Obama Is Fundamentally Transforming America



…Conservatives need to recognize not only what they stand for, but what we, in turn, wish to return to. We must be cognizant of the principles of the American founding rejected by Progressives, and we must really understand both. The fight between progressivism and American constitutionalism is far from over, and conservatives need to know which side we’re on and why…

~ Josh Lerner

Obama talked about fundamentally transforming America and he meant it. Most of the people he has employed in high positions are socialists and even communists. He has a long list of associates who hold radical ideologies and political beliefs. They are unquestionably change agents.

Obama is adding more and more government control over every aspect of our lives from ownership of AIG and car companies, to bullying banks, and to controlling our healthcare. He is committed to class warfare. He is an Alinskyite who believes the end justifies the means, therefore, his actions mean more than his words.

His Keynesian economics of tax and spend appears to be destroying our economic and political system though we have Nobel Prize winning economist, Paul Krugman, telling us our problem is that we are not spending enough – his ideology is a topic for another article.

Obama believes in the Marxist class struggle and redistribution. This is partly why Obama ignores the will of the people and the nature of our Republic to forge ahead.

Obama strives for ever-increasing Executive control over education, property, religion, the military and the environment.

  • Obama has orchestrated a bill that assumes total control of our health.
  • He uses agencies and EO’s to bypass our constitutional framework.
  • He cedes our sovereignty through open borders policies and attempts to further his globalist ambitions by ceding our rights and resources to a global authority via treaties.
  • His green energy policy is based on a Marxist global worldview and once again exposes his dialectical materialism.
  • He has assumed federal control over rural land and waterways.
  • He believes, as we have recently heard from Panetta, that military actions involving coalitions must be determined by global authority.
  • His belief in government employment practices and health mandates superseding the individual’s conscience are evidenced by his recent fight with the Presbyterians and Orthodox/Conservative religious.
  • Finally, his support for after-birth abortion is belief in modern day eugenics.

Obama’s spiritual underpinnings derive from Black Liberation Theology which, in its extreme form, has a loose hold on Christianity and focuses on the material here-and-now. The can be seen in the rantings of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s mentor of 20 years, who sees the class struggle as the cause of the problems in society and redistribution and reparations as the answer. Obama has started a war on religion because he believes that government must have the ultimate power.

Yid with Lid had an interesting article with a simple and clear way of looking at the question of Obama’s guiding philosophy. The essay, entitled, Yes, Barack Obama is a Marxist is worth reading.

Here is an excerpt from the article –

…I use a simpler and more direct method of proving my case. When the President was running for the Illinois State Senate, not only did he run with the endorsement of a local socialist organization, but also he signed a contract with one of them, The New Party.  The party was a Marxist Political coalition. This was not guilt by association thing. Senator Obama sought out their nomination. He was successful in obtaining that endorsement which required that he sign a contract with the group…

When Obama quoted Theodore Roosevelt, he undoubtedly related to Roosevelt’s most Progressive values which did actually mean progress in Roosevelt’s time, but Obama also has a personal history rooted in Marxism which affects his perception of Roosevelt’s political philosophy. When Obama appointed justices to the Supreme Court, he made it clear that he wanted them to make decisions with the Progressive view of empathy which is a significant diversion from adherence to the strict rule of law on which our system of justice was founded. Obama takes some of his ideas from capitalism as well, but they are rooted in excessive government regulation of the free market.

Bill O’Reilly believes that Obama is a Progressive. You decide!

Following is a summary of the Marxist ideology and the most prominent government systems and while none of them can be explained adequately in such a brief space, it is a start only.

Marxism (Marx and Engel ) is an ideological worldview on which Socialism and Communism are based. It looks to a Utopian classless society in which there is no controlling body allocating resources since people do everything for the common good. There is no private ownership of anything and all things are held in common. If you need something, take it – From each according to his abilities; to each according to his need.” This relies on the people always doing the right thing.

It is not based on effort, talent, fortune but, rather, it is based on the mere act of existing – you get paid for being. Marxism does not accept religion which is seen as the upper class weapon to keep the lower classes down – “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” The belief in dialectical materialism is central – the only reality is matter in the here-and-now.

Marxism and Communism were originally interchangeable in that Marxism must end in a form of communism, not the type we see in China or Russia, but rather a Utopian society in which all live in wealth and harmony. Marxism is the militant form of socialism. Marx invented the idea of the class struggle as a way of explaining aspects of his theory.

