Race in the Obama Era

The historic election of Barack Obama represented an undeniable blow against the legacy of racism in the U.S. For the first time ever, a Black man was elected president of a white majority country. Slavery persisted in the U.S. for more than 300 years, and when slavery was abolished, Blacks were legally designated second-class citizens until the civil rights rebellion of the 1960s finally produced full legal equality.

This backdrop made Obama’s victory last November all the more astonishing. Even in the desperate dog days of the McCain-Palin campaign, when Republicans tried to make race an issue by reviving the dead issue of Obama’s former pastor Jeremiah Wright, calling Obama “dangerous,” letting conservative followers believe Obama was Muslim and Arab, and calling Obama “uppity”–they failed miserably.

In fact, the Republicans’ strategy backfired. The closer we got to the election and the more desperate they became, the more they began to slip in the polls. For the first time in 40 years, the staples of American politics–race-baiting and racial scapegoating–failed as a political strategy, and the result was the election of the nation’s first African American president.

Since the election, the media has manufactured a discussion about whether the U.S. has entered some netherworld of post-racialism. The mantra was quickly picked up by conservative pundits who have always denied the saliency of racism. They concluded that the political ascendancy of Obama was the final “proof” that the U.S. was a color-blind society. Dinesh D’Souza, who wrote the 1995 book The End of Racism, recently gloated:

As I watched Obama take the oath of office, I was moved, along with many others, but I also felt a sense of vindication. In 1995, I published a controversial book The End of Racism. The meaning of the title was not that there was no more racism in America. Certainly in a big country, one can find many examples of racism. My argument was that racism, which once used to be systematic, had now become episodic. In other words, racism existed, but it no longer controlled the lives of blacks and other minorities. Indeed, racial discrimination could not explain why some groups succeeded in America and why other groups did not…for African Americans, their position near the bottom rung of the ladder could be better explained by cultural factors than by racial victimization.

D’Souza’s outburst aside, the idea that Black poverty and unemployment is the result of individual failure and personal dysfunction is a regular staple of political parlance in the U.S. Even Obama made news when he spoke at a Black church last Father’s Day and chastised Black men for not being more involved in their children’s lives. “We need fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception,” he said.

Without a condemnation of the racism that shapes the communities, choices and interactions of poor and working-class African Americans, this kind of moralistic finger-pointing essentially blames the victim.

Moreover, D’Souza’s outburst underlines the problem with measuring racism in American society simply by changing ideas or attitudes, as opposed to barometers that actually measure the quality of life of African Americans. The current meltdown of the American economy, which faces its gravest crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s, demonstrates the institutionalization of racism in the U.S.

A Black depression

While most Americans are struggling to find ways to cope with the economic recession, African American communities have been experiencing a protracted financial collapse since 2000. The impact of the unraveling U.S. economy on African Americans is nothing short of startling and should give lie once and for all to worn axioms that describe Black poverty and inequality as products of the Black community itself or the result of cultural deviance.

While the media have marveled at how quickly the national unemployment level ballooned to 8 percent over the last two months, Black unemployment currently stands at more than 13 percent, while Latino unemployment creeps toward 12 percent.

Since 2000, Blacks and Latinos have been 40 percent more likely to experience unemployment than whites. But the national unemployment rates don’t really speak to the catastrophic levels of job displacement in Black communities, particularly among African American men.

In a study conducted by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, social scientist Marc Levine looked at the total unemployment of Black men aged 16 to 65 in urban America. He included men who were out of the labor market for a range of reasons, including those who were incarcerated and those who were jobless because they had given up looking for work.

He found that Black men in Milwaukee had the highest rate of unemployment at 51 percent, followed by Buffalo, Detroit and Chicago, where Black male unemployment is 45 percent. In other large metropolitan areas like New York City and Washington, D.C., unemployment rates for African American men of working age were more than 30 percent. In Detroit, the 11th largest city in the U.S., Black workers have been devastated by the plunging fortunes of the auto industry, where, by last December, more than 20,000 Black autoworkers had lost their jobs.

This rise in unemployment will undoubtedly increase the numbers of African Americans without health insurance–already at a high of 19 percent.

The job losses that began before the current economic crisis have led to an increase in Black poverty, from a historic low of 19 percent in 1999, back up to 24 percent in 2007. Poverty rates for Latinos are also at more than 20 percent. This number will surely rise if predictions are that official Black unemployment will exceed 20 percent by the end of 2009.

In addition to the job losses shaking African American communities, the collapsing housing market is having a disproportionate impact on Black homeowners. Because of a racist legacy of redlining, housing discrimination and the patterns of predatory lending as their result, Blacks were three times more likely to be steered toward subprime loans for home mortgages than whites.

This has meant that as rates for these loans readjusted upward and beyond the means of Black homeowners, tens of thousands have been forced into foreclosure, destroying what little net worth exists among African Americans. Home foreclosures are not measured by race, but a recent study found that since 2004, Black homeownership has dropped from 49 percent to 46 percent.

By 2007, 30 percent of Black households had zero net worth, compared to 18 percent of white households. According to the nonprofit think tank United for a Fair Economy, households of color lost between $164 billion and $213 billion over the past eight years because of foreclosures and ballooning subprime loan rates. According to economic analyst Dedrick Muhammad, the cumulative impact of these losses will result in a 33 percent reduction of the Black middle class.

The election of Obama, while significant, doesn’t change the daily struggle against deprivation that shapes the Black experience in the U.S.

What’s race got to do with it?

The crisis is having a disproportionately brutal impact on Black workers because of the racism inherent in American capitalism. U.S. capitalism was built on the labor of Black slaves, and when slavery ended, capitalists in the North and South stoked racism to divide their workforces, drive down wages and increase their profit margins.

Throughout the first 70 years of the 20th century, millions of African Americans moved from the rural South to the urban North and South in search of jobs and freedom from the codified racism of Jim Crow. Black workers found that racism in the North was only different by degrees from the racism they encountered in the South.

Violent white mobs and racially restricted covenants in housing deeds–which allowed private homeowners to forbid the selling or renting of homes to African Americans for up to 20 years–hemmed African Americans into ghettos. Federal housing policy stipulated that Black inner cities be restricted from mortgage insurance, guaranteeing that businesses and developers wouldn’t invest or build in the cities.

