With barely a nod to the likes of Frederick Douglass, W.E.B. Du Bois, or MLK, Barack Obama illustrated a political genius last Wednesday night akin to a combination of Lincoln, FDR, and Harry Truman--the strategist, the great communicator, and the folksy everyman rolled into one. For the first time since I decided to vote for him, and break a solemn oath to God that I have taken seriously even if I am agnostic, I felt both positively righteous as well as negatively resigned about reneging on my promise.
When Jimmy Carter, the last Democratic Party candidate whom I deigned to believe, screwed us completely about Central America and human rights, and neglected to fulfill vows about the environment and social justice, I swore that I would never again support a Democrat until the party came to pieces, which I predicted had to happen eventually. After Barack-the-Magnificent's brilliance last week, I actually feel positively 'hopeful' about my decision and the future. Nevertheless, one aspect of the candidate's message profoundly troubles me, which I'll address below, even as his final words trumpet the message that I have been delivering since Carter's time, thus leaving me clinging to hope even as my critical faculties scream "Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!"
My mother exclaimed to me repeatedly, "You were born a critic!" So what some folks see as a perverse negativity is actually some sort of inbred character trait, which I hope will make my tendency to consider the down side of things less troubling. Since I've always taken thinking and theory seriously, even as a pre-teen deconstructing Catholicism and finding it wanting as a faith, for example, I'll start by explaining the paradigm which seems essential to apply to any sort of issue in the current moment. Bertell Ollman summed it up for me, when he contended that a "philosophy of internal relations" arguably might be essential to coming to grips with any complex reality. In this view, no single element exists independent of others; such an approach ought to attract significant interest in the globalized mega-markets of our time.
Given that one accepts such a starting point, then, Senator Obama's presentation demands a careful, critical assessment. Even if almost every point was at least acceptable, with the median performance perfect, even meriting the "awesome" rating that I ascribed to it in the DailyKos poll, a thorough and comprehensive evaluation must give it the "ALL clear!" before citizens sign off on it and say. "Let's go!" After reading the transcript and listening to it carefully a second time, 'ever the critic,' as mama Kassy pointed out, "I think we may have a problem, Houston," seems an apt message to deliver.
Part of what puts me off is probably pretty trivial, so I'll start by dispensing with that. My candidate for President said, nearing the end of his presentation, "I learned at an early age from my grandparents how vital it is to defend liberty," ending this sentence with the unarguable right of national self-defense. Similar to others who cannot help but admire and extol Jefferson, I cling to the Bill of Rights as one essential foundation of social justice. However, unless clearly differentiated as such, a call to "defend liberty" in the current context inevitably means extending the Bill of Rights to corporate 'individuals,' which guarantees that we cannot work our way toward any sustainable social reforms, 'spreading the wealth,' providing basic services, etc.
As I noted, this is a point that is easy to clarify and turn aside. I for one intend to continue this discussion, about how we should formulate and promulgate our political philosophy, how we should 'frame' our concepts of justice and contextualize our plans of action, for as long as I draw breath. A much more thorough and far-reaching conversation about this little line in Barack Obama's address is both possible and necessary. But it was of little moment, compared with another portion of his talk.
As president, I will rebuild our military to meet 21st century challenges. I will renew the tough, direct diplomacy that can prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and curb Russian aggression. And I will refocus our efforts on finishing the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
These words remind me of President Kennedy's first inaugural speech, calling for us "to support any friend and oppose any foe" that might stand in the way of "liberty." Within a year of this outpouring of rhetorical genius in 1961, the U.S. was all-but certain to involve itself in Vietnam as a replacement for the defeated French. Astute observers must at least posit that a connection is likely between Kennedy's--and Obama's--words, and possible involvement in 'limited' wars and 'police actions' that serve the dual purpose of propping up ruling business and social interests, on the one hand, and guaranteeing that my ROTC advisor's call for "a good five penny war" to resuscitate the economy comes to pass.
Again, though the amount of text here probably already irritates folks who long for quick answers and an even rapider choice of pathways that lead to painlessly brilliant policy decisions, our survival as a democracy and thriving as a world full of cousins may depend on a comprehensively vast and inclusive citizen discourse on these matters. At least rhetorically, Barack Obama eases my mind on this critical issue. After all, his final words suggest a complete affirmation of this matter.
I'm reminded every single day that I am not a perfect man. I will not be a perfect president. But I can promise you this - I will always tell you what I think and where I stand. I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you when we disagree. And most importantly I will open the doors of government and ask you to be involved in your own democracy again.
As a point of information, I would suggest that we at least consider Bertell Ollman's insights into complex systems, such as global economic and political operations as they exist today. In the vernacular, 'one rotten apple will spoil the barrel,' so any approach that relies on an overarching and world-dominating 'military industrial complex' will inevitably doom all else that we attempt to accomplish.
Our job in the coming period, as I understand the situation, is therefore at least equally important as all of our candidate's efforts. More likely, our willingness to act as faithful stewards of a government "of the people, by the people, and for the people," ranks alongside any set of commitments that human beings have ever made to sustain our presence on the planet. Abraham Lincoln recognized that political democracy such as America at its best has manifested might easily "perish from the earth," unless we do what Americans have shown little willingness to do of late, which is to show up and stand up and speak up as if the essence of democracy were in fact real: the people are in charge of the politicians, and not the other way round.