I'm about tired of the idea that experience is what the US needs right now in its political leadership. And I'm tired of the punditocracy shoving that meme into the electorate, as if it has some kind of self-evident value. For one thing, where was all this concern about experience when the nit-wit GWB ascended the throne? But more than that is this: experience is really important when what you've got to do is essentially no different from what you've done in the past. In that case, experience might get you somewhere.
But our challenges today are very, very different. How will experience help us navigate the era of peak oil combined with global warming? Who even HAS any experience with this circumstance? How will experience help us design a health care system that actually serves the American people?
What I'm more interested in -- and what the country ought to be more interested in -- is someone who has some ideas about how to get out of the jams we're in.
David Leonhardt's profile of "Obamanomics" does a good job of showcasing why experience is not enough. After outlining the differences between Clinton-era economists Robert Reich and Robert Rubin, Leonhardt says
In practical terms, the new consensus means that the policies of an Obama administration would differ from those of the Clinton administration, but not primarily because of differences between the two men. "The economy has changed in the last 15 years, and our understanding of economic policy has changed as well," Furman says. "And that means that what was appropriate in 1993 is no longer appropriate." Obama’s agenda starts not with raising taxes to reduce the deficit, as Clinton’s ended up doing, but with changing the tax code so that families making more than $250,000 a year pay more taxes and nearly everyone else pays less. That would begin to address inequality. Then there would be Reich-like investments in alternative energy, physical infrastructure and such, meant both to create middle-class jobs and to address long-term problems like global warming.
While some would probably argue that more should be done to reduce inequality (as would I), Leonhardt captures the relationship between vision and experience-- vision is born of serious study of experience. The "vision thing" --where are we going? is the top priority right now, because the old answers just aren't taking us very far.
Making a fetish of experience has also downplayed another of Obama's strength's: the ability to craft workable strategies to get from here to there. We've certainly seen him do it throughout the primary season. And while I've been sitting on pins and needles as much as the next person, I also have to admit that he has struck the right notes, made the right choices, and focused on the most important objectives.
I hope that he will use this convention to apply his strategic thinking to the problems the country faces. The people who whine about his not being "specific" enough --including Bob Herbert of the NYT -- haven't been doing their homework. What Obama can do is lay out the strategy -- how we're going to get from here to there -- based on the objectives his campaign has outlined.
He needs a meme to counter "experience." And it isn't just "judgment," either, which means that he knows how to choose between existing alternatives. He needs something to showcase his capacity to see into the future and devise a way for us to get there.
I'll take that over experience any day.