Instead, government monies subsidized building and investment in white suburbs. The disinvestment in the central cities fueled residential and school segregation, creating a political economy of racism where Blacks paid more for inferior housing and services, while the managers of inner cities reaped the profits of minimal investment.

Existing employment in the inner cities became increasingly elusive as businesses either moved to the suburbs, to the South or out of the country altogether in search of cheaper labor. The conditions of diminishing employment, low-wage service jobs, underfunded schools and segregated housing created by racist federal policies are maintained and policed by a racist criminal justice system, and have been since Blacks arrived en masse in the North.

These public and private practices have led to historic disparities between African Americans and whites. The social movements of the 1960s eliminated the last vestiges of legal racism and opened up greater opportunities for the economic and political advancement of a small layer of African Americans, but for the majority of ordinary Blacks, racism continues to restrict opportunity. This means that Blacks have borne the greatest brunt of this economic catastrophe.

The managers of capitalism profit handsomely from inequality and racism in the U.S. because they guarantee a combination of low or lower wages paid to Black workers and the absence of a welfare state. Moreover, these same managers have historically used racism to divide political struggles for public or state entitlements–welfare–to poor or unemployed workers regardless of race.

The material impact on the lives of Black workers should be clear enough, but ideologically, the systematic and institutional impoverishment of African American communities perpetuates the impression that Blacks are inferior and defective. These perceptions are perpetuated and magnified by the mass media, Hollywood and the general means of ideological and cultural production in bourgeois society.

The recurrence and persistence of racism in this economic system is not accidental or arbitrary. American capitalism is intrinsically racist.

A new era

The racist nature of American capitalism doesn’t mean that workers of color and white workers do not challenge it. The political struggles of the 1960s are but one example of this potential, but so are the heroic struggles to build unions and anti-poverty movements during the Depression era in the 1930s.

The era of Obama is a welcome change from the era of Bush and opens the potential for a new period of struggle that can both fight for economic reforms and against racism. During the Bush administration, not only did the economic gains of Black America during the 1990s go into reverse, but the racial symbolism of the Bush administration was downright regressive.

From his theft of the 2000 election at the expense of Black voters in Florida, to the malfeasance of his administration during the Katrina disaster in New Orleans, to the unleashing of raids in Latino communities, to the imprisonment and internment of Arab and Muslim men across the U.S., the Bush administration was a disaster for communities of color.

The election of Obama represented a popular rejection of this state-sanctioned racist hostility. But what concretely replaces the racist Bush agenda will depend upon struggle from below. While Obama’s candidacy and election represented a dramatic shift in racial attitudes in the U.S., Obama, has eschewed almost any racial discourse–and continues to.

Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, made the strange comment that when it comes to race, “Americans are cowards,” when it is the Obama administration that has gone out of its way to avoid putting forward coherent policies aimed at curbing the racism evidenced by the overwhelming impact of the economic crisis on Black families.

To be sure, the almost $300 billion in economic stimulus aimed at working-class communities is a welcome change to the tired mantra of tax cuts–but it’s woefully inadequate when compared to the more than $1 trillion filling the troughs of corporate America and Wall Street. Moreover, given the disproportionate way in which the crisis is impacting African Americans, there needs to be specific programs and solutions aimed at Black urban communities.

This must include more than infusions of cash to increase food stamps and unemployment cash benefits. Economists predict that the jobs that have been lost are not likely to come back, as American capitalism restructures and retools itself. This means there could be a long period of unemployment until new, sustainable jobs are created, rather than short-term “project”-oriented jobs.

This in turn means that the U.S. needs a new public welfare system that can house, feed, clothe, pay and take care of its population while the job market fluctuates. The public entitlement to welfare was gutted in 1996 during the boom, as recipients were made to “work” for their meager cash benefits.

The assumption was that the economy was supposedly awash in jobs–which were largely low wage and in the service sector–and, if people weren’t working, it was because they didn’t want to. These anti-poor policies, shrouded in anti-Black rhetoric, were underpinned by the politics of “personal responsibility,” which looked to shift the blame for poverty and unemployment away from inherent problems in the system–as they were identified in the 1960s by everyone from the Black Panther Party to Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.–to the individual failings of Blacks themselves.

But the rapid disintegration of the job market has opened up the ideological space to expose the racist assumptions that Black workers are more interested in welfare than work. When 650,000 jobs have been lost every month since December, it’s difficult to mount an argument that the problem of unemployment is a moral one.

Moreover, when banks and corporations fail as a result of the personal irresponsibility and greed of executives, but are still bailed out to the tune of trillions of tax dollars, it rightfully raises the question of where is the bailout for ordinary workers–Black, white and Latino.

The ruling class proposal for resolving the economic crisis–blank checks and no questions asked for Wall Street–diminishes the extent to which they can argue that workers shouldn’t also demand our piece, in the form of direct cash stimulus, universal health care, a new welfare system, real affordable housing, an end to home foreclosures and more.

The key to winning any of those demands depends on building a movement of workers, the unemployed and the poor to take on the obvious economic inequities that have been exposed as a result of the crisis, but it also demands the building of an explicitly antiracist movement that can highlight and organize against the specific ways this crisis is affecting Black workers.

While Obama has been reluctant to discuss the issue of race or racism, the vast majority of African Americans viewed his election as their own victory–as demonstrated by the dancing in the streets in Black communities across the country last November when he beat McCain. A CNN poll conducted in the days leading up to Obama’s inauguration found that 69 percent of Blacks felt that King’s dream was now fulfilled because of Obama’s victory.

In March, a poll found that African Americans were more optimistic than the general public that the financial crisis would be resolved by the end of the year. Fifty-eight percent of Blacks said they expected their household financial situation to improve by next year, and 85 percent said they were generally optimistic about the future.

But the confidence and optimism that resulted from successfully sending a Black president to the White House has come into conflict with the reality that African Americans are bearing the brunt of the economic downturn in the U.S. At the same time, the election of Obama has raised the expectations of African Americans–and most workers–for more, not less.

While the Obama honeymoon within Black communities may not end for while, the worsening economy will demand politics, organization and activism from Black workers. This new reality, in a new political era, represents an opportunity to build a movement to demand new social programs for the working class, with Black workers and antiracist demands at its center.

