Communist Obama Display

im000541

Above: Pictures of communists associated with Obama in a negative way by right wingers. Karl Marx, Frank Marshall Davis, Obama, Bill Ayers, and Che Guevara

Two days ago a few students approached me wondering if I saw the VERY large anti-Obama banner displayed down the road from campus; I really thought they were joking until I and a group of my students took a field trip off campus to take pictures — and to mock the sign; as a liberal, I support the rights of people to protest and showcase their political and ideological leanings; if I did not I would be the biggest hypocrite and agent of anti-intellectualism on campus. Still, I find it interesting that Americans want to associate Obama with communism. Better yet, I find it most interesting that people who protest him and the others on that banner — but have not read nor discussed their work. I have blogged before on the topic of Marxism as an academic method of study here and here. Thus, most people really do not understand this topic nor have they read about it; I realize I sound like a snob, but I do suspect I am right.

As noted before ,Obama is not a communist…. Though I am sure his race and academic training influenced him. It was during the course of the 20th century in which the emergence of Marxism as an academic philosophy in higher education set forth a new wave of examining American culture. It was during the Cold War and its sub conflicts (Vietnam), as well as the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s that promulgated many academics to make an ideological shift to the far left. With social and political instability taking place in the United States, Marxist academics were training young students of history, political science, economics, etc., for an intellectual war; this conflict was set to transform the thought process in classes, lecture halls, professional meetings, and published works.

im000544

Above: Carson in front of Houston’s firewood business anti-Obama display.

im000542

Above: HCHS students who visited the conservative shrine located off of Beltway 8 next to Baseball USA.

Advertisements

28 thoughts on “Communist Obama Display

  1. Whenever I hear people bring out the whole “Obama is a communist/socialist” spiel I can’t help but be reminded of Tom Brady’s (no, not the quarterback) pamphlet, Black Monday: Segregation or Amalgamation …America Has Its Choice, where he used the same argument to propagate his racist ideals against Brown v. Board.

    I don’t want to inject race where it doesn’t belong, but the resemblance is striking.

  2. Yeah, things like this always make me scratch my head. I will say though that I’m much more concerned with Guevara. The Marxism thing can be chalked up to general ignorance. Putting him up there with Che is just gratuitous, and more reprehensible. Like comparing Bush to Hitler.

    One other thing. I’m trying not to be obnoxiously argumentative, but do conservatives not “support the rights of people to protest and showcase their political and ideological leanings?”

  3. Eddie,

    Although I believe it is a huge waste of money and time, I see no difference between the posters of Obama and the Anti-Bush posters that I have seen posted all over NYC and other large cities. As a matter of fact, I saw some of these pictures likening Bush to Hitler. One should not question the intelligence of some- without questioning the intelligence of all.

    Suzan

  4. I’m having a bit of trouble understanding your post theNimrod. Most of the conservatives are the ones who are praising the accuracy of this poster. Though I am conservative, I hardly consider this sign to be completely accurate. I am in agreement that some of Obama’s plans do tend to be a bit socialistic, but he is not as extreme as Che Guevara or even Bill Ayers (though most whites still probably don’t even know who he is).

  5. It depends on the conservatives Nimrod. And no, this is not a personal attack on anyone on this blog. I have found, however, based on my experience in private Christian schools and universities, that protest and political/ideological leanings were definitely suppressed at the institutions I was associated with. Now, that’s by no means a sampling every single conservative in the world, but sometimes you have to go with what you’ve seen.

  6. I am in agreement with Mrs. Phenicie. True that Obama is now our president and deserves our respect as the commander in chief, but it has got to be a dual sided endeavor. You cannot expect the Republicans to sit by and feel proud of Obama while the Democrats are singing “Hey Hey, Na, Na, Kiss him Goodbye” when bush left on his Sea king. People will always go to any extremes to try and discredit political candidates (on both sides mind you), and sometimes stupidity can work, but it is never a one-sided occurance.

  7. Every time I see this banner and/or picture, I can’t help but laugh. Anyone who likens President Obama to Che and Karl Marx is obviously extremely ignorant and stupid. I would say the same thing about anyone who likens Bush to Hitler.

    Kristi – I agree. I have, on multiple occasions, been attacked by my peers and faculty members for my Leftist views. It used to bother me more than it does now – I have learned to reserve political discussion for people of a similar intellectual caliber.

