Good and Evil in a Troubled World (Guest Voice)
Good and Evil in a Troubled World
by Craig Barnes
Nobody seems happy. Not the democrats who want to get out of Afghanistan; not the Republicans who want to bomb devils and wipe out evil. Not the prophets of non-violence and not the advocates of strength. Obama’s autumn strategy is a collage of contradictions. On the one hand, he is for peace; on the other hand he is engaged in the escalation of war. On the one hand he is for the public option in health care and on the other he holds to the conviction that right and left must both be accommodated.
Dick Cheney, on the right, says that Obama is weak. Greg Palast, on the left, says that Obama is weak. It would surely have taken courage to come down wholly on one side or the other in any of these battles and since Obama has not done so, both left and right find him lacking in courage.
All of history accustoms us to this way of thinking. Communists are evil; capitalists are good. Taliban are evil; bombings by unmanned American drones are good. We are the people of light; those whom we oppose are people of darkness.
Such simple slogans led Americans to wholeheartedly follow Ronald Reagan in his cold war against government and George W. Bush in his hot war against Saddam Hussein. In each case the slogans over simplified the problem and under simplified the solution. Reagan’s free-market-is-good-and-government-is bad simple dichotomy led to runaway corporate greed and eventual collapse. Bush’s concocted illusions about Iraq led to hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi deaths. Such imagined simplicity keeps Fox News going, and Rush Limbaugh, and sometimes, Air America. It is that simplicity that lines up nearly 100% of republicans against every Obama initiative and nearly 100% of liberals in favor of the public option in health care reform.
But the world is not, in reality, either this or that. It is not good or evil. It is not “for us or against us.” No family quarrel is that clear. No global quarrel is that clear, not really. No simple path exists for Afghanistan, or for health care, or bringing down the oligarchies of extreme wealth. To see only two sides in a world that is essentially complex is to speak clearly, yes, but it is a clarity that is profoundly delusional.
It was the philosopher Hegel who first described the world in terms of thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. He saw that underneath apparent contradictions lay the possibility of reconciliation at some deeper level and that it has always been that deeper reconciliation that produced new energy, creativity and even human freedom.
Now in 2009, history has presented Barack Obama again with apparently irreconcilable contradictions between war and peace, rich and poor, oligarchy and democracy. It is his way of dealing with these contradictions makes him unusual. Rather than using democracy to gain victory over his enemies he seems to use enemies to build the processes of democracy.
In his speech in 2008 on race and in his Oslo speech on war and peace, Obama sought to reach beneath any formula of good versus evil and in so doing dignified the reality and complexity of a tragically violent real world. While all about him, on the airwaves and in the Congress, liberals on the one hand and conservatives on the other cry out for slogans of decision and sound bites of solidarity, here is this fellow who refuses to play the game as it has been played for at least the last 30 years in American politics, and, perhaps in the larger sense, for the last 3,000 years.
It would be unwise to write off such a man. It would be unwise to reject out of hand such unusual willingness to bear openly and thoughtfully the pain of the world’s horrible contradictions. In Obama’s search beneath the surface of history’s struggles we see shades of the kindness of Dwight Eisenhower and sometimes the multiple purposes of FDR. But here is a fellow with a wider reach than either of them. We have not had this kind of mind dealing with the real world since Abraham Lincoln.
As host of the radio show Our Times with Craig Barnes, and as author, playwright, lecturer, mediator and essayist, Craig Barnes has been a champion of civil society, the rise of democracy and the rule of law. This is cross posted from the commentary portion of his website.
23 Responses to “Good and Evil in a Troubled World (Guest Voice)”
More exaggerated expectations. Do they help him? I don't think so. He needs to be able to make mistakes as that is perfectly normal for a manager (good managers, at least in business, batting .550 is good), without looking for feet of clay. It may not be my place to say, since I did not vote for him, but I think he needs to be more TR tan FDR.
Here's an algebraic equation for Team Obama to solve: Oil/X = Al Qaida where “X” is amount of effort we put into freeing ourselves from purchasing foreign fossil fuels.
Believe it or not, this is a direct and applicable equation for solving the problem at hand. Whack-a-mole [thanks to who came up with that here- I forget] where the value of “X” remains insufficient sure ain't workin'.
.
In other words everyone is unhappy because we have been blessed with someone who turns water into wine and cures the sick and raises the dead.
Does the Obama worship ever end for some people?
Rather than using democracy to gain victory over his enemies he seems to use enemies to build the processes of democracy.
Which processes would that be? Deals cut behind closed doors with Pharma and others after promising transparency? Denying such deals until leaked to the press? Votes bought for cloture using tax dollars? A plethora of czars appointed to evade Congressional oversight? Voter intimidation charges dropped and inspector generals fired who threaten his donor base? Bills rammed through in the dead of night that haven't even been read or properly examined? Bills stuffed with earmarks which he repeatedly claimed he would stop? Taxes being raised and not called taxes? The Census being taken over by political operatives at the White House? 10% unemployment turned into 'jobs saved and created through grossly inflated reports?
Most realists expect some broken knuckles in hardball politics but Barnes apparently wants us to enjoy watching the sausage being made. What a privilege to have Obama not stooping to mere politics? Is this some kind of joke? Too much eggnog on New Years?
Obama went from impressive broad national support to the worst Presidential approval rating in modern history in one year. That was for a reason Mr Barnes. There is deep seated anger at this President that shows up in the polls across the board and at town halls held by Congress. You would think a self described “champion of civil society” would recognize that Obama has done little to advance that cause and not be out peddling Chicago hardball politics as some kind of New Age mysticism. The aroma is too unsavory to fool anyone but the True Believers.