There is also the possibility that as conditions grow worse, there could be a rise in racism against Obama and other minorities in the guise of right-wing populism–as racists and the right intensify their efforts to scapegoat and blame sections of the population for the crisis.

This is why the revival and rebuilding of progressive forces and the radical left must put the fight against racism at the center of its politics–as opposed to focusing only on the economic dimensions of the crisis. Racism and class oppression have always been the nexus of American politics, and today is no different.

43 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. Martha said on April 10th, 2009 at 11:15am #

    This is the best the Dallas public schools produced? That is a scary thought. More Obot nonsense that recasts the entire election as a ‘victory’ for us (African-Americans). As Glen Ford, Bruce Dixon and Margaret Kimberley so aptly demonstrate each week, Barack’s not in it for us. This bad article from The Socialist Worker should never have been reposted here. And Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, in Dallas, they may go by that one-drop rule, but in the real world, Barack’s a biracial man, not “Black.”

  2. BILL LAWRENCE said on April 10th, 2009 at 11:21am #

    “The end of racism” sounds wonderful, almost noble, but it’s nothing more than rhetoric and a self-assuring line that people are currently feeding themselves for comfort. Our president is continuing the war in Iraq and escalating the Afghanistan conflict. These, like most every war that the U.S. has ever been involved in, are certainly racist in origin and in the manner in which they are being conducted. Can you imagine using drones to bomb homes in Sweden? During the Viet Nam war the Viet Cong were called slopes, gooks, etc and now we are at war with sand niggers, rag heads, etc. When you think about the end of racism remember Obama and our steadfast support for Israel and then take a long hard look at the women and children of Gaza.

  3. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 11:36am #

    “While Obama’s candidacy and election represented a dramatic shift in racial attitudes in the U.S., Obama, has eschewed almost any racial discourse–and continues to.”

    Obama has done the latter in part because the former isn’t really true. A dramatic shift from what? From the days of lynchings and overt racism? Hip hip hooray.

    “…69 percent of Blacks felt that King’s dream was now fulfilled because of Obama’s victory.”

    That’s awfully depressing. I don’t think electing a biracial, hawkish member of the wealthy class represents the realization of Dr. King’s dream.

  4. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 1:15pm #

    “American capitalism is intrinsically racist.”

    I’m not sure an ‘ism can have a human characteristic. (Can an ‘ism be an ‘ist?) But I do think some greedy people stir up and exploit racist attitudes so as to help achieve their objective (i.e., the acquisition of money and power).

  5. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 2:50pm #

    Obama election victory does represent a decided shift in racial attitude despite the contradictions that the author writes about. The problem for the Left is HOW to put Obama in the proper perspective. And IMO Glen Ford has not done a good job putting Obama in the proper perspective. In fact Ford has downright engaged in the sort of stereotypical blame game from the Left that you find mirrored coming from the right which IMO is counterproductive.

    Obama’s was able to take advantage of the discontent with the Bush Administration and the American people general mood and uneasiness with America’s political direction. Also the lack of a real Left alternative means that Obama has no pressure to offer any real progressive programs and the public has no real alternatives to the Democrats.

    The problem that I see with how the Left is dealing with Obama is that they refuse to deal with Obama in a NUANCED manner. Obama being black is by definition — triangulation. If there was real solidarity, especially with communities of color on the Left, then Obama would be easy to confront. But with the current weakness of the Left, Obama can easily sway communities of color into his camp and thus further isolate the Left.

    For example there was a recent posting on whether Obama is more dangerous than Bush. Such a rhetorical question must be handle with care otherwise it can severely backfire when trying to convince people of color over to the Left. Also some comrades have even gloated over disillusioned progressives which again IMO is counterproductive especially since the Left hasn’t been all that honest and self-critical especially on the issue of Zionism.

    The best way to confront Obama is for the Left to construct a radical vision. The recent Rasmussen poll give indications that the American people are ready to listen to alternatives. The Obama phenomenon represents that while racism still persists, white Americans at this point may be willing to form the needed alliances with people of color for systemic change.

    It is up to the Left to take advantage of this moment.

  6. lichen said on April 10th, 2009 at 3:13pm #

    Obama has MURDERED HUMANS in Afganistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. That is illegal, and he should be arrested and brought to The Hague; end of political story.

  7. Garrett said on April 10th, 2009 at 3:38pm #

    DB,

    There has been a shift in “racial attitudes” over time, but I don’t think the Obama election victory represents any sort of recent shift. Are racial attitudes really any different now than they were before Obama ran for President or before he became famous with his speech at the ’04 Democratic Convention? I don’t think so.

    Low approval of Bush/Cheney and Obama’s charisma (along with the elite’s acceptance of Obama) got him elected. Of course, I’m pretty confident that Hillary Clinton also would have won.

    “But with the current weakness of the Left, Obama can easily sway communities of color into his camp and thus further isolate the Left.”

    Just as Bill Clinton and others before him did. Just as Hillary Clinton would have done. Obama, like Clinton, can easily sway white communities, as well. The Democratic Party has for a long time taken people of color for granted. We need people of all “races” to realize that the major political parties are nothing but shills for the corporatocracy.

    A couple of things that really worry me about the Obama euphoria:

    1) Speaking out against the Obama Administration will be construed as racism, even if those speaking out are very much antiracists.

    2) Poll results, like the one cited in this article, that suggest large percentages of folks believe the Obama election victory means we’re now post-racial and Dr. King’s dream has been realized.

  8. Max Shields said on April 10th, 2009 at 3:44pm #

    This article is coming for a “socialists” publication?

    So, Obama is a socialist after all and Orwellian rule is upon us like never before. I know DV doesn’t censor, but this is total crap. There must be a smell test before this kind of article hits the blog…no? Apparently not.

    Let’s see what can be done in the future, or is it time to begin reading the Huffpost DailyKos for my shot of reel (as in make believe film) Marxist Lenist diatribes?

    Let me pass through the Looking Glass to find Alice…and may Che rest in peace.

  9. Don Hawkins said on April 10th, 2009 at 3:55pm #

    And we are not in Kansas anymore I think we can safely say that.

