Is Obama a Fascist?
By Peter Andrew ConservativeAmerican.org
While the President’s Homeland Security Department is out with a 9-page document warning cops about Rightwing Extremists, the truth is that the enforcement community would be better off watching a far greater danger…Barack Obama himself. We’re going to use the “F” word and Barack Obama in the same sentence, However, our “F” word is Fascism.
A nation caught up in the euphoria of thinking it would be cool to have a partially-black president, and a nation upset with President Bush, willingly jumped at the chance to vote for Barack Obama. Those who brought up concerns about him, were labeled rightwingers and few believed them. The media downplayed any negative stories about Obama. The result was that we have elected at best, the nation’s first socialist president and at worst, a Fascist Leader.
You might think I’ve gone too far with this one. However, let’s look at the facts. First, what is Fascism?
Webster’s Dictionary defines Fascism as follows:
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
Robert Paxton defines Fascism this way:
It’s scary stuff. The Fascist believes in a single-party nationalist system. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently stated that she doesn’t understand the two-party system (it is #107 on the Official Obama Administration Scandals List).
Fascism is all about the “community,” not the individual. It’s message is about the good of the nation, rather than the good of a nation’s individual citizens. It is about spreading the wealth and returning it to “its rightful owners” rather than recognizing and rewarding individual accomplishment.
So, does any of it apply to Barack Obama?
President Obama consistently talks about the community over the individual. It is a battle of collectivism vs. individualism. He speaks of the “common good” as he did at his inauguration:
He also assumed he had the power to, as a representative of a minority shareholder in a publicly traded company, fire a CEO! The government owns 35% of GM and Obama simply fired the CEO. No board meeting. No vote. No input from the majority of shareholders. This scandalous power grab was applauded by the media, rather than questioned. For the most part, the media fails to provide a check and balance to a system completely controlled by one party.
Even Democrat Senator Robert Byrd says President Obama is “pushing the limits” of the Constitution with his power-grabs.
President Obama is the leader of what I believe is an extreme left-wing political movement. He exalts nation above individual. He is demanding (and getting) a more centralized autocratic government headed by himself. He continues to push the limits of the US Constitution, even trampling on it for more centralized power. He speaks of the redistribution of wealth and making enemies of wealthy citizens. President Obama also is acting like he wants to forcibly suppress the opposition. That sounds an awful lot like the Webster’s definition of Fascism we list above.
How does he intend to suppress the opposition? Your President wants to control the internet, deciding on his own what is extreme and what isn’t and then having the power to shut down sites he doesn’t like. His Homeland Security Departmet wants to have the cops work as spies on conservative Americans and those he calls “radical extremist rightwingers” like…those who are pro-life and believe in the sanctity and value of each human life. These pro-life American people are not extremists, yet Team Obama wants to paint them that way. As traditional conservative Americans, we are among these pro-lifers that the President thinks are extremists. We are not making any of this up.
He wants all the power to make all the decisions. Americans willingly gave it to him. He and the democrat-socialist party he runs control the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government. They control the schools and the labor unions. We have more power centralized into one party and one man today than ever before in our nation’s history. He wants to be able to decide which private companies should be taken over by the government. Once he’s made that choice, he wants to take them over and run them. He has already stolen the power to fire the CEO’s and put his own people in place.
Isn’t this Fascism? While it is tougher to match the Paxton definition of Fascism (and there are hundreds who have tried to define the term), President Obama’s words and deeds match the Webster’s definition.
Americans do have things and people to worry about. True Conservative Americans, peaceful, Constitution-loving Conservatives, are not among the people we need to be worried about. The direction President Obama wants to take this nation may be the thing we should be most worried about. I think we are witnessing at least the beginnings of Fascism. This is President Obama’s new (or neo) Fascism. I believe it is clear that President Barack Obama is behaving as a Fascist would. His actions certainly match the Webster’s definition.
While the President’s Homeland Security Department is out with a 9-page document warning cops about Rightwing Extremists, the truth is that the enforcement community would be better off watching a far greater danger…Barack Obama himself. We’re going to use the “F” word and Barack Obama in the same sentence, However, our “F” word is Fascism.
