Anyway, today its the opinion writers at the New York Times. See if you can catch what's all wrong with this:
Republican opposition is bad enough, but The Times’s Jennifer Steinhauer reported that many Congressional Democrats are hanging back, saying they could support one or another of the components of the jobs plan, but not the whole package. Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana wants to protect the oil companies to which she is beholden from losing outdated and overly generous tax breaks. Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, seemed to be preparing to bury the jobs program in Senate rigmarole. Senator Bob Casey and others threatened to slice and dice the program to death.
For Mr. Obama to win public support for this effort, Americans need to see him attack the Republicans’ opposition and to forcefully get his party in line.
Its all right there in the second paragraph. The first one describes the problem. I'm with them 100% on that. But then, you'd expect a "call out" of the oppositional Democrats to get in line, wouldn't you? But no, it's all on President Obama's shoulders to do something about it.
If you start paying attention to this kind of thing, you'll notice that it happens all the time. We really do have something in us that is rejecting government of, by and for the people. There seems to be a longing for an imperial presidency, doesn't there?
This is why I found the discussion between Yglesias, Benen, and Coates so powerful. They were fighting this meme that all power resides with elected officials - primarily President Obama. If this is still anything like a democracy, "we the people" have some power too.
I don't know about you, but I'm sick to death of being cast as the spectator victim in this drama of politics. I will NOT put up with that frame. As Coates said, I'm prepared to accept both the power AND the responsibility.
Power confers responsibility. In evading the notion that citizenship in a democracy confers power, you also evade the notion that it confers responsibility...
If you don't like the current iteration of America, you need to remember that you are America.
So my message is to folks like Landrieu, Reid, Casey, Webb and other Democrats who are the one's actually lacking the spine to fight for what's right for the American people. Get off your duffs and do something. If you don't like what President Obama is proposing - put something on the table yourselves to create jobs and fight for it. But don't come around here whining about what President Obama is/isn't doing. It's about time for Americans and their politicians to grow up and take some f*cking responsibility! (oops, so much for trying LOL)
It seems to me that there's a kind of psychological void fostered by the denial that the president has two distinct, and possibly contradictory functions. He's the executor of law, but he's also the head of the body politic. Conservatives have NO PROBLEM with acknowledging that fact. Liberals get squeamish over the fact that politics is more than mere reason, so we tend to pretend that we don't all want a metaphorical parent running the show. If we could acknowledge that aspect, we could mitigate it. But instead it just festers under the surface, coming out in pathology.
ReplyDeleteHey dirkster - VERY thoughtful analysis.
ReplyDeleteI do think this is some under-the-surface psychological issue. And it does fester.
How I think about it is that for all of our desire to have power, the role of victim has become entrenched culturally. Complaining and whining about those with power is applauded and carries no risk. Stepping out and owning responsibility requires taking the time to see all of the factors/obstacles involved and risking the possibility of failure. But to me, that's what grown-ups do.
By the way, my view of this is colored by the fact that I see it in other arenas besides politics.
Nietzsche is the first person I can think of who articulated that sense of the pathological morality of victimhood. The problem for me comes in disentangling a victim mentality from the reality of victimhood.
ReplyDeleteBut there does seem to be a widespread cultural schizophrenia about victims and morality. On the one hand, victims have a moral status - I'm thinking of the scene in "The First Wives' Club" where the two characters are complaining about their problems, and then when Diane Keaton's character steps in with her bigger problems, Bette Midler throws up the white flag with "You win."
At the same time, there's a real resentment of people naming how they are victimized - that is the entire ideology of the Tea Party: backlash to naming suffering.
I can't quite get my mind around the contours of that contradiction. As much as Nietzsche's formulation of slave/master moralities has always bothered me, I've become more and more convinced that he is on to something with his discussion of resentment. I suppose the challenge is to integrate his insights into a more democratic and inclusive worldview than he could offer.
Wow - you're making me think. Thank you!
ReplyDeleteI think some of that contradiction comes in not recognizing where our power lies and where it doesn't. Its the classic case of a woman who is physically abused by her partner. She embraces her victim status if she decides to stay in order to try to change him. That's because she doesn't have the power to do that. But instead, if she embraces her own choice in the situation (whether to stay or go), she retains her own power.
So I think there are many examples of where/how we are truly victimized by others. Our power lies in what we decide to do about that. Its a limited power. But too often we give it away in search of things that are out of our control.
I used to try to talk to some folks at DK about that when it comes to Obama. If you don't like who he is, you actually have very little ability to change that - at least during his term. What you can do is try to understand who he is and find an approach to working with him that will get you more of the results you want. I'm afraid I wasn't very good at making that case though. Because it never seemed to sink in to those I was talking to.
So for me it all comes down to us perpetuating our own sense of victimization by giving away the one place where we have the power to change...ourselves.
I get the impression that the "the responsibility is Obama" in this paragraph is in saying that it is ultimately on Obama's shoulders to unite the Democrats in opposition to the Republicans. I can't really argue against that. Just so long as those who argue it acknowledge that it doesn't help that he needs help doing so.
ReplyDeleteSo, the Repugs and some of the Blue Dog Dems wanted President Obama to come out with a solution to the jobs program, he does, and now they can't go along with it because of the SHARED SACRAFICE. In the 2010 election cycle, I couldn't beleive the shit that was being said by supposedly Democrats to get reelected. Most of them lost their seats. Casey is worried about what the PA electoral college is going to look like,I think it is time for Landrue to go, but who will replace her. What a mess the Dems get themselves in. The only adult in the room is President Obama, and he can't do everything, as much as some people woulde prefer. If Harry Reid really doesn't bring this up as a whole bill, then he is toast next election also, he just squeeked by this last time. Oh, happy days.
ReplyDelete