  10. Max Shields said on April 10th, 2009 at 4:20pm #

    We are blessed to have a black man, even if only half black as our commander in chief, MLK would have raised his voice in praise of the almighty for having given us HIM, the one and only, the smartest badass, AIPAC loving sonofabitch supppperduper bad meanmotherf*ker of a President the world has very seen, the son of a Kenyan father, praise the lord and pass the friggin ammunition, motherhead. Off to kill us some Afghan women and children and then some babies in PakiSTAN for the Commander In Chief.

    We the people have been given a chance to be re-born under the leadership of the greatest MAN, the godliest of among us, the supppperrr smartass of all mutherf&cken time, the one the only SHAFT!!! (Shut your mouth…we have over come can. Do I hear an AAAAAMEN! Thank you Lord.
    OOOOOOOOOBBBBBBBAAAAAAMMMMMMAAAAAAAA.

    The AmeriKan killing machine can kill with impunity. WE HAVE A NEW AND CLEAN VOICE FOR WAR AND DESTRUCTION. BUSH WAS A FAILURE. HE LOOKED STUPID. THIS GUY LOOKS SMART…

    Gives us this day our daily bread as we forgive those who trust pass against us. Our father who art in nada, nada be his name for thine kingdom is nada, and thine will be nada on nada as it is in nada. Hail to the Chief. The SMARTEST. The HANDSOMEST. The son of a son of a son who was never a slave, but over came the singularity of his loneliness in his bedroom where he listened to music and combed his hair and pretended and prayed that one DAY, he’d be OUR PRESIDENT. And when that day came he’d deliver us to the MOUNTAIN TOP. He is the coming of the LORD, and he shall be done, as he is doing….I hear a drone in his name ONE HALF MEGA-TON-BOMB (OBOMAAAAAAA AWAY!!!). Blood and bones…Hallahloah or shake it up baby…..

    Where are we now? Oh Yea the Village Voice says it’s ALL about bread butter and WAR….war will set us free, and give us peace. The Socialist are here and are BELIEVERS. Give us time to rejoice.

    A moment of silence. Let the supplicants wash HIS feet. Mary Passover and a Happy Easter to the White House where the easter bunnies are hopity-hoping.

  11. Tennessee-Chavizta said on April 10th, 2009 at 8:50pm #

    I GIVE UP IN WAKING PEOPLE UP IN THIS CONFUSED COUNTRY OF USA !!

    I have a problem, and that problem is with the libertarianism brainwashing of American people as a solution for USA. Many people in this country believe that USA has never been capitalist system. That it is a corporate system as Ron Paul and other libertarian conspiracy theorists label it.

    How can I wake up libertarian-capitalists, by telling them that USA is a capitalist system and that corporatism is just a final stage of capitalism-system.

    Many libertarians think that a pure, romantic bourgeoise capitalist system like Adam Smith wrote in his “The Wealth of Nations” can work in the USA, but that vision is so anti-scientific, so anti-reality because we are in a different world, in a globalized world, and the system that Ron Paul would like to apply without taxes, isolated from other countries, without food-stamps, with every thing privatized would destroy the USA faster than Bush and Obama.

    .

  12. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:00pm #

    Lichen writes …

    Obama has MURDERED HUMANS in Afganistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. That is illegal, and he should be arrested and brought to The Hague; end of political story.

    As all U.S. Presidents murdered humans they all should stand trial. The problem with such rhetoric is that Obama by the very fact that he is black triangulate the Left. The Left MUST reach out to people of color and to suggest that he is “worst than Bush” as has recently been discussed on DV is counterproductive.

    No one is suggesting that Obama should not be held accountable but what is important is how the Left can take advantage of the current crisis and the Obama phenomenon to reach out to communities of color since especially since Obama won 95% of the black vote and 95% of the Latino/a vote.

    I know to some of the Left this may seem like “pandering” and “impure”. Unfortunately lacking nuance when dealing with Obama will keep the Left on the margins.

  13. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:09pm #

    Garrett writes …

    There has been a shift in “racial attitudes” over time, but I don’t think the Obama election victory represents any sort of recent shift. Are racial attitudes really any different now than they were before Obama ran for President or before he became famous with his speech at the ‘04 Democratic Convention? I don’t think so.

    There was no way an African American could even win the office of the President even as little as 20 years ago much less 40 years ago. What Obama represents is that WHITE America was willing to vote for an African American. This is a HUGE shift in racial attitudes and an opportunity for the LEFT to REACH OUT TO communities of color.

    But for the Left to do this the Left must do it with a NUANCED approach. Going into the Black and Latino communities by saying that Obama is worst than Bush will be a HUGE tactical mistake. No one want to be scolded for throwing their vote away and for voting FOR history. No matter what you feel and understand about Obama’s policies, Obama winning the White House is historic and it is a shift albeit limited in racial attitudes. If race, even for a moment can be “overcome”, then CLASS condition could br

  14. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:17pm #

    Garrett writes …

    There has been a shift in “racial attitudes” over time, but I don’t think the Obama election victory represents any sort of recent shift. Are racial attitudes really any different now than they were before Obama ran for President or before he became famous with his speech at the ‘04 Democratic Convention? I don’t think so.

    There was no way an African American could even win the office of the President even as little as 20 years ago much less 40 years ago. What Obama represents is that WHITE America was willing to vote for an African American. This is a HUGE shift in racial attitudes and an opportunity for the LEFT to REACH OUT TO communities of color.

    But for the Left to do this the Left must do it with a NUANCED approach. Going into the Black and Latino communities by saying that Obama is worst than Bush will be a HUGE tactical mistake. No one want to be scolded for throwing their vote away and for voting FOR history. No matter what you feel and understand about Obama’s policies, Obama winning the White House is historic and it is a shift albeit limited in racial attitudes. If race, even for a moment can be “overcome”, then CLASS issues can bring “workers” closer which is needed in order to radically alter the course.

    My position to be clear is that Obama was able to emerge because OF the Left’s inability to forge solidarity among workers and communities of color and its inability to provide a radical, coherent and cohesive alternative to the Democrats. Thus a major reason why people of color VOTE for the Democrats. And to chide folks, like Glen Ford does, for voting for Obama in the face of no real alternative is counterproductive thus the histrionic by the Left over Obama falls flat especially when the Left has especially in the very recent past sabotaged itself.

