I love it how Liberal America or at least, the more leftist elements of it, is slowly starting to realize that it just might not be true that Obama is the messiah
( Read more... )
a few things. To start, you keep using variations on the phrase "Obama the messiah." To the best of my knowledge, that is a Republican talking point. Rational people do not perceive politicians to be holy figures. So, are you a Republican trying to convince people that their belief in Obama's desire to fix things is a sign of irrationality, or do you really believe that more moderate members of the leftist movement based their votes for this man on a hysterical faith?
Also, Obama didn't run on a platform of revolution. He ran on a platform of fixing the system, and I am hardly convinced that at this point in time there is a better way to do that than universal health care and large public works projects, both of which he has strongly indicated will be top priorities. What do you think would be better policy choices at this point in time?
Finally, presumably you are saying that Obama is the next Clinton based on his political appointments. Two things: One, who but former Clinton appointees have the executive branch experience to be able to make the system as exists work from day one? Because he needs to hit the ground running, our country's in a pretty bad place. Two, what specific ways do these picks signal "corporatist oligarcy" to you? I've yet to see him pick a person who was beholden to corporate interests. Even Hillary's debts are to foreign interests, not to corporate ones.
So, in short, on what evidence are you basing any of these comments?
Well I've been reading a lot of Andrea Smith so the only responses I feel like mustering at the moment might come off as somewhat dismissive. I posted this in response to some murmuring on Common Dreams and other places about how Obama may not be quite the environmentalist that many leftist groups were making him out to be. My response is not meant so much to open a dialogue about the finer points of obama but to sigh in the face of what I percieve to be naivete on the part of folk on the left.
I voted for Obama under the pretense that he will do a few good things and a lot of bad things. We have very different views though.
"The United states is not at war. The United States is War." Is something we talked about in class today from Andrea Smith's "Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of White Supremacy." I totally agree with that quote. Furthermore, how is Obama going to topple white supremacy? By being a black man? It's neat and all, but as Smith see's it, White supremacy is supported by three distinct logics, that of Slavery/Capitalism, that of Genocide/Colonialism, and that of Orientalism/War.
Obama has made it apparent he plans to run a hawkish government, that he is fully invested in washington consensus free market capitalism (though her wants "reform"), and he sure as hell isn't going to stand up against the continuing colonization of native people's in this country and others in any meaningful way.
Okay, so your top priority, over health care, judicial or economic reform, is the erradication of "white supremacy"? For reals? How do you propose a government does that? Because I feel like, knowing your politics, any government program to address that would cost more than you're comfortable paying.
Look, I get you believe something different than I do. That's fine. But you CONSTANTLY are broadcasting that people who believe what I do are just gullible rubes. And that's really annoying, particularly because I can support my beliefs with evidence, a plan for change, and a willingness to compromise when my beliefs prove unworkable. So when I ask you to do the same, and you dismiss my questions with some self-righteous diatribe cribbed from someone else's thoughts, which shows no signs that you're actually thinking these things through on your own... frankly, it's insulting.
How has Obama "made it apparent he plans to run a hawkish government"? How do you reconcile that statement with the signs that he is backing Gates' plan to slash the military budget away from bombs and nukes, for example? How can you reconcile your own admission that Obama wants economic reform with a "full investment in consensus free market capitalism"? And when there are literally more people disenfranchised and imprisoned than there are native peoples left, how can you feel that colonization is more worthy of mention than prison reform?
Just support some of your beliefs with evidence and independent thought... not vitriol and theory.
I dont have a lot of answers yet and I'm not nearly as smart as you are. I wish I could articulate my understanding of things as well as you can, and I have no doubt that some of my idealism will turn out to be so not pragmatic that I have to abandon it for survival...
I don't really have the energy for this, I need to do homework not argue on the internet.
I think the problem is that you articulate your contempt pretty damn well. It's a fucking great skill, because all social movements need firebrands... I just feel like I've seen you in defense of things you figured out for yourself around CT, and comparing that fire with your steady stream of comments against the democratic process has been a study in opposites.
Bring back the Kat who supports her arguments with evidence!
Also, Obama didn't run on a platform of revolution. He ran on a platform of fixing the system, and I am hardly convinced that at this point in time there is a better way to do that than universal health care and large public works projects, both of which he has strongly indicated will be top priorities. What do you think would be better policy choices at this point in time?
Finally, presumably you are saying that Obama is the next Clinton based on his political appointments. Two things: One, who but former Clinton appointees have the executive branch experience to be able to make the system as exists work from day one? Because he needs to hit the ground running, our country's in a pretty bad place. Two, what specific ways do these picks signal "corporatist oligarcy" to you? I've yet to see him pick a person who was beholden to corporate interests. Even Hillary's debts are to foreign interests, not to corporate ones.
So, in short, on what evidence are you basing any of these comments?
Reply
I voted for Obama under the pretense that he will do a few good things and a lot of bad things. We have very different views though.
"The United states is not at war. The United States is War." Is something we talked about in class today from Andrea Smith's "Heteropatriarchy and the Three Pillars of White Supremacy." I totally agree with that quote. Furthermore, how is Obama going to topple white supremacy? By being a black man? It's neat and all, but as Smith see's it, White supremacy is supported by three distinct logics, that of Slavery/Capitalism, that of Genocide/Colonialism, and that of Orientalism/War.
Obama has made it apparent he plans to run a hawkish government, that he is fully invested in washington consensus free market capitalism (though her wants "reform"), and he sure as hell isn't going to stand up against the continuing colonization of native people's in this country and others in any meaningful way.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Look, I get you believe something different than I do. That's fine. But you CONSTANTLY are broadcasting that people who believe what I do are just gullible rubes. And that's really annoying, particularly because I can support my beliefs with evidence, a plan for change, and a willingness to compromise when my beliefs prove unworkable. So when I ask you to do the same, and you dismiss my questions with some self-righteous diatribe cribbed from someone else's thoughts, which shows no signs that you're actually thinking these things through on your own... frankly, it's insulting.
How has Obama "made it apparent he plans to run a hawkish government"? How do you reconcile that statement with the signs that he is backing Gates' plan to slash the military budget away from bombs and nukes, for example? How can you reconcile your own admission that Obama wants economic reform with a "full investment in consensus free market capitalism"? And when there are literally more people disenfranchised and imprisoned than there are native peoples left, how can you feel that colonization is more worthy of mention than prison reform?
Just support some of your beliefs with evidence and independent thought... not vitriol and theory.
Reply
I don't really have the energy for this, I need to do homework not argue on the internet.
Reply
Bring back the Kat who supports her arguments with evidence!
Reply
Leave a comment