Obama and socialism are related subjects, but not dependent subjects. A discussion about Obama being wrong doesn't have to include socialism just as a conversation about socialism doesn't have to include Obama.
The biggest problem with Obama is that we have a set of laws in this country that are there to limit the power and authority of the government, itself. Congress does not have the authority to make any law - it can only make laws that are consistent with the Constitution - a document that outlines the structure of the government and what the government is allowed to do (that is why all states that join the nation ratify it and agree to abide by it). Obama, however, does not seem to recognize these processes and limitations. The ends justify the means.
Which leads us to problem number two - which does involve, to some degree, socialism.
But, again, socialism isn't necessarily the source of the problem, but a product of the problem. The problem cuts to the root of human nature and human arrogance. The problem is that there are people who believe they have the right to tell you how to live.
These people come in many shapes and forms and will carry many different ideas to the tune of this mentality. Through some process of events, they have come to believe that they are not just smarter or 'better' than you - but that they are therefor entitled to lord over you. It is not just arrogance - it is a rejection of the very notion that beings have free will.
This fundamental mindset is what drives those who seed the idea of fascism, socialism, etc. The argument is very seductive because it promises security if only you allow a certain group or person to control things. "Just do what I say, and you'll never be hungry." Many people initially buy into the idea because it sounds very proper. People have a "duty to society" and should "pay their fair share."
But it is fundamentally evil - even if its goal of prosperity is noble.
As people begin to buy into the deception, the accusation phase begins to take hold. Those who do not believe it to be a good idea to join with the warlord or to take government command of businesses are quickly accused of being vile, evil people who simply want to live like kings upon the backs of the working.
Of course, no one can promise you prosperity. That is not within the power of a government to grant - it cannot over-ride the laws of nature. People can produce prosperity through their efforts, but a promise of prosperity is a promise that you will be rewarded with the efforts of someone else. It can promise you nothing that you can't produce on your own to begin with.
But it all sounds good, people buy into it, and then why wouldn't other people want a system of justice and equality? Surely, if they don't want a system of justice and equality - they want a system of injustice and inequality.
Of course, by this time, they have already bought the lie that the system they are supporting is going to yield the promise of justice and the promise of equality (or that it can yield it at all).
Thus, they will eventually turn against those who resist the conversion. Ridiculing, assaulting - even jailing and executing/torturing in some cases.
It's quite possibly going to be the fate of America, at this point.
It wouldn't appear so, currently, because the population is starting to dig in its heels against this administration and many of its ideologies... but the seeds are sown and the crisis will continue to pile up. The dollar is doomed to hyper inflation and it will be about that time that we become a large scale re-enactment of Germany in the 30s.
The national socialists will rise to power and will begin exterminating political opposition.
Perhaps there will be enough of a hold-out to have a civil war over it - but the major population centers are so overwhelmingly indoctrinated into this idea, already, that it would likely be a rural phenomena that prompts a response from the military that essentially forces farmers into producing food under penalty of death.
You know. Kind of like what happened with Stalin when the rural population thought he was off his rocker and thought they were just going to not sell food to communist dictators.
The wonderful thing about communism is that someone else gets to declare what you do their property and kill you when you disagree with their claim.
But then you get sarcastic remarks from people who insist the free market is somehow 'survival of the fittest' when the existence of charities (before the enlightened concept of forcing people to hand over money to others in governments came about) pretty much refutes the very notion that free market is about 'survival of the fittest.'
The free market is about the notion that individuals are responsible for their own choices and that no one is granted domain over your free choice regarding how you apply your knowledge/talents/trades. It is the idea that no one has the right or the authority to force you to make or purchase anything.