    The Left needs to be very strategic especially BECAUSE Obama is Black. Obama’s brand of triangulation is very different from that of Bill Clinton beca

  15. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:19pm #

    Garrett writes …

    There has been a shift in “racial attitudes” over time, but I don’t think the Obama election victory represents any sort of recent shift. Are racial attitudes really any different now than they were before Obama ran for President or before he became famous with his speech at the ‘04 Democratic Convention? I don’t think so.

    There was no way an African American could even win the office of the President even as little as 20 years ago much less 40 years ago. What Obama represents is that WHITE America was willing to vote for an African American. This is a HUGE shift in racial attitudes and an opportunity for the LEFT to REACH OUT TO communities of color.

    But for the Left to do this the Left must do it with a NUANCED approach. Going into the Black and Latino communities by saying that Obama is worst than Bush will be a HUGE tactical mistake. No one want to be scolded for throwing their vote away and for voting FOR history. No matter what you feel and understand about Obama’s policies, Obama winning the White House is historic and it is a shift albeit limited in racial attitudes. If race, even for a moment can be “overcome”, then CLASS issues can bring “workers” closer which is needed in order to radically alter the course.

    My position to be clear is that Obama was able to emerge because OF the Left’s inability to forge solidarity among workers and communities of color and its inability to provide a radical, coherent and cohesive alternative to the Democrats. Thus a major reason why people of color VOTE for the Democrats. And to chide folks, like Glen Ford does, for voting for Obama in the face of no real alternative is counterproductive thus the histrionic by the Left over Obama falls flat especially when the Left has especially in the very recent past sabotaged itself.

    The Left needs to be very strategic especially BECAUSE Obama is Black. Obama’s brand of triangulation is very different from that of Bill Clinton because of RACE. Understanding that is crucial in order for the Left to build solidarity.

    I apologize for the multiple submission. I’m having problems with my laptop. thx.

  16. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:47pm #

    Garrett writes…

    A couple of things that really worry me about the Obama euphoria:

    1) Speaking out against the Obama Administration will be construed as racism, even if those speaking out are very much antiracists.

    You are right and it WILL BE which is why NUANCE is extremely important. My impression of the Left is that this is where you should be able to have honest dialogue and debate. Therefore let’s call a spade a “spade”. Race will be a factor in any critique of Obama. Glen Ford, who is a black critique of Obama, thought that he could harshly critique Obama because of his race. Unfortunately even his critiques has backfired. The reason is that he believe he has a license to critique the entire 95% of the black community who voted for Obama. If Ford’s who is black and his critiques were ineffective then how is a white critic of Obama going to be effective especially since the RIGHT uses racist overtures on Obama. This is why Obama, just by being black, is effectively triangulation. The question is for the Left is how to critique Obama without alienating the very people they must attract.

    2) Poll results, like the one cited in this article, that suggest large percentages of folks believe the Obama election victory means we’re now post-racial and Dr. King’s dream has been realized.

    Clearly the poll participants are mostly whites because people of color don’t think that. The MSM is trying to spread that false notion of the “realization of King’s dream” but once again this is why NUANCE is important because Obama DOES represent a change and to say that it does not is to be hyperbolic in the opposite direction. At this point in time hyperbole will only lead to tactical errors in the face of opportunity.

    Just to be clear, I don’t like Obama and I believe he is full of shit. But there are places where he can be attacked. Clearly his interest in bailing out the bank. Here is a golden opportunity for the Left to show how Obama is putting the rich white male bankers about EVERYONE. This class based attack is legitimate. Also Obama fealty to Zionism is also another Achilles heal. His defense budget is also another problem with communities of color as well as his policy on health care. Blacks, especialy black males suffer huge unemployment rates and it will only get worst under Obama economic plans. Again there are ways to attack Obama among people of color without being abrasive but clearly there needs to be outreach by the Left to communities of color. So I see the current situation as an opportunity for the Left. Like I’ve said what matters is how the Left decides to approach the situation.

  17. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 10:57pm #

    Max writes …

    We the people have been given a chance to be re-born under the leadership of the greatest MAN, the godliest of among us, the supppperrr smartass of all mutherf&cken time, the one the only SHAFT!!! (Shut your mouth…we have over come can. Do I hear an AAAAAMEN! Thank you Lord. OOOOOOOOOBBBBBBBAAAAAAMMMMMMAAAAAAAA.

    Max’s expression while amusing doesn’t effectively explain the Obama phenomenon and how the Left can confront it. This lack of strategy is the power behind Obama’s triangulation. The way to deal with Obama is by hitting hard on the issues of race and class.

    Ridiculing Socialist who BTW has been on the forefront of racial issue and have much more credibility confronting racism than others on the Left again fails to understand the NUANCE of the Obama phenomenon. If NUANCE is ignored I guarantee the Left will remain alienated from communities of color who BTW voted massively for Obama (95% of blacks and 85% of Latinos).

  18. Deadbeat said on April 10th, 2009 at 11:37pm #

    T-C writes …

    How can I wake up libertarian-capitalists, by telling them that USA is a capitalist system and that corporatism is just a final stage of capitalism-system.

    I had a friend who was libertarian and when we debated and he brought up the “free market” I would tell him” “There is no such thing as a ‘Free Market’ because as Ronald Reagan use to say there is no ‘free lunch’ so how can you have a “Free Market”? Now what we really want is a “FEE Market” because for there to be capitalism you don’t want lunches to be free.”

  19. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 4:49am #

    Deadbeat

    You keep bringing up that blacks (who voted) voted for Obama (D) in large numbers. And what were the numbers when Kerry or Gore ran? These too were very large.

    The fact that Latinos and African Americans vote overwhelmingly for Dems is NOT an Obama phenomenon. It is a simply a trend that goes back to Roosevelt.

    What makes Obama dangerous to real change, is that he appeases, he is a better version of George W. Bush and the imperial policies which also govern domestic. He is of absolutely no help to African Americans any more than Colin Powell or Condalesa Rice have been.

    As Garrett writes, Obama does not represent some kind of transcendence past racism; that while there are some superficial (and some less superficial) racial changes (much of these have to be discerned because they are strongly tainted with corporate imperialism), there is nothing about Obama that “transcends”.

