadian I think I can help answer that question.. haha. For the past 50 or 60 years while we have been instituting all of these ridiculous policies we have, much like the rest of the "civilized" world, been mooching off of the US in order to survive. The US has been the only thing keeping the world afloat and I am very interested to see what will happen once you guys fully jump on the Socialism bandwagon... my predictions are not exactly optimistic

Link to post
Share on other sites
As a Canadian I think I can help answer that question.. haha. For the past 50 or 60 years while we have been instituting all of these ridiculous policies we have, much like the rest of the "civilized" world, been mooching off of the US in order to survive. The US has been the only thing keeping the world afloat and I am very interested to see what will happen once you guys fully jump on the Socialism bandwagon... my predictions are not exactly optimistic

Well, I wouldn't be so hopeless. We do have at least one party pushing for complete freedom, Freedom Party of Canada. I also read a news article the other day about political rumours about "overhauling" our own health care payment system. Complete freedom, at least right now, is out of the question, but apparently the idea of increasing privatization has been floated - as has been more rationing and higher taxation, unfortunately. However, these ideas are based on the fact that too much money will be going to health care in the next few years due to our aging population, not out of any moral. People need to get out and start discussion about the morality of freedom, and why the current system of altruism is killing us very slowly.

Who knows? Given most Canadians' tendency to be seen as not-American or equal-to-but-opposite-than-American, this might actual cause an upswing in freedom while the US spirals down a bit (not that America's downfall is good by any means). Then all the freedom-lovers can come here and make it even more free. But I'm telling you, in a few years the time will be ripe, people will be fed-up with the system (I think many already are) and things will change, if slowly, for the better. I plan on catalyzing this process once I'm done school.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...