There is still hope. Hope that the President can learn from his mistakes. Hope that he will return to embrace the moderation and transparency that he campaigned on so eloquently. But such hope would be furthered by recognition of his mistakes and a desire for change, not worshipful adoration of them as some type of glorious transcendence. Water into wine sir, not water into koolaid.
Dduck and DaMav both make very good points. And, what each says points to one of the truths in the article: that, across party lines, Obama is viewed as weak. Many of the specifics to which DaMav makes reference have to do with Obama's unwillingness to take on congressional D's (earmarks, health care, stimulus(?), special interest deals [though some also ocurred at the WH], hidden taxation).
It is not Obama's contemplation of issues that is his downfall, it is the absence of conviction/leadership once the contemplation is complete. He is neither TR nor FDR. Both were decisive. By agreeing to whatever congressional D's manufacture in the sausage factory, with the assistance of special interests, Obama is losing the confidence of the people, resulting in a staggering drop in approval ratings.
The American public appreciates contemplation, but it also expects strong leadership. The latter is lacking.
I'm sorry, but the wine lobby is getting very nervous with your statements. Don't you realize the importance the grape pickers (some legal, some not) jobs and all the others involved in the oldest and noblest of human activities. Plus, Damav, I must protest the use of already endangered and seriously depleted reserves of potable water. Surely Gore can take some time off from Global Whatever to thwart you in your quest to dehydrate us.
Obama is viewed as weak”
I didn't mean to imply that. I just think he is inexperienced and wants to live up to his inflated image and be liked by us, and the world. I would like to see him do some personnel shuffling and add experienced and wiser advisers to help him snatch victory from the overly exaggerated “jaws of defeat”.
I shalll havta made it ush to teh wine loggy by coshuming more of thare produckt :-z
Take a nap.
dduck,
Like you, I did not vote for Obama and am no particular fan of his administration. The reference to weakness is mine, not impliedly yours. My view is that most conservatives regard him as weak on foreign/terror policy, as you expressed the other day, while most liberals view him as weak on domestic policy. I view him as a weak and inexperienced leader across the board, kowtowing to special interests and congressional D's.
That you prefer TR to FDR is your view, and I appreciate it. Being ecclectically anti-partisan, I view both TR and FDR as having been strong leaders with a national vision, whether I agree with that vision or not, and see Obama not measuring up to either. Mine is a comment on leadership style, not policy or substance.
As for personnel shuffling, I wouldn't have a problem with that, but leadership comes from the top. A Kennedyesque approach, brightest and best, wouldn't hurt, but how much it would help when there is weak leadeship in the Oval Office I'm not sure.
As for personnel shuffling, I wouldn't have a problem with that, but leadership comes from the top.”
We may disagree, I think he has the “potential” to be a good leader. And, I think a wise person surrounds himself with wise people. Like Damav, I'm an optimist.
Dear dduck,
On this thread you claim to be an optimist. On another you confess to being a NY Giants fan. One cannot help but wonder whether you are an optimist or a masochist.
All in good humor. Go Packers!
And yet so many reactions do exactly that. Prejudging is something of an epidemic in the blogosphere, and comments are too often more reflective of partisan reflex than of any real thought. The challenges facing Obama are daunting enough that his tendency to think them through is often perceived as weakness by those who are more impressed by the rushing in philosophy, which as we've seen in recent history can happen with a severe shortage of forethought – and result in the creation of more problems than are solved.
Like Lucy, the Giants gave me five good football games (optimist) then took took the the rest of the season to turn me into a fatalist/masochist. And, I wish Favre well (oops, not a Packer).
The Barnes piece reminds of Chauncey Gardner from Being There, with Obama playing the Peter Sellers role. People are projecting their own expectations and hopes onto Obama rather than just judging him by his actions. So far he has been fairly passive and content to let others run the government. Possibly this is the result of a man who is inscrutable and unwilling to play political games, or possibly this is a guy who is in over his head and doesn't stand for much.
His motivations really don't mean much at the end of the day, what matters is what he accomplishes.
you know dont you dear DaMav, i now need to wipe down the monitor. I was drinking a cup of joe when I came to your post. The 'wine loggy' … man, we have got to get you a stage gig, and dduck too. Now presenting DaMav and DaDduck. Ok, ok… back to work.
Thanks Dagoat.
Yes, his administration will flourish. Take care of the pruning and mind the insects, water the rhetoric and tie up the loose limbs. Don't apply too much fertilizer as it can poison the Rose garden.
Awesome, Sil. The oil equation.
Another variable that must also be solved is Israel+Oil/x=Al Qaida.
Those two “constants” must be addressed, for an Al Qaida to disappear and prior to any actual defeat of terrorism.
“Obama's unwillingness to take on congressional D's (earmarks, health care, stimulus(?), “
You are dead-on, tidbits!!!
If Obama were to pull a Teddy Roosevelt, and Veto any bill that included pork (including the big ones like health “reform”); his approval rate may stop falling. Americans appear to be up to their eyeballs with corruption and the “inside-the-beltway” crowd.
“you confess to being a NY Giants fan. One cannot help but wonder whether you are an optimist or a masochist. All in good humor. Go Packers!”
Want to see a masochist? I'm a die-hard Steelers fan!
Lord help me.
Puhleez. At least you won last year and none of your players shot themselves.
“Puhleez. At least you won last year and none of your players shot themselves.”
Yeah….. I know. Seems like celebrity isn't agreeing with Rothlesburger (or Burress for that matter).
But being the true Steelers fan I am, I just don't think five Super Bowl rings is enough.
Bulls make money, bears money, pigs get slaughtered.
America With And Without Health Care Reform…
See Also: Health Care Spending 1965-2008, Economist Says Health Care Bill “Is Just Another Bailout Of The Financial System”, Healthcare Diversions Part 3: The Financialization of Health and Everything Else in the Universe, The Hidden History of the…