    As we’ve “discussed” many times, and others have noted it as well, you’re focus on a “left” or “socialism”, to the exclusion of all core issues begs the question to the point of diverting it to some by-gone belief in an ideological cure.

    Nevertheless solidarity is needed, but not around an ideology of left/right post French Revolution lines.

  20. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 5:29am #

    Just came across this statement that bears repeating: “It’s not about left and right anymore, it’s about truth and lies.”

  21. bozh said on April 11th, 2009 at 7:42am #

    max, yes,
    or to put out the same idea in diff’t words: enlightenment wld, one hopes, set us free and most of us wld not ever utter divisional words such as the Left or the Right.

    clero-political people, speaking broadly, having once included only patricians and lately multy millionaires and billionaires, have set out millennia ago to forever divide us into to groups: one group, extremely jingoistic and ‘patriotic’; i.e., for king and the country and the other group was and still is largely silent.

    natch, the crowd shouting “King and the country” or “USA,USA , USA get’s the bigger slice of the pie; while silent people toil and toil and financially support the jingoists while denying self even better health care, etc. tnx

  22. Garrett said on April 11th, 2009 at 7:55am #

    DB: “Clearly the poll participants are mostly whites because people of color don’t think that.”

    According to the article, “A CNN poll conducted in the days leading up to Obama’s inauguration found that 69 percent of Blacks felt that King’s dream was now fulfilled because of Obama’s victory.”

    DB: “If NUANCE is ignored I guarantee the Left will remain alienated from communities of color who BTW voted massively for Obama (95% of blacks and 85% of Latinos).”

    And they would have done more or less the same for Hillary Clinton or John Edwards…as they did for Kerry, Gore, B. Clinton, etc.

    This is why labels, including ‘isms, are so dangerous. Self-proclaimed Democrats (or Republicans) vote for Democrats (or Republicans)…issues take a backseat.

  23. bozh said on April 11th, 2009 at 8:00am #

    deadbeat, respectfully,
    am i incorrect [eschewing for now the word “Lwft”] to note that the poorest amers just voted against healthcare/free education; for warfare, etc?

    these people, latinos and blacks, shld have solidly demanded they finally receive their inheritance. this cld be compared to one of children rejecting inheritance from own family because such a sacrifice wld be done for the greater good of the family.
    tnx

  24. bozh said on April 11th, 2009 at 8:32am #

    tennessee.
    some of the aspects of situation in US are the same as elsewhere and some are similar. at least we on DV shld not analyze all or most events in US as existing in isolation from world events.

    at this time, i can’t think of one trait in US that is unique; totally/purely american, having no connection with religion [cults, really], feudality, warfare, greed, fears, supremacism, ‘education’.

    the aspect people in the world [and not just USans] eschew or do not analyze, is the fact that US was not ivolved in major wars as europeans have been.
    when at war, US was attacking weaklings and never ever had been attacked. Propagandists took advantage of this fact by mounting a propaganda model that was more successful than anywhere else.

    the propaganda always had one and the same aim: to make sure that the vast amers never participate in the governance in US and to make nonruling class believe that because of ruling class’ guidance, wisdom, nobility, etc., the country became the strongest and best in the world.

    US propaganda model differs from nazi or communist models. Nazis did not tolerate even silence; a voiced support was demanded.
    communists, on the other hand, tolerated silence but like the nazis they did not tolerate dissent.

    US model allowed dissent; silence was OK and actualy nurtured. Of three models, US model, as we can see, was by far ‘superior’.

    thus it wld be dsiappointing to expect in a few yrs a propaganda model change; it may take decades. tnx

  25. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 8:51am #

    DB, my earlier diatribe was just a cry for MERCY given the author’s refrain about Obama. The fact Mr. Taylor writes for the Internationalist Socialist Review should give all pause. This is like Obama being the “anti-war” war president.

    As far as the issues, many here, including myself has expressed the issues as I/we see them. There are African Americans who post here who see right through the audacity of lies that represent the Obama/Dem agenda.

    If someone believes in Santa Claus – are YOU going to convince them otherwise? First, is the “belief” even worthy of discussion?

    But Obama is not Santa Claus as much as some keep writing those godawful Dear President Obama letters…that go on to say, please, pretty please don’t put that corporatist/Monsanto Mouth Piece in as Secretary of Agriculture….and please or pretty pretty please, stay away from the misogynistic and ugly neoliberal Summers, won’t you please….and President O, I know you mean well, but could you please stop killing children in Afghanistan/Pakistan? Oooooohhhhhh PLEASE; and Mr. President would you stop bailing out the Banksters, even if they paid for you to be our President…wouldn’t please?

    That’s the kind of godawful shit that is endlessly displayed all around the “progressive” blogs and letters to editors.

    Barack Hussein Obama is a WAR CRIMINAL. That’s the truth, if you have problems with it don’t argue with me, you’re argument is with the Nuremberg principles. BHO is a WAR CRIMINAL. Let’s just cut to the f*cking chase. And the little old ladies who marched against the war in Iraq and Bush, are NOWHERE to be found as they write their little notes about writing your Congressman to let them know you support President Obama’s call to reduce nuclear weapons. These head up their arse old bitties WOULDN”T listen to reason. Like OBAMA IS A WAR CRIMINAL. When you got your own in office YOU put your hands over your ears and stop listening DEADBEAT.

    The end to this madness will come through it’s own destructive means. We need to do what we can to prepare for the outcome as best we can.

    If people want to believe in the Easter Bunny…then….THAT”S ALL FOLKS!!!

  26. Ron Horn said on April 11th, 2009 at 11:34am #

    Until we on the “left” come to the realization that the problem is the system, then we will forever read a lot of rants on websites like this. This applies especially to the US and Canadian left who mostly only aspire to have their countries remain peaceful, have good job opportunities, and universal health care. (Yes, Boz, Canadians have the latter, but it could be a lot better.)

    People have become so conditioned to living in a system where only a few are allowed to participate in any meaningful way to determine how their workplace is managed, how people are rewarded for their work, how their schools are run, what news is covered by the media and how it is covered, how taxes are spent, how foreign policy is shaped, etc.

    While the ruling class deprives ordinary people from any meaningful participation, they hold out “The American Dream” which is mostly about getting rich–the quicker, the better. Because this has become more and more untenable, the people are provided with casinos. This is an contemporary version of “let them eat cake”.

