Obama Worse For US Democracy Than Bush?

[garth cartwright]

http://davidswanson.org/content/obama-even-worse-bush

Thought provoking essay by David Swanson. To think Charlie believed so much in Obama and how disappointed he would be if he had lived to see what kind of Prez he became.

[Jonathan E.]

What a depressing piece — and events, the bombing of Libya, have now outstripped the article. And Obama did about fuck-all to help out in Wisconsin.

It's not just Charlie who might/would have been disappointed in Obama as president. I'm not sure I know one informed American who approves of his performance. Of course, there are many uninformed Americans who don't pay much attention — and why should they?

But there's also a level of complete naivety. As Chris Hedges, I think it was him, said, "Obama would never have been elected, would not even have been nominated, if he was not approved of by the corporations and established power structure. He was never a threat to their interests." That's a paraphrase, but when I read the original, I was absolutely struck by its blinding truth.

[Des]

Noam Chomsky said something similar the other night. It seems incredible how people thought Obama was going to make any difference or be any better. They should have listened to me. I told you so etc.

[Jonathan E.]

Still the slight problem of what the choice was.

[howard male]

Quite frankly I’m always surprised that anyone of intelligence ever gets caught up in the illusion of democracy here or in the States. That’s why I have no interest in following the game of politics.

But having said that, I must confess I did get caught up in the collective hypnosis that led so many to believe that this time - with Obama - things might at least start to shift in the right (rather than Right) direction. Sigh.

[Adam Blake]

We don't live in a democracy and neither do the Americans. We live in a plutocracy devoted to the service and worship of Mammon. Obama cannot change that. To suggest that he is worse than Bush seems to me a fundamental misunderstanding of the different natures of the two men. I commute to America two or three times a year and have done since the last days of the Bush era. I can testify that Obama has made a difference, many differences, but they are small and only noticeable if you have them pointed out to you by someone who actually understands grass roots America (which no Brit does, any more than any Yank understands Blighty).

As for his lack of action on Wisconsin, reneging on campaign promises etc. I suspect that few people feel as badly about that as Obama himself. He is not a stupid man, nor, I believe, is he an evil man. I suspect that Bush was both. I am sorry if I come across as an apologist for Obama. What I suspect is that the office he holds, that of President, is as irredeemably beholden to the oligarchy as represented by such as the Koch brothers, Murdoch, Halliburton, Wall St etc as the British Prime Minister's office is to the likes of BaE, Tesco and The City. And until these real enemies are recognized, addressed, fought and beaten, then essays like this only serve to depress people into feeling hopeless. And hopelessness is fuel to the oppressors.

[Jonathan E.]

I think the point of essays like this are to point out exactly what you just said, Adam — that it's necessary to recognize, address and fight these real enemies. Now, good or bad man as Obama may be — and whatever minor effects of his that you may have had pointed out to you in your visits to the US, Obama has generally let a lot of opportunities slip from his grasp and, according to Swanson, has not addressed many of the more infrastructural issues of the exercise of presidential power and its abuses that he had hoped he would. I think you can make an argument that the president should have more power in the face of the corporations and recalcitrant knuckle-scraper politicians — but then again the whole US thing is based on checks and balances between the three branches of government.

I don't think the game is over with Obama, he may yet surprise us — and when I linked this article to our local progressive group, it raised a hackle similar to yours — but, truly, I think there's little doubt that he wasted his first two years when he had the numbers and the momentum. I think a lot of people do feel let down by him, but the obvious problem is that there is just about absolutely no viable alternative on the horizon. And, perhaps that's just going to be the way it is with the US — business as usual.

If I recall correctly, Tony Judt referred to the Bush years as the years the locusts ate. My feeling is very strongly that Obama, unfortunately, does not appear to be doing much to replant. This is a time when bold initiatives and some serious structural changes are needed; a new vision, not the same old same old. That initial bounce after his election has evaporated. Ultimately, maybe, as you point out, "the office he holds, that of President, is as irredeemably beholden to the oligarchy". Certainly, that's the way he's behaved and that's the result of many of his actions, so why should we feel all cheerful about it? Where's the good news? I'm sure I'm not the only one who expected a little more change as a result of all that hope. He said it would be different. The old Johnny Rotten line seems appropriate to me here; there's been a bait-and-switch.