According to Karl Marx, three phases are necessary in order to convert a society to communism –

  1. The total destruction of any existing system
  2. Wealth must be collectivized by a leader who emerges to take control of of the populous choices of education, religion, employment, and private property ownership
  3. Utopia is then achieved by government control

Marxism from The Communist Manifesto –

1. Expropriation of landed property, and the use of land rents to defray state expenditure [the foreclosure deals with the government renting foreclosed properties has the potential as does the takeover of Fannie and Freddie]

2. A vigorously graded income tax [we have a progressive tax system which Obama seeks to grow with his “tax the rich” mantra]

3. Abolition of the right of inheritance [TDR’s and abuse of Eminent Domain lead to the abolition of inherited property and need to be watched]

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigres and rebels

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly [Obama has asked for his own bank which would bypass Congress and have direct funding.]

6. Centralization of the means of transport in the hands of the State [high gas and oil prices and emphasis on mass transit could accomplish this goal]

7. Increase of national factories and means of production, cultivation of uncultivated land, and improvement of cultivated land in accordance with a general plan [the government emphasis on unions and government control over the use of land and waterways]

8. Universal and equal obligation to work; organization of industrial armies, especially for agriculture [our departments overreach continuously]

9. Agriculture and urban industry to work hand-in-hand, in such a way as, by degrees, to obliterate the distinction between town and country

10. Public and free education of all children.  Abolition of factory work for children in its present form.  Education and material production to be combined. [Source: Tenets of Marxism]

Socialism is the path to communism –

It is the economic system in which the working class take over and run things collectively, “democratically,” for the benefit of the majority (who also “just happen” to be workers too). We heard that call from Maxine Waters for one of the many self-confessed socialists in congress. The U.S. is a Republic which was intended to protect us from the tyranny of the masses (which socialism has repeatedly evolved into throughout history). Socialism is based on cooperation not competition. [The NPVC making its way through states will achieve this “direct democracy.”]

Communism absorbs the socialist economic system and goes one step further. It is an economic and political system –

It strives for a stateless society in which the collective manages the economy and society. All property is owned collectively and control over the distribution of property is centralized.

Communism and Socialism assume that the economy can only be owned publicly and controlled and planned by a central organization. Socialism allows for an individual’s efforts in terms of the individual’s production. Communism distributes goods and services according to the individual’s needs as determined by the central authority.

Socialism says – from each according to his ability, to each according to his deeds, while communism says – from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs as determined by a central authority.

Progressivism is the belief that government needs to gain more control over society as society evolves and modernizes –

The desire is for efficiency in all areas of society.  Its lofty goals are to purify society and rid it of waste and corruption.

These goals are partly attained by the bureaucratization and professionalism of education and public health programs.  Social work is accomplished by trained government officials. Monopolies must be dissolved, large corporations regulated, labor regulations and organized union labor become most important.

Heavy social activism helps move society ‘in the right direction’.  The conspicuous accumulation and consumption of wealth is attacked openly. Wage and price control are central to its goals. There is a strong emphasis on conserving and reclaiming public lands in order to control natural resources.

Progressivism is mostly represented by the Democratic and Green parties. [Source: Ideapalooza]

A core principle of Progressivism is that society must be used for the common good and the belief that the government must be used for the collective or common good. People as collectivists are more effective than people acting in their individual interests. Social justice and wealth redistribution are foremost in political decisions.

Helping others becomes mandatory since government takes the money from the taxpayer to distribute in accordance with their humanitarian beliefs. Progressives distrust corporations and the free market principles. Freedom (wealth) must be widely distribute (hence redistribution becomes necessary).

Progressives do not see themselves as Marxist socialists, but, rather, they see themselves as the purveyors of direct democracy, Hegelians (absolute idealism). Marx was trained in Hegelianism and was undoubtedly influenced by him.

Marx, however, was a materialist as opposed to an idealist. Marx seemed to have misunderstood Hegel and misused or omitted many of his theories – there is a big difference between dialectical idealism (Hegel’s spiritualualism) and dialectical materialism (Marx and Engel). Marx’ philosophy ends in communism. Marx further believed that Hegel’s theories failed to explain the class struggle which he conjured up.

There has never been a “perfect communist state” and there never will be because people will never be perfect.

Lerner, out of the University of Chicago, in his essay  from The Conservative Quarterly, Understanding the Progressives, gives a great summary of Progressivism and is worth reading.