A nation caught up in the euphoria of thinking it would be cool to have a partially-black president, and a nation upset with President Bush, willingly jumped at the chance to vote for Barack Obama. Those who brought up concerns about him, were labeled rightwingers and few believed them. The media downplayed any negative stories about Obama. The result was that we have elected at best, the nation’s first socialist president and at worst, a Fascist Leader.
You might think I’ve gone too far with this one. However, let’s look at the facts. First, what is Fascism?
Webster’s Dictionary defines Fascism as follows:
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
Robert Paxton defines Fascism this way:
“a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion”
Who needs two parties?
“The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity, on the ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart — not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.”
Tony Blankley wrote about this at TownHall.com shortly after the inauguration…
“I believe that Obama intends to craft a new nationalism, using the disassembled timber of our traditional values to build a new, more collectivist and less individualistic ship of state. The planks will look vaguely familiar, but the ship will be quite different. It is as if he would disassemble the warship Old Ironsides and build with its timbers a collectivist’s ark.”
President Obama himself says it this way, as quoted in the Chicago Reader:
“In America,” Obama says, “we have this strong bias toward individual action. You know, we idolize the John Wayne hero who comes in to correct things with both guns blazing. But individual actions, individual dreams, are not sufficient. We must unite in collective action, build collective institutions and organizations.”
He certainly fits in with the Fascist desire to replace individualism with collectivism. He certainly “exalts nation above the individual.”
Another part of the definition is centralizing power. President Obama is taking steps to invent more presidential powers and give himself more power than any other president. He is trying to centralize decision-making. He is taking steps to ensure his 2012 victory and to create more democrat party voters. Let’s look at seven strong examples:
- From #70 on the Scandals List: As Obama tries to test the waters to see how much power he can steal in violation of the US Constitution, his trial balloon about moving the control of the census into the White House is creating yet another scandal in his first month in office. Fox News reports: “Congressional Republicans say they’ll go to court against President Obama if he doesn’t scuttle his plan to move the census into the purview of the Oval Office. But the administration says there is no such plan, even after apparently (and privately) assuring some Democratic members of Congress that there is. Statements issued by the White House have seemingly backed both points of view.” Gosh, that’s surprising (not). UPDATE 3/18/9: Obama’s ACORN community organizers will be recruiting the workers for the 2010 census! So the democrat party’s ACORN, plagued with voter fraud problems already, will run a “fair” census???
- From #71 on the Scandals List: Republican John Boehner reveals Obama sneaks money into the Deficit Stimulus Plan for his democrat partisan pals at ACORN for neighborhood “stabilization” (creating more democrat voters makes a neighborhood more “stable” I guess)
From # 95 on the Scandals List: Democrat Warns Obama about Constitutional Violations -2/25/9 America’s Watchtower: Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, sent a letter to President Obama warning him that he is pushing the constitution’s limits in regards to Obama’s appointment of all of these “czars” to oversee issues (health reform, energy, climate change, urban issues) that are supposed to be handled by the legislative branch of the government.- From #135 on the Scandals List: Obama Administration Seeks Unprecedented Powers over Private Industry - 3/19/9 The Charlotte Observer says Obama wants: “new powers to seize troubled companies such as AIG – and take ownership of their toxic assets – if their collapse would threaten the financial system. His administration will propose…a “resolution authority” that would have powers similar to those of the FDIC, which can seize control of banks, take over bad assets and sell good ones.” No details (of course) on how they would pay for such a plan.
- From #150 on the Scandals List: Obama Steals Power from Congress - 3/30/9 President Obama today took the power of the congress to decide on spending by simply announcing the government will back the warranties of both GM & Chrysler, a huge new expense. He did so without any legislative approval, again attacking the US Constitution.
- From #160 on the Scandals List: Obama Wants to Control the Internet! - 4/6/9 Team Obama proposes Office of National Cybersecurity Advisor, an arm of Obama’s executive branch, that would have vast power to monitor and control Internet traffic to “protect against threats to critical cyber infrastructure” is “rattling some civil libertarians,” says the Obama File. “The Cybersecurity Act of 2009 (.pdf) gives the president the ability to “declare a cybersecurity emergency” and shut down or limit Internet traffic in any “critical” information network “in the interest of national security.” The bill does not define a critical information network or a cybersecurity emergency. That definition would be left to Obama. The bill also grants the Secretary of Commerce “access to all relevant data concerning [critical] networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access.” This means he or she can monitor or access any data on private or public networks without regard to privacy laws. Drino Olympia Snowe is helping Obama (again) with the bill. Leslie Harris of the Center for Democracy and Technology; “Such a drastic federal intervention in private communications technology and networks could harm both security and privacy.”