  8. Kristi – I see where you’re coming from. The propensity to censor is stronger amongst conservative institutions like the ones you’re talking about. But remember you’re talking about private religious institutions. As you say, hardly a great sampling, let alone comparable to liberal reaction in the face of a public billboard like this one.

    Patrick – I don’t think you understood my post. I would agree with your assessment.

  9. Phenicie: I am not one to showcase things that bash “W.” I find this interesting because it notes a sense of ignorance on behalf of the presenters. It is a fundamental misunderstanding of complex ideological topics concluded into something they heard on FOX news.

  10. I figured you would have hopped the fence by now and snagged the Marx and/or Che poster. Not for censorship, just so you could have one. 🙂
    BTW – I saw some Obama shirts that look very similar to those Che shirts that are so popluar.

  11. Wow. That’s not the most astute thing I’ve ever seen. That having been said, I support the right of all people to peacefully proclaim their ignorance. As an aside, I’m not sure you could really lump any three of the individuals pictured (non-Houston residents) together.

    Ayers and Che make the most logical pairing in some ways, but the others wouldn’t fit.

  12. Oh dear. That makes me chuckle… a sad, cynical chuckle.

    It would have been more effective if the maker had used Mao and Stalin instead (although it would be just as stupid); I’m sure far more people recognize them than Davis and Ayers.

  13. iantrevor: It seems that we are often forced to do that. I know I am; like the Brady ref…

    Dillon: I say we just take it. We will leave a book in its place. I have a few pixs of Reagan.

  14. I drove past this the morning after Obama was sworn in, and I actually did a double take of it (probably not the best thing to do when driving) but I’m really happy you wrote about this, thank you

  15. Eddie,

    Quite the commentary on this piece. I have one last point to make. The only difference between the billboard and a blog is that a billboard stimulates the economy.

    Love ya Eddie.

    Suzan

  16. You would think they would look up collectivism first – and I do think Obama will prove to be – let’s invent a new word here – a
    redistributionist. There is a difference in my mind between the two
    (communism as practiced by those pictured and collectivism).

    Of course, putting a photograph up of someone like Eugene Debs or Big
    Bill Haywood is not going to stir-up any emotions amongst the average
    historically ignorant American since they have no clue who Debs and
    those who shared his beliefs were. I would put President Obama more inline with individuals like these two, who wished to change the economic structure of the nation, create large government, and have a leveling of the classes so to speak (and I would imagine that Debs and Haywood of course would be on the top of that leveled society).

    President Obama faces a tough four years. Some of the problems he faces are not of his own making, some are, and some he has yet to make for himself (all Presidents create some of their own grief). I have very mixed feelings about his presidency now that the former senator is President.

    Historically, it is exciting that in my own lifetime as a Southerner I have lived through and witnessed the end of segregation, and while race relations in the U.S. are not perfect, they have improved enough that the white voters of America voted for a black man in large enough numbers that an African-American was legitimately and peacefully selected to serve in the highest elected office in the nation.

    For the sake of my nation’s future, it is important to me that President Obama at least wear the mantle of the office of President well. Regardless of the success or failure of his agenda, President Obama in some ways faces some similar challenges as the first President of the United States, George Washington. President Washington not only had to determine how the job of President was to be performed, he had the burden of the knowledge that his Presidency would set the tone of conduct, behavior, and standard for all Presidents to follow him, and that the standard needed to be set as high as possible.

    President Obama does not have to determine how the Office of President functions, but he must set a very high standard for HOW he performs the duties of President. Average Americans, on both sides of the political fence, will be watching closely. A poor showing on the President’s part will open the door to racists to say, “see, a black man cannot do the job” or to tell their children “never look up to a black man as a role model – see how President Obama was not up to the challenge.”

    Fair or not, President Obama MUST set a high standard for integrity,
    work ethic, ethical decision making, and both the public and private
    conduct of his affairs while serving as President. His political agenda could fail, and I hope most of it does, but if he can conduct himself in the aforementioned manner, I believe President Obama will succeed in leaving a positive and lasting legacy that is far more important than a political agenda.

    I have recently been amused as a conservative by the comparison being
    made by a few local media members of the newly sworn in President Obama and that of the Great Communicator, Ronald Reagan. Both are great orators but that is as far as the similarity between the two goes. But I do hope President Obama takes a page from the Reagan years – even Reagan’s harshest critics from the left said he wore the mantel of the Office of President well and was an excellent Chief of State, a SYMBOL of the nation’s highest office, a role model to its citizens. President Reagan was, well, Presidential.