    It is the economic system, stupid! The system is designed to do what it in fact does: create wealth for a tiny minority which inevitably ends up destroying communities, the environment, the lives of many working people, and constantly engaging in wars over markets, resources, and cheap labor. Yes, isms and ideology are important, absolutely! It is not much about individuals. So ranting on about this leader or that leader regardless of race seems to me to be rather futile.

    With the current breakdown of the capitalist system, I think the time is ripe to focus on system issues. Many people are beginning to do so. The Rasmussen poll that DB referred to reported the following results:

    “Only 53% of American adults believe capitalism is better than socialism.

    “The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 20% disagree and say socialism is better. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are not sure which is better.

    “Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided. Thirty-somethings are a bit more supportive of the free-enterprise approach with 49% for capitalism and 26% for socialism. Adults over 40 strongly favor capitalism, and just 13% of those older Americans believe socialism is better.

    “Investors by a 5-to-1 margin choose capitalism. As for those who do not invest, 40% say capitalism is better while 25% prefer socialism.”

    The online edition of the Merrian-Webster dictionary recently announced that the Word of the Year for 2008 was … bailout. But third on this list was “SOCIALISM”!

    I would like to see much more discussion and examination of the most basic questions of all: What is democracy, and how can we design a system where everyone can meaningfully participate in decisions that affect their lives? What property should be privately owned? What should constitute social property?

  27. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 3:28pm #

    While there is some merit in blaming it all on the “system”, the “system” is a vehicle and it is, most I say, a human invention.

    Yes, the US economic system is what it is, but it is just an oversimplication (and I would add a major injustice) to provide impunity to those who benefit and drive and shape it.

    The US economic system is not static. It has laws and loop holes which are leveraged and used by the powerful, by elite.

    It is very to realize the limitations of a system, that there are also laws which do not pertain to a “system” but to human behavior. We live by those laws, some made law through treaties, or we live in a lawless state. Laws have been used, as mentioned, to bolster the powerful, but there are laws which are meant to intrude on injustices, on grave crimes and they are fairly clear. We don’t put a system in prison, at least not as far as I can tell.

    As to the point about democracy, and making it participatory, that is complex task. First, participatory democracy demands constant engagement and vigilance. It also requires deep learning, and an understanding of limits. Interdependency is critical. It is the only thing that creates community and democracy without a strong sense of our interdependencies is meaningless.

    The overarching system is the natural system, or ecosystem. Until we come to terms with that, our invented systems of polity, economy and culture are worthless and generally dangerous. Devising a “system” that is in balance with the larger life giving system is the first step to creating a world that is based on universal principles. Those principles have been in existence since time immorial. They are embedded in every great religion, philosophy and are present in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html)

    But, this does not get individuals off the hook who behave criminally, nor does it simply forgive it all to a system that made “him/her” do it.

  28. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 3:42pm #

    The Earth Charter can provide guidence to this larger goal. http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/content/

    We are not without ideals nor means. We are however dominated by a narrative of fear and domination which holds (have held) these ideals captive.

  29. bozh said on April 11th, 2009 at 4:12pm #

    ron,
    the four pillars of a fair[er] life are health care, free education, more freedom, and no wars of aggression.

    from this it is difficult or nigh impossible for me to grasp why 37% of amers consider socialism better than americanism, or a special case of capitalism, when nearly 98% just rejected the four staffs of life.

    so, what does their socialism mean? what do their socialism and socialists want to do? i don’t want definitions- i want to now what is their agenda?
    but may be i know the answer after what happened last november. tx

  30. bozh said on April 11th, 2009 at 4:25pm #

    max, respectfully,
    i blame it all on liars, deceivers. no system can exist without people. so some people are entirely to blame for all ills that befall us on interpersonal and int’l level.

    it shld be remembered we all emanate from one genetic pool; thus, i have no control over my fate; as marlo, said, I cldhave been a champion.
    and i say i cld have been a murderer, rapist, tief, deceiver. in fact, since god didn’t make me good, i thought she cld make bad. so, for yrs i’ve been praying to her to make a thief and join a huge crowd.
    but don’t worry, she’s not listening.

    people born as thieves, murderers need our attention and help. Some people may dysfucntional from childhood; so why are we on moon, all over the world instead paying attention and treating socalled deviants.
    tnx

  31. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 4:56pm #

    bozh:” i blame it all on liars, deceivers, no system can exist without people.”

    That’s my point. Though systems can facilitate certain actions and behaviors…they tend to reflect the power structure or the social structure. It become a symbiotic relationship after a while.

  32. Ron Horn said on April 11th, 2009 at 5:36pm #

    Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Because most people appear to have left this particular commentary site, I think I’ll return to this topic on another occasion, particularly one in which I might have some allies and when I might not have to face you two bullies alone. 😉

  33. Max Shields said on April 11th, 2009 at 5:47pm #

    Aside from the race issue, which is a conundrum in and of itself, there are a number of points of tension when talking about participatory democracy. One is the structural tension between centralization and decentralization.

    Power concentrated structurally, the industrialization of power if you will, is the antithesis of participatory democracy. And yet there has been a history of centralization in the implementation of socialistic and capitalistic systems. The tendency toward growth, economies of scale, thousand acre mega-farms, massive edifaces, artifical landscapes are all unnatural outcomes of powerful centralized systems.

    Decentralization is the alternative. It is not an “ism”, but it provides a human-scaled existence which can allow for deep participatory democracy. The social structure must be utterly changed to adapt and learn how to be democratic. There is no democracy in a centralized, consumer based social structure.

    Economics is not of a piece, but integral to the whole interplay between our daily lives, the incentives that motivate us, and the wants and needs that are only partly formed at birth. We are the result of an environment that has come before us, but that continues to emerge. This emergence is powerful, and natural.

    The choices are ours, but gasping this is the constraint to real change.

  34. Tennessee-Chavizta said on April 11th, 2009 at 7:00pm #

    bozh said on April 11th, 2009 at 8:32am #

    I am sorry but i don’t think US government tolerates real dissent. It only tolerates the right to talk, a talktative-dissent if you will. But not electoral dissent, which is the real threat to the capitalist class of this country. But you can’t overthrow the capitalist system in USA with just talking. You need a real electoral dissident movement in order to overthrow the US capitalist-government, and replace it with a socialist-government.