- From #177 on the Scandals List: Fascist Obama Tells Local Cops to Watch out for Rightwing Extremists! - 4/13/9 Team Obama says cops should watch for right wing extremism which the Washington Post says “may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.” Obama & Janet Napolitano at Homeland Security sent a 9-page report to cops around the nation to warn them about conservative Americans! If you are a pro-lifer, cops are supposed to watch out for YOU! Michelle Malkin has the document for you, just click here. The president is off his freaking leftwing extremist rocking chair with this one! It’s part of his Obama 2012 effort to convince people that conservative Americans like you and I are “scary.” Can you imagine if President Bush had sent out a document like this about lefties like Obama? The media would have run him out of town.
He also assumed he had the power to, as a representative of a minority shareholder in a publicly traded company, fire a CEO! The government owns 35% of GM and Obama simply fired the CEO. No board meeting. No vote. No input from the majority of shareholders. This scandalous power grab was applauded by the media, rather than questioned. For the most part, the media fails to provide a check and balance to a system completely controlled by one party.
Even Democrat Senator Robert Byrd says President Obama is “pushing the limits” of the Constitution with his power-grabs.
President Obama is the leader of what I believe is an extreme left-wing political movement. He exalts nation above individual. He is demanding (and getting) a more centralized autocratic government headed by himself. He continues to push the limits of the US Constitution, even trampling on it for more centralized power. He speaks of the redistribution of wealth and making enemies of wealthy citizens. President Obama also is acting like he wants to forcibly suppress the opposition. That sounds an awful lot like the Webster’s definition of Fascism we list above.
How does he intend to suppress the opposition? Your President wants to control the internet, deciding on his own what is extreme and what isn’t and then having the power to shut down sites he doesn’t like. His Homeland Security Departmet wants to have the cops work as spies on conservative Americans and those he calls “radical extremist rightwingers” like…those who are pro-life and believe in the sanctity and value of each human life. These pro-life American people are not extremists, yet Team Obama wants to paint them that way. As traditional conservative Americans, we are among these pro-lifers that the President thinks are extremists. We are not making any of this up.
He wants all the power to make all the decisions. Americans willingly gave it to him. He and the democrat-socialist party he runs control the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government. They control the schools and the labor unions. We have more power centralized into one party and one man today than ever before in our nation’s history. He wants to be able to decide which private companies should be taken over by the government. Once he’s made that choice, he wants to take them over and run them. He has already stolen the power to fire the CEO’s and put his own people in place.
Isn’t this Fascism? While it is tougher to match the Paxton definition of Fascism (and there are hundreds who have tried to define the term), President Obama’s words and deeds match the Webster’s definition.
Americans do have things and people to worry about. True Conservative Americans, peaceful, Constitution-loving Conservatives, are not among the people we need to be worried about. The direction President Obama wants to take this nation may be the thing we should be most worried about. I think we are witnessing at least the beginnings of Fascism. This is President Obama’s new (or neo) Fascism. I believe it is clear that President Barack Obama is behaving as a Fascist would. His actions certainly match the Webster’s definition.
July 16th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
Comments at St. Louis Today website about this article after “Elite1″ posted the article at the site:
”
Mr. Happy
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:02 pm
zzzzzzzzzzz
Mr. Happy
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:04 pm
If Jesus Christ came back as President of the US you clowns would complain if it were not a stupid white hick from a southern state.
CardsRed
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:04 pm
You nutjobs are hilarious.
“Socialist” doesn’t scare people into voting for the GOP anymore, so now they’re going to completely remove meaning from the word Fascist.
It’s really lame that you can’t come up with intelligent opposition…it’s all smears and BS. There’s so much to take issue with in a serious manner, you’re not doing the country you claim to love(though i have serious doubts) any favors.