    President Obama has the opportunity to set an example to ALL American
    people that the President of the United States represents ALL U.S.
    citizens regardless of their individual background. This will open the door for opportunities for other individuals to follow and it will allow for further integration of different groups into the melting pot known as America. If President Obama can carry out his duties with great dignity, class, and serve as a great role model to ALL Americans, his presidency will go a long way in successfully eliminating irrelevant objections on both sides of the political isle as to why this group or that individual cannot successfully represent a particular group of Americans. As a conservative – this is the one area I truly hope President Obama succeeds in.

    Beyond that, I hope his left leaning agenda goes nowhere.

    I will be watching closely.

  17. This is mind boggling how people would go this far just to show how they feel about our new president. I myself was not going for Obama, but now there is nothing I can do to change it so I have just accepted it and moved on. Why can’t everyone do this?

  18. I too manage to sneak a peak at this poster as I drive by. Now Carson you know how much of a conservative I am, but I honestly don’t agree entirely with this poster. To me, Marx is not the proper historical figure to associate with Obama. I agree with Jon in that if the person was going to compare Obama to a communist leader, it would be more fitting at any rate to use Lenin or Stalin. I lean more to Obama being more socialist at any rate.
    I agree with Patrick and Mrs. Phenicie for the most part, not surprising for me though. Obama is president for the next four years and we should all do our best to support him, but when you have democrats shouting left and right about Bush and the mockery he has had to endure, you have to understand the bitterness of many conservatives and the unwillingness to support our new President. I know we cannot change the fact Obama is president, but democrats have been complaining about Bush for the past 8 years. With all the posters that have been published about Bush, this doesn’t surprise me.

    I’m guessing Ayers was used because of the Obama-Ayers controversy.

    Very interesting discussion, it was nice to read different points of view.

  19. “Redistributionist” isn’t the same as communist or socialist? OMG…please give me a break. I think the display is VERY fitting and certainly Lenin and Stalin need to be added…maybe even Chairman Mao. The way we’re going there won’t BE any constitution nor “voting rights” either come time for the next election. It could be perhaps we’ve seen the last presidential “election” for this country or what’ll be left of it. Obama will be just as Castro is in Cuba. Get ready to turn in all US currency and of course any/all firearms to the new military soon.

  20. We can safely bet that Obama fits the three requirements of a Marxist motivated politician.

    1. The dialectical and materialist concept of history — A society’s history results from its internal conflicts between social classes (bourgeoisie and proletariat), and among the forces of production (technology, labour, institutions); a society’s future derives from the developments resulting from said social conflicts.

    His first months have brought more social conflict than any in our short history, and by his inflamatory actions and rhetoric, he reveals that this is his desire. Bring about conflict to cause revolution.

    2. The critique of capitalism — In a capitalist society, an economic minority (the bourgeoisie) dominate and exploit the working class (proletariat) majority. Per the labor theory of value, under conditions they do not control, workers produce more output, and create more value, than necessary to meet societal needs; with the surplus value (over-production), the capitalists accumulate more wealth and political power.

    “Washington is broken” …. no, the government is out of control. The principles and foundations of our great nation are timeless, but he is removing them and thereby opposed to the freedom upon which Capitalism is based.

    3. The theory of revolution — In a capitalist economy, the workers are alienated because they do not control their labour, thus are alienated from society, from the products they make, and from Nature. The solution is uniting in labour unions and political parties, thereby, the workers assume politico-economic power from the bourgeoisie.

    “Equal work for equal pay” says it all as well as “Change”.

    revolution ‘ a radical and pervasive CHANGE in society and the social structure, esp. one made suddenly and often accompanied by violence.’

    You see, the problem is that you don’t have to have a PHD to understand … much learning doth make you mad. He may not look like a marxist as he has walked into the posh seat of the worlds greatest nation which was built on principles to which he does not espouse. But if he talks, walks and acts like a Marxist .. he is just that.

  21. To say he isn’t a socialist makes me scratch my head. Though ultimately I say this man read Marx and thought, “yeah that makes sense.” Which of course as such means he’s completely ignored history. Elected yes, successful at destroying our country, yes.

  22. Pingback: Anti-Obama Display | The Professor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s