Milos Forman Says Oh, Grow Up! … US Not a Socialist Country
By Staff News & Analysis - July 12, 2012

Obama the Socialist? Not Even Close … When I was asked to direct "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," my friends warned me not to go anywhere near it. The story is so American, they argued, that I, an immigrant fresh off the boat, could not do it justice. They were surprised when I explained why I wanted to make the film. To me it was not just literature but real life, the life I lived in Czechoslovakia from my birth in 1932 until 1968. The Communist Party was my Nurse Ratched, telling me what I could and could not do; what I was or was not allowed to say; where I was and was not allowed to go; even who I was and was not. Now, years later, I hear the word "socialist" being tossed around by the likes of Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and others. President Obama, they warn, is a socialist. The critics cry, "Obamacare is socialism!" They falsely equate Western European-style socialism, and its government provision of social insurance and health care, with Marxist-Leninist totalitarianism. It offends me, and cheapens the experience of millions who lived, and continue to live, under brutal forms of socialism. – New York Times

Dominant Social Theme: Americans just don't know how good they have it.

Free-Market Analysis: What the hell is this?

Milos Forman, who won Academy Awards for best director for the films "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" and "Amadeus," has penned a defense of the formal American military/political system, the one that is waging at least six overt and covert wars overseas, that has poisoned millions with depleted uranium and has participated in the virtual ruin of the world's economy via monopoly fiat central banking.

It only goes to show that you can be really smart at some things and not at others. That's our initial reaction, and one we tend to stick to.

On the other hand, maybe somebody or something got to Forman and he ended up making this statement to benefit his career, his family, his personal safety. Whatever possessed him, we wonder both at the motivation and the necessity.

Is Forman a formal backer of President Barack Obama? He's certainly no fan of those who complain that the US is verging on profound authoritarianism, and that it has been abetted by the current president and his allies.

Forman says he'd lived through the real thing and those that are sounding a warning over the US are just exaggerating. Here's some more:

My sister-in-law's father, Jan Kunasek, lived in Czechoslovakia all his life. He was a middle-class man who ran a tiny inn in a tiny village. One winter night in 1972, during a blizzard, a man, soaked to the bone, awakened him at 2 in the morning. The man looked destitute and, while asking for shelter, couldn't stop cursing the Communists. Taking pity, the elderly Mr. Kunasek put him up for the night.

A couple of hours later, Mr. Kunasek was awakened again, this time by three plainclothes policemen. He was arrested, accused of sheltering a terrorist and sentenced to several years of hard labor in uranium mines. The state seized his property. When he was finally released, ill and penniless, he died within a few weeks. Years later we learned that the night visitor had been working for the police. According to the Communists, Mr. Kunasek was a class enemy and deserved to be punished …

Whatever his faults, I don't see much of a socialist in Mr. Obama or, thankfully, signs of that system in this great nation. Mr. Obama is accused of trying to expand the reach of government — into health care, financial regulation, the auto industry and so on. It's fair to question whether the federal government should have expanded powers: America, to its credit, has debated this since its birth. But let's be clear about how frightening socialism actually could be …

I'm not sure Americans today appreciate quite how predatory socialism was. It was not — as Mr. Obama's detractors suggest — merely a government so centralized and bloated that it hobbled private enterprise: it was a spoils system that killed off everything, all in the name of "social justice."

Our issue in these humble pages isn't with President Obama, either, or a President Mitt Romney. But we think Mr. Forman either hasn't been reading enough material on the Internet or he's ignoring what's available.

The US likely has more prisoners in its penal gulag than the Soviet Union had at its height. The US's military-industrial complex is infinitely more powerful than anything Hitler built in pre-war Germany and the US is armed with weapons of which Hitler could only dream.

Anyway … who does he think funded the Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany? There is powerful evidence showing that the same power elite that is now making its will more clearly known in the West was behind the terribly repressive systems that Mr. Forman complains about.

Wall Street bankers snuck into pre-Soviet Russia dressed as Red Cross helpers and funded the Red Army with millions. Hitler's Nazi Party was funded by Money Power as well. This is not supposition. The historical evidence exists.

Forman is claiming that the system he lived under as a young man was far worse than the system that exists today in America. But the forces of authoritarianism that are active in the West are the very forces that created the socialism and fascism he rightly found so frightening and reprehensible in Eastern Europe.

Money Power works via a Hegelian dialectic. It has to create opposing forces of thesis and antithesis in order to create the synthesis. In the 20th century, Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union existed as an antithesis to the West's freer thesis. But today, we are evidently and obviously in the synthesis phase where all political systems seem a good deal more homogeneous.

Forman, of course, won't see it this way. He simply claims that concerns voiced over Obama are over-blown. He wants to see "unity" and claims that the democracy that still exists in the US, "a miraculous gathering of diverse players, desperately needs … unity."

What he wants is for "all participants (to) play fair and strive for the common good … If just one section, or even one player, is out of tune, the music will disintegrate into cacophony."

The point he's making here is that opponents of Barack Obama are being overly harsh in their assessment of both Obama's intentions and the programs such as "Obamacare" that have become law during his reign.

The libertarian magazine Reason commented on Forman's article, as we are. Before we make our final point, we'll quote the summation of the Reason commentary just to make sure we're being "fair and balanced" – something our enemies would never accuse us of! Here's Reason:

Like culture in general – which has benefited from a technological and attitudinal deregulation – political battles and elections are more hard-fought because more not fewer people can get in the game now. In this sense, the passion of contemporary politics (remarkably non-violent, too, despite all those phoney-baloney warnings about tea party mobs and all that) is a sign that Americans are still making glorious, discordant, woefully off-key music.

This is a thoughtful assessment by Reason, though it is one we disagree with profoundly. From our point of view, it doesn't matter how many people participate in the "system." What's going on in the US and the West generally is apparently a preparation for what will be initially a slow-motion genocide that may well pick up speed as it unfolds.

To us, unlike Reason, which proclaims itself partial to much of Forman's argument, there is less and less "glorious, discordant, woefully off-key music." In fact, we have trouble hearing music at all. Forman wouldn't have it but our paradigm is a good bit grimmer than his. We hear jackboots.

Come on, now! It's certainly not Reason's paradigm, but there is plenty of evidence for Money Power – a handful of elite families that control central banking around the world and are busy implementing world government. This may not worry Forman, were he to acknowledge it, but we find it dreadful … in the sense of inspiring dread.

Where does Forman believe the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, Bank for International Settlements, World Bank, World Health Organization, International Criminal Court, Interpol and other globalist institutions came from? All these entities have been built up within the past century.

Forman doubtless wouldn't deny their existence, as they unimpeachably exist. But he would apparently deny that these facilities constitute a present danger or even a future one. He would, we have to think, deny the trend.

We believe the kind of centralization that is taking place is not merely dangerous, it is part of a move to fulfill what has been predicted by such grim forebodings as the Georgia Guidestones. Whether one believes the prophecies or not, the idea that human beings should live in harmony with nature at a carrying rate of 500 million is a startling thought. Who is to do the culling?

Thanks to the Internet and what we call the Internet Reformation, much has been discovered about the secret conspiracy to build world government. Again, such a conspiracy is not musical. It does not provide even discordant music. Once one understands the trends, the pattern that can be discerned is truly frightening.

After Thoughts

Forman, in our view, is either blind to a terrible sociopolitical evolution that is clear to us or, despite his glorious and artful pedigree, is being willfully ignorant.