Think of the damage in the minds of independents that the left’s fascination with calling Bush a Nazi…remember the low water point of 2002…remember Rove’s “permanent majority”. There was a reason the Dems got that low…and the GOP is repeating every single mistake. It’s a real shame.
Mr. Happy
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:05 pm
And in anticipation of your first knee jerk retorts, Carter and Clinton were smart white hicks from southern states.
Board Stiff
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:06 pm
My enjoyment of the board and the average IQ of the posts I read soared when I did one thing:
Elite1 is on your IGNORE list.
CardsRed
I took him off because it’s more fun to get to read his latest copypasta.
This one’s a doozy. Laughing
SuperFly
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:12 pm
putting someone on ignore is a punk maneuver.
You want the truth? You can’t HANDLE the truth! Wink
Devil’s Merchant
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:14 pm
Dont look now happy but your racism is showing Surprised Surprised Surprised
CardsRed
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:15 pm
SuperFly wrote
putting someone on ignore is a punk maneuver.
You want the truth? You can’t HANDLE the truth! Wink
No, actually it’s a great way to avoid feeding the trolls.
IlliniGuy02
Where the heck were you when Bush and Cheney were in office for 6 years and had control of everything, and broke every law known to man? You actually think we are closer now to fascism than we were then? Think again.
Mr. Happy
Post subject: Re: Neo-Fascism…
Posted: 15 Jul 2009 22:18 pm
Devils Merchant wrote
Dont look now happy but your racism is showing Surprised Surprised Surprised
All hicks are white. Not all whites are hicks.
http://www.stltoday.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=643031
September 21st, 2009 at 11:48 am
Yeah, right. We've seen what the education community comes up with! No thanks. We note definitions of fascism in our piece that do not match yours. We also know how to pronounce it, not sure why you include that…unless you're trying to show you're sooooooooooo much smarter than everyone else. We did not say Obama is a Fascist. We asked if he was and we noted examples of how he behaves like one. We have several other posts online that describe fascism and how it relates to the political spectrum. Some of Obama's actions are like those a fascist would take. You education types teach that fascism is on the extreme right of the political spectrum, which is absolutely wrong. I think we better keep the democrat educators out of this!
September 21st, 2009 at 11:56 am
Yeah, right. We've seen what the education community comes up with! No thanks. We note definitions of fascism in our piece that do not match yours. We also know how to pronounce it, not sure why you include that…unless you're trying to show you're sooooooooooo much smarter than everyone else. We did not say Obama is a Fascist. We asked if he was and we noted examples of how he behaves like one. We have several other posts online that describe fascism and how it relates to the political spectrum. Some of Obama's actions are like those a fascist would take. You education types teach that fascism is on the extreme right of the political spectrum, which is absolutely wrong. I think we better keep the democrat educators out of this!
September 21st, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Fas⋅cism [fash-iz-uhm] Show IPA
–noun
1.( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
Source : History, Dictionary, *gasps* school.
If you have a different definition, maybe your interpretation of the facts is the problem.
Words of advise : Unless you can "competitively defend the opposite sides argument, you have not researched enough" Source - Stanford University.
I copied and pasted from the source, the pronunciation, I don't know why you would not see that as obvious, rather than threatened by it?
I don't know on what world you spend most of your time, but the facts are in… you just have to know how to interpret them. Here is a FACT: socialism is a natural reaction to a capitalist society. Learn about Marxist theory not Marxist as in history, and you can see that. You cant change that, its inevitable. Fascism.. I dont even know where you get this. It's definitively not the same thing at ALL . "Fascists believe that nations and/or races are in perpetual conflict whereby only the strong can survive by being healthy, vital, and by asserting themselves in conflict against the weak." So to point finger to a president, 1 of 535 people who make the decisions in this country is ridiculous. Take one of those issues and understand the why before you speculate, or try to loosely associate this to something different. You give him way WAY more power than he deserves.
If I took instance of anyone's life without full spectrum, I could connect the dots of anyone to anything. You need to understand the why of which it is happening. You cannot blur the facts with limited perspectives unless you understand everything including the why. I suggest you try to understand the why it is happening, not complain and try to argue views that it is happening (or propose it as merely questioning is irresponsible) WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.