Generally, I somewhat go along with Howard's point of view here — but I like to watch and analyze and think about it to a degree. However, I keep it out of my personal life. Tom Robbins said it about right in Jitterbug Perfume through the voice of Alobar, a character who lived a thousand years,"Our political leaders are unenlightened and corrupt, but with rare exception, political leaders have always been unenlightened and corrupt. I stopped taking politics seriously a long, long time ago, therefore it's had practically no effect on the way I've lived my life. In the end, politics is always a depressant, and I've preferred to be stimulated."

I'm still not sure if I want to live 1,000 years, however! I doubt I could take all that stimulation.

[AndyM]

For all the disappointments that have followed his election (and given the intensity of the hope, wasn't disappointment inevitable?), Obama becoming president remains a defining historical moment. And if he'd lost, Sarah Palin would have been just a heartbeat away from the nuclear button.......

[Des]

Sarah! C'mon gal!

[garth cartwright]

Great post, Jonathan. If on Facebook I could tick "Like".

It's worth noting that the author of the essay is not saying it would have been better if Palin/MCann won - instead, he's observing that Obama, rather than reforming the role of President after Bush left it so tainted appears to be continuing some of his worse legacies. The essay's point being that by solidfying such traits it means all Presidents who follow will take these for granted. Adam, to say the essay "depresses" people is silly - its aim is to stimulate debate and -who knows? - action. Pretending everything is fine cos a black man's in the White House is just dumb.

All politicians are flawed and all politics is flawed but we are all part of a world shaped by political thought/detail so ignoring it is no answer. The US is a very flawed nation and corporate capitalism appears intent on destroying its civil society. And that Obama has delivered so little hurts all idealists - not that I expected much from a Democrat but I did think he would be a little more inspiring and, well, liberal. But the US remains a nation full of creativity and great minds and progressive people - that Obama could be elected shows how much that nation has changed in a few decades: Louis Armstrong couldn't even stay in hotels he played in fifty years ago!

Anyone else marching tomorrow?

[NormanD]

Mumia Abu-Jamal, the well-known Afro-American political activist, still languishes in jail cell (nearly 30 years) convicted on a trumped-up murder charge. Obama has done nothing for him, and may not even exercise his right of pardon when he leaves office.

Marching tomorrow? Of course! I've no faith / hope in Brendan Barber and the TUC, but a lot in the thousands who'll be around me.

[Adam Blake]

Adam, to say the essay "depresses" people is silly - its aim is to stimulate debate and -who knows? - action. Pretending everything is fine cos a black man's in the White House is just dumb.

Garth, if I find the essay depressing I am allowed to say so, am I not? Also, I wasn't aware that anything I wrote pretended that everything was fine because a black man is in the White House. Perhaps you could point out what I wrote that brought you to that conclusion?

[Con Murphy]

Even allowing for the incredible thrill that a person of mixed race could ascend to the top job in the world's most powerful nation, with all its history of racial discord and exploitation, it still astonishes me that so much disbelief was suspended so readily by so many intelligent people about a politician who had ascended so swiftly. You don't become top dog by being a wet liberal pussy and a few of us recorded here at the time the sinking feeling we were getting at the emotional investment being made in such a calculating individual. As expectations were raised, he must have known that the very nature of the job - with its checks and balances and partisanship and buck-passing - would stymie a lot of people's dreams, but he was too carried away by the faith shown in his opaque political evangelism to care. Nearly two years on hope's running on empty and change is a slow train coming. If he gets a second and final term maybe he'll find some of the audacity he's lacked so far to take on some of the ideologues and vested interests. I doubt anybody will be holding their breath next time round.

[garth cartwright]

Adam, you are absolutely entitled to write "essays like this only serve to depress people into feeling hopeless. And hopelessness is fuel to the oppressors" and I am entitled to say that is a silly statement. It's a forum - we can disagree, right?

I don't feel hopeless having read it. I feel grateful for the writer's clear analysis. I never fell for Obama As Saviour and those that did will be depressed without any essays to help 'em.

Anyway, what do you prefer to read? "Don't Worry Be Happy" essays? Would that make people feel empowered to stand up to the oppressors?

[Adam Blake]

Of course. What made me cross was your inferring that I had somehow said that "a black man in the White House meant everything was OK"- as if I would ever make such an asinine observation. I notice that you have not addressed my request for clarification on this.

I read plenty of doom and gloom essays. I used to post them up here regularly. Neil Foxlee took the hit for me and since his departure I have felt increasingly that there is no point at all in discussing such things here.

So, with respect, I'll shut up now.