    .

    .

  35. Tennessee-Chavizta said on April 11th, 2009 at 7:49pm #

    Max Shields: I think that black people, spanish people and poor whites in USA vote for Democrat Party, because Republican Party is so evil, i mean so, so evil and down right Nazi, of unspeakable terms, i mean hardcore in your face fascism and evil alas V. For Vendetta, that the Democrat Party looks like a socialist populist party compared with the in your face fascism of Republicans, and its voters who have very evil mentality of “bombing muslims to stone ages” and stuff like that that I’ve heard from Republican Voters.

    Remember that poor and oppressed people that depend on food-stamp programs, child programs etc. are not dumb. And they knew about Bush’s constant threatening of cutting welfare aid to poors.

    So i don’t think that Democrat Party is the same as Republican party. I consider the change of Obama, like a 500 lb. man, that wants to be at 160. lb, but with Democrats he is at 300 lbs. which is still fat, but a lot better than 500 lbs.

    And that’s why the oppressed sectors of USA voted for Obama, because remember “Vox Populis, Vox Deus” (The voice of the people, is the voice of God).

    Remember that John Mccain and Sarah Palin were even gonna bomb Spain, they were threatening Spain. Those people are real wackos, specially the Republican Evangelical voters from the Red States. who are every weird people.

    I don’t understand how can America, this country which was founded with very nice moral laws, christian laws, etc. has produced so many sick individuals, millions of individuals like the Republican Party evangelical voters.

    .

  36. Deadbeat said on April 11th, 2009 at 11:27pm #

    T-C is absolutely correct in why workers vote for the Democrats and without a Left alternative they will continue to vote for the Democrats. This is why the constant berating of Obama could have a reactionary effect rather than an educational one because people don’t want to be told that their vote was “wasted” and ridiculing them for voting for Obama will backfire on the Left especially since the Left has not shown people of color and the poor that they can get their shit together.

    T-C is correct in his assessment of the Republicans. The Republican are SO awful that the Democrats, without a VIABLE Left-wing alternative, leaves communities of color with no other choice.

    Therefore it is up to the Left to get itself organized and offer RADICAL solutions and a RADICAL vision of reorganization of the political economy. As I mention the Rasmussen survey, all American are today open to the ideas inherent in Socialism. Socialism has a long affinity in the black community. This is why the Right tried to pin “Socialism” on Obama. It was a racist tactic because of Socialism’s affinity. What this points out is that “Obama-mania” could be seen as an opportunity if the Left approaches this situation with intelligence and without hyperbole, finger-wagging and proselytizing. It means having DISCIPLINE and building trust and solidarity.

    Unfortunately I’m not sure if the Left is up to the task. The Left ruined a perfect opportunity to build a movement against the War on Iraq during the Bush years. As Bush was the most unpopular President, there should be huge movement yet the Left sabotaged itself especially when it came Zionism. This doesn’t go unnoticed in communities of color and it leads to DISTRUST of the Left. Thus the Left has a lot of work to do to rebuild its credibility because one thing that communities of color do not want is betrayal from the Left. They get enough of that from the Democrats.

  37. Deadbeat said on April 11th, 2009 at 11:57pm #

    David Zirin writes …

    I’LL NEVER forget interviewing Lester “Red” Rodney, the 96-year-old former sports editor of the Communist Party’s newspaper, the Daily Worker. Speaking about the Great Depression, Rodney said, “People who weren’t around during the 1930s can’t fully grasp what it was like politically. If you weren’t some kind of radical or socialist…you were considered brain-dead, and you probably were!”

  38. bozh said on April 12th, 2009 at 7:11am #

    T C,
    i am not familiar with the “electoral dissent”. if i am correctly understanding that label, US governance [a term that has diff’nt meaning from gov’t] did allow at least four other new parties to enter election and had candidates running for office.
    but perhaps you mean smthng else by “electoral dissent”.

    written and spoken dissent had always been allowed but not welcomed. individuals, tho, may have persecuted or fired some dissenters who governance and gov’ts did nothing to prevent or punish.

    however, last few yrs we have seen further restriction of freedom. tnx

  39. bozh said on April 12th, 2009 at 7:34am #

    T C,
    i forgot to reply to your averment that we can’t change anything by just talking.
    even today with diminishing rights, all we got as a tool is our talking/writing.
    that’s all shamans/priests had to be able to enserf/enslave people some 10-2o T yrs ago; later also by king’s/noble’s/priestly army/police.

    enlightenment/education is all we have to break our chains. and we are seeding good seeds. it is a + and will never be a -.
    so, i suggest we shun politics as a plague; it being a narrow field of knowledge and thus a vitiating human activity.

    if we wld properly talk about politics we must also at the same time talk about religion, science, causes of warfare, class society, governance, courts, gov’ts, oneparty system, cia, fbi, police, drug wars, etc.

    all this topics are much or completely shunned by politico-clerical class. i am hoping new readers or even teens wld read this. tnx

  40. bozh said on April 12th, 2009 at 7:42am #

    max,
    i read your explanation about what you meant by blaming the system.
    and you say we are in agreement. still, it is OK to say it in diff’rt words.
    tnx for reply. bozhidar bob balkas is still praying to ‘god’; thi stime hoping h’d make me an excellent terrorist; the best ever.
    but is s/he/it listening?

  41. beverly said on April 12th, 2009 at 6:57pm #

    Well said and then some Martha!!!

    Ms. Taylor should expend her efforts informing black kool-aid drinkers about the real 411 on their Messiah-in-Chief – and tell her mainstream black media brethren to do the same.

  42. Charles Minor said on April 20th, 2009 at 5:23am #

    This is the some of the dumbest crap i have ever heard and i am saying that in nicely. Obama epuals OBAMAnation and will turn the U.S. into a socialist country. united we stand DIVIDED we fall

  43. Charles Minor said on April 20th, 2009 at 5:27am #

    Oh and by the way Obama isnt fully African American he is half so let me know when we get the first full blooded african american in office. Also to the people who think he is our savior, he will make this country better than you need to go check yourself into a mental facility because he is only going to bring us pain and chaos. If it sounds like Marx… and acts like Stalin… Its probably Obama