Do you know any Fascist to suggest that Obama is following this pattern? You don't even understand the definition to speculate this on your own. Present the FACTS. Not your interpretation , but educated factual ones. Don't propose the question unless your expecting your audience to come to your same conclusion.
"You education types teach that fascism is on the extreme right of the political spectrum, which is absolutely wrong". How is this taught? I have never been to an institution of higher education that has taught this. Not one. This is a irresponsible understanding . The fact is that often more so than not its on the right. That is it.
This has nothing to do with democrat educators. You need present the whole truth with responsible examples of it. Including the educators. How can you leave the educated community out of this! How does that even make sense! If you don't have the WHOLE truth , then suggest your interpretation. Don't try to make you own up and present it as fact.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Did you even read the post? We do list sources (including a dictionary like the one you mention) for the story. I'm not against education, I have a master's degree. I am against liberal indoctrination by educators. We present both facts and our interpretation of them. That's why its called a blog. Sorry that offends you. We'll ask whatever questions we feel like asking and you are welcome to do the same. Read our other posts on fascism and you will see specifics about how the notion of fascism being on the right is put forth. Yes, we certainly are taught that Hitler was a far right extremist, a complete fabrication.
You are beyond wrong in stating a "fact" that fascism is more often than not on the right side of politics. This demonstrates your complete lack of understanding of the topic at hand.
http://conservativeamerican.org/dems-libs-sociali...
What makes you think the people we quote are not educated?
October 7th, 2009 at 6:27 am
Just some food for thought. Did Jesus Christ preach it's all about the individual or did he spread the word of serving thy neighbors? If we only think of ourself all the time and think It's all about ME ME ME. How can we truly move forward as a nation?
Leviticus 19:18 thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
I went to college, graduate school, and work VERY hard to make a living, yet I can't afford health insurance and when I say that a public OPtion doesn't seem like a bad idea, I'm accused of being a fascist /socialist by my republican counterparts. This is not a sports game people. This is a nation, The Native Americans were here before anyone else, and we are a blended society. We can still be conservative but let's think of how we can move forward without being so selfish but thinking of the common good of the American people. Every man and woman deserve the right to the liberty of health. God Bless.
October 13th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
You are all missing the point. Stalin, Hiltler, Mouselini were all facists and all left wing socialists. Thats all that needs to be said. Liberals simply want to change the definitions of fasism, to change the dictionary. Obama is a so much more a fasicst than bush its not funny.
December 23rd, 2009 at 8:15 am
I'm not terribly familiar with the topic, but I would argue that merely comparing the definition of fascism with Obama's presidency is a misappropriation of the term. I think that the historical characterization of fascism as a distinctly anti-liberal, anti-socialist is well supported in prominent scholarly literature and is crucial to understanding the usage of the term. Without this historical context it is entirely too easy to conflate the fascist ideals, for instance, of controlling industry with the socialist-leaning policies of increased regulation (or public shareholding in GM's case) that Obama engenders.
I think Kristina had a point there — it's not that you aren't allowed to have opinions or print them wherever you like, far from it. The fact remains, though, that this kind of writing will remain political diatribe unless it assumes some air of scholarship and approaches the subject objectively. We should all by now be children of the postmodern era. Yes you have sources and yes, the article is convincing, but that doesn't say a thing about its methodological rigor. Maybe I'm making assumptions about your assumptions, but it sounds an awful lot like you scoured that definition for ways to paint Obama as a fascist, which as a Master in something or other you know is no way to approach a subject that you care to study in a proper manner.
In the interest of disclosure I paint myself as a liberal. However, I don't necessarily disagree with the text of your argument — that the definition of fascism sounds an awful lot like what Obama is doing. I just think that the whole story isn't being represented and that the subtext of your argument is a mischaracterization of both (from my point of view) Obama's actions and, more objectively, fascism as a concept.
December 23rd, 2009 at 7:30 pm
If you are open to the historical truths of fascism, which it sounds like you will be, please see this video:
http://conservativeamerican.org/dems-libs-sociali...
It describes how wrong those so-called historical descriptions are which pretend to put fascists on the right side
of the political spectrum. Nothing could be further from the truth.