Here are some excerpts –

…The essence of Progressivism is the rejection of the natural rights and social contract theories underlying the founding of the United States and the Declaration and Constitution. While these were certainly not the first American theorists to reject the concept of the social contract, they were the first to levy a sustained attack against the foundations of the American Constitution and, particularly, the philosophy undergirding it. The use of “nature” by the founders and notions of “inalienable” rights strikes against the heart of the progressive project. Progressives argued that the rapid modernization undertaking the United States at the turn of the century, particularly the great economic and political uncertainty that came with the end of the first great industrial era in American history, required a more dynamic vision of the role of government…[If you object to this, you are a reactionary by the way]

…Progressivism is progress…

…Socially or politically traditional ideas and institutions became malevolent (hence the rise of the pejorative reactionary) and the new deliberately and rationally created ideas became intrinsically good. Rights, insofar as they were useful, only existed as creations of the time at which they were talked about; old concepts of natural rights needed to be replaced by more nebulous concepts like “Human Rights” and social rights. As Teddy Roosevelt expressed it, “property rights [one of the banes of progressivism] to the exclusion of human rights, had first mortgage on the Constitution.” Meaningful and eternal rights are a major impediment to the progressive project, something that puts progressivism directly in contrast with the principles of our founding…

..The obstructionist elements of the American Constitution, the elements designed to prevent rapid unilateral change, were the parts most decried by progressives…

…Directly democratic reforms weren’t all about restructuring the Constitution. Progressive intellectuals, including President Wilson, were adamantly opposed to the two party system. In their view, it fostered divided decision-making and diminished the individual’s say in his or her own government…

…progressive belief in direct democracy, although in a very different way than just the belief in direct democracy, because Progressives wished to eliminate non-technical decision making from the implementation side of policy, while still maintaining the “will” of the people. Constitutional roadblocks to complete efficiency within government like checks-and-balances limited these experts’ ability to mediate the will of the people…

…Constitutional roadblocks to complete efficiency within government like checks-and-balances limited these experts’ ability to mediate the will of the people. Wilson, in his seminal 1880 essay The Study of Administration, writes extensively about the role administrative bureaucracy played in the modernization of Germany. Recognizing the limits that our Constitution places on the development of such an infrastructure, Wilson is adamant about importing the best elements of the Prussian system to America…

…Conservatism, in this view, is only useful insofar as it provides an intellectual corrective to the more correct progressives; the idea of excess on the part of progressives was entertained, but not seriously considered, given that they move with history…

…I take great issue with some of my friends on the right who group together Progressives with Marxists or proto-fascists. What differentiates the progressives from these groups is their fundamental Americanism, the overarching belief in the righteousness of democracy. Granted, the progressive rejection of the Anglo-Enlightenment is rather similar to that their fascist and Marxist counterparts, and many of the same texts that influenced American progressives also became the intellectual foundations of fascist thought. So it is not unreasonable to see elements of Fascism or Marxism in progressivism, but at the same time, it is even more important to recognize the differences…

…Progressives, for all the issues that I have brought up, are fundamentally not Marxists. This is an absolutely essential point to understanding them. They consider themselves an American corrective against Marxist socialism, and champion democratic and liberal reforms. Although they share with the Marxists a Hegelian view of history, the progressives deviate in that they do not see an actualized end to history, let alone a Communist state as that end. Class distinctions, crucial to any Marxist understandings of history, are largely ignored by progressives, who hope to mollify any serious labor discontentment with a generous welfare policy and a robust regulatory prerogative. The means of Progress are the only positives the progressive’s recognize as an absolute, so Marxist notions of a “general strike” or the righteousness of the proletariat revolution are not only not in accordance with the progressive vision for America, but, even more so, are fundamentally opposed to it…

…For conservatives, it is crucial to fully understand progressivism because it, in so many ways, provides the intellectual building blocks for modern liberalism. What I hoped to focus on in this essay was, in fact, the eternal similarities between progressivism and liberalism. I tried not to cherry pick the most egregious examples of progressive malfeasance (like their support for racial eugenics), but rather to explore the fundamental truths underlying their beliefs…

…Conservatives need to recognize not only what they stand for, but what we, in turn, wish to return to. We must be cognizant of the principles of the American founding rejected by Progressives, and we must really understand both. The fight between progressivism and American constitutionalism is far from over, and conservatives need to know which side we’re on and why…


Classic capitalism is defined by the belief that the economy is a self-sustaining enterprise.  It has the utmost regard for individualism, economic freedom, and ownership of production is the individual not the government.  Owners of production are allowed to pursue the self-interest goal of accumulating wealth.  They do so by applying the economic principles of supply and demand.  When supply and demand is applied, the individual benefits from wealth accumulation and work while society benefits from increased standard of living and lower prices.

Capitalism is further characterized by the development of the owner class and the working class.  Wealth distribution is uneven in this society as competition rewards the most successful.

Capitalism is mostly represented by the Republican and Libertarian parties. [Source: Ideapalooza]