archive › Barack Obama
Pessimism Means Fighting for the Impossible
Like a lot of people who voted for Obama, I’m pretty upset about the election results in Massachusetts tonight. On the one hand, I knew full well that Obama would never meet my expectations, which were considerable, and that he had no desire to do so, with his post-partisan belief in abstract “reform,” and even more troubling faith in the Republican Party as acting in good-faith, having been made clear early on in the campaign. I suppose, then, that I’d have no good explanation for why I feel so betrayed and disappointed, and even guilty for being so, as these sentiments bear witness to some small kernel of hope I had that things might be different this time around.
So now I just want to selectively quote Brad Johnson’s brief post over at An und für sich regarding the recent narrative taken up by certain liberal progressives about how this sort of disenchantment was predictable from the beginning given Obama’s lofty rhetoric and promise of hope and change, and that people who took Obama seriously should become more pragmatic, more “realist.” Here’s what Brad writes:
As I reflect on the latest setback to the Democratic party’s legislative agenda in tonight’s election in Massachusetts, I’m reminded of the increasingly prominent narrative making the rounds amongst the A-list liberal bloggers. Basically, so we’re told, we should’ve known better than to expect anything more than what we’ve gotten so far out of an Obama presidency. Sure, he used flashy, inspirational rhetoric
…
Dream Big, Obama
David Sirota in Salon:
All of these inventors envisaged machines, theories and societies that never before existed. And that’s why for all the positive, even admirable steps Obama’s America seems poised to take, the aspirations still seem too small, too unimaginative, too confined by old parameters and old conceptions of how things have always worked.
Consider the Wall Street bailouts. By simply giving banks trillions of dollars with no strings attached, our government theorizes that the problem is not the financial system, but a momentary cash drought that can be solved by temporary recapitalization. These bailouts do not aspire to change the whole industry into one dominated by many small institutions rather than a few big ones. They also don’t reach for “a tightly regulated banking system, which made finance a staid, even boring business,” as Paul Krugman said we once had — they envision the same get-rich-quick casino that generated huge profits and huge losses.
Via @HicSaltus.
Use Your Illusions
Žižek offers hope for those of us burdened by cynicism. He also touches on genocide, farming and the importance of awakening from our dreams. (Tom Waits might counter, “you’re innocent when you dream” and Zizek may reply, “Shut up you’re not real!”)
I wanted to be the one who links to a Žižek article for a change. I even went to Wikipedia to copy the funny Z’s.
Obama’s victory is a sign of history in the triple Kantian sense of signum rememorativum, demonstrativum, prognosticum. A sign in which the memory of the long past of slavery and the struggle for its abolition reverberates; an event which now demonstrates a change; a hope for future achievements. The scepticism displayed behind closed doors even by many worried progressives – what if, in the privacy of the voting booth, the publicly disavowed racism will re-emerge? – was proved wrong. One of the interesting things about Henry Kissinger, the ultimate cynical Realpolitiker, is how utterly wrong most of his predictions were. When news reached the West of the 1991 anti-Gorbachev military coup, for example, Kissinger immediately accepted the new regime as a fact. It collapsed ignominiously three days later. The paradigmatic cynic tells you confidentially: ‘But don’t you see that it is all really about money/power/sex, that professions of principle or value are just empty phrases which count for nothing?’ What the cynics don’t see is their own naivety, the naivety of their cynical wisdom which ignores the power of illusions.
…It is unlikely that the financial meltdown of 2008 will function as a blessing in disguise, the awakening from a dream, the sobering reminder that we live in the reality of global capitalism. It all depends on how it will be symbolised, on what ideological interpretation or story will impose itself and determine the general perception of the crisis. When the normal run of things is traumatically interrupted, the field is open for a ‘discursive’ ideological competition. In Germany in the late 1920s, Hitler won the competition to determine which narrative would explain the reasons for the crisis of the Weimar Republic and the way out of it; in France in 1940 Maréchal Pétain’s narrative won in the contest to find the reasons for the French defeat. Consequently, to put it in old-fashioned Marxist terms, the main task of the ruling ideology in the present crisis is to impose a narrative that will not put the blame for the meltdown on the global capitalist system as such, but on its deviations – lax regulation, the corruption of big financial institutions etc.
The New Socialism
Matthew Yglesias:
Over the past 30-35 years or so, the world as a whole has retreated from the high tide of state management of the economy that was reached around midcentury, and moved more in the direction of laissez faire. But I think it’s fair to say that though the trend has been perfectly general, the political leadership in this movement has tended to come from Washington and London, where Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were the loudest and clearest exponents of it and their successors on the center-left tended to confirm, rather than reverse, a new Anglophone consensus. And yet:
The British and American plans, though far from identical, have two common elements according to officials: injection of government money into banks in return for ownership stakes and guarantees of repayment for various types of loans. […] The Treasury’s openness to direct infusions of cash is a remarkable change in tone from a few weeks ago, when the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., and the Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, discouraged such actions in testimony before Congress. “Putting capital in institutions is about failure,” Mr. Paulson declared on Sept. 23. “This is about success.”
This is what a lot of left-of-center economists said in the first place, but the ideological taboo against nationalization was very strong. Now, though, the forces of looming collapse in the banking sector are proving even stronger. Thus, it looks like it’ll be George W. Bush, Hank Paulson, and Ben Bernanke who bring a very strong dose of socialism to the United States of America. And yet Andy McCarthy’s busy worrying if Barack Obama is a closet Maoist.
Vote for Obama
Shaviro over at Pinocchio Theory argues that, despite the fact that the Democrats will more than likely disappoint anyone who thinks anything will actually “change” beyond a pathetic return to Clintonian neoliberalism, one should nevertheless vote for Obama:
It is not stupid to vote for McCain/Palin; rather, it is evil. Republicans are intrinsically, and necessarily, morally depraved. Anyone who votes for McCain/Palin, or supports them, by that very fact demonstrates that he or she is a person utterly devoid of basic morality, and lacking in any respect for others. To vote for McCain is to shit on human civilization, and show utter contempt for human values and human hopes. And not in spite of the Democrats’ hypocrisy, but rather precisely because of this — because their hypocrisy is, as it were, the compliment that vice pays to virtue — the only moral thing to do in this election is to vote for Obama.
(Via I cite.)
Toyota Brown
So although many people seem to be dreaming of the slightly more exciting Republican nominee, last night I had the strangest dream involving Obama and McCain. It took place at a surreal convention center; the decor reminded me of a mix between a David Lynch film and a vibrant Nintendo videogame. Anyhow, the video being broadcast was showcasing, in a cartoony, almost socialist realist form, all of the various ways in which Barack Obama was better than McCain, making the case for how easy it should be for him to win. A typically stupid “dream as a fulfillment of a wish,” as Freud said.
Then John McCain took the stage with someone who was apparently an old buddy of his from their rock and roll days. The guy had sagging, but tight white skin, numerous piercings, shades and a soul patch, reminiscent of Tommy Lee. His nickname for McCain was “Toyota Brown,” the origins of which were not explained, except that it was referred to as a term of endearment from when John McCain, too, was evidently a hard rocker in the mid- to late-70’s.
Which is all to say that from now on I’ll be referring to John McCain as “Toyota Brown” on this blog, and hope others follow in my footsteps.
Vote for Change
The Obama campaign has a nifty, Katamari Damacy-esque website where you can register to vote quickly and easily, unlike the McCain campaign, which could only conceivably win if they were to actively discourage new voters from registering. I followed the instructions and was able to register to vote absentee in my county in about 10 minutes tops. I think the process for normal voting is a bit shorter, since you don’t have to take a detour through state and then county websites. (Via Bitch, Ph.D..)
The Audacity of Rhetoric
Another Zizek article in In These Times, this time specifically on the subject of Barack Obama. I haven’t read it yet since I’m in a hurry, but I like the quote the editor highlighted:
Measured by the low standards of conventional wisdom, the old saying ‘Don’t just talk, do something!’ is one of the most stupid things one can say.
Back to the Futura
Given all of the idiocy the radical right has been spewing in recent days about how Obama’s trip to Germany is somehow a step closer to him burning the Reichstag, it’s worth noting, as John Holbo does, that the Obama campaign has chosen German “New Typography” for their posters and advertisements. Here’s an interesting excerpt from German Modern:
After the Nazi’s rise to power in 1933, however, when the Dessau Bauhaus was closed (the school had moved from its original home in Weimar in 1925), it was forbidden to use modern design or sans-serif typefaces such as Futura, which Goebbels called a “Jewish invention.” Rigid, central balanced composition returned and traditional (and often illegible) Fraktur type was touted as symbolic of the glories of the nation. (17)
For typophiliacs or those interested in the art of the Third Reich, I recommend reading the entire article over at Crooked Timber.
The Audacity of Listening
A strangely sensible op-ed piece by Gail Collins on Obama’s recent “triangulation.” I say “strangely” because it’s in the New York Times. Zing! (Via Wonkette.)
FISA Passed
To the surprise of no one, the FISA bill that grants retroactive immunity to telecoms and legalizes warrantless wiretapping has passed today. I think the vote was something like 69-28. Even though pretty much the entire Internet is aware of this, I figured I would post a link to mark the historic occasion.
Anyhow, here is a comprehensive article over at Salon by former constitutional lawyer Glenn Greenwald on why this bill is a great leap forward for democracy and why the Democratic-led congress may be even worse than the Republican-led one. The owl of Minerva spreads its wings at dusk!
Neobamacon
For those that still think Obama is an “ideal candidate,” check out this laundry list of cringe-inducing positions adopted by our democratic Patron Saint, carefully culled together by Bernard Chazelle over at A Tiny Revolution. To wit, he’s still way better than WALNUTS!, but he is no Pericles.
Get Disappointed By Someone New
In honor of Barack Obama’s rejection of campaign finance, support for FISA and, most recently, his denouncing the Supreme Court decision to reject the death penalty for child rape, linking to this bumper sticker by Edge of the American West seems like the only appropriate measure.
(All proceeds go to the Obama campaign.)