(Page 2 of 2)
This is the language of a society of beggars. The need to “fight the city” or “confront officials” or persist “as officials lied and delayed” or “challenge authorities” is pre-eminently the language of human beings made to depend on government. To beg from it as Oliver Twist was made to beg. “Please, sir, I want some more.” It may have once had a certain allure in the 1960s — forty years ago and even longer before that — but the idea of creating big government programs and then creating “community organizers” whose sole purpose is to make citizens more effective beggars of those government programs has long since been discredited by the results — or lack thereof .
YET THIS IS PRECISELY the vision that Obama wishes to extend across all of America. And the question that becomes relevant for Obama’s vision is a version of the question Ronald Reagan once asked Americans about the presidency of Jimmy Carter: “Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” Is the South Side of Chicago better off today because Barack Obama and his fellow community organizers accepted the status quo of big government? Is the community where Obama “organized” better off today than it was when he arrived? Has he done anything with his philosophy that has lifted the people of the South Side of Chicago out of poverty, and has the philosophy itself worked anywhere else in America?
One need go no further than the Nation magazine’s same loving profile of Obama to learn this:
“Despite some meaningful victories, the work of Obama — and hundreds of other organizers — did not transform the South Side or restore lost industries.”
In other words, the Nation answers the Reagan question in a word: No.
This is important when understanding that Obama’s vision of America is to make of America one big South Side of Chicago. A nation where he raises taxes (“Please sir, may I keep some more of my money that I worked for?”), bureaucratizes health care (“Please, sir, will you pay for my medicine?”), and tells automobile manufacturers how to make energy-efficient cars (“Please sir, may I make my car my way?”).
All of this is, of course, the same old, same old. It is nothing more — or less — than the old socialist stew which has failed everywhere from the South Side of Chicago to the Ninth Ward of New Orleans to the North Side of Moscow. There is nothing new about any of this except the messenger. And the messenger, according to the impeccably left-wing pages of the Nation, has already served up this stew in Chicago and — surprise, surprise — failed. He has been utterly unable to do in his own public service what he once advocated for others in Alinskian terms, which is to say “challenging people to scrape away habit.” The habit of setting up big unionized bureaucracies and then targeting them with organized begging campaigns is apparently impossible for Obama to scrape away.
The kerfuffle over Obama’s tendency to plagiarize words from Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick is perhaps more revealing than the simple plagiarism itself. What it displays at its heart is an unoriginal cast of mind, as well as something more damning. An unwillingness to accept hard truths simply because it is unpopular in his circle to do so. While Obama was big on organizing to challenge local officials, he was not in the least inclined to challenge his fellow liberals with the subversive idea (to liberals) that it is big government itself that has exacerbated if not produced the problems on Chicago’s South Side.
If he is unwilling to take a hard look at his surroundings on the South Side of Chicago, if he is unable to understand the failure that resulted in the conditions of the South Side in the first place, and why, then his lovely repetitions of the eloquent phrases of others notwithstanding, there either just isn’t much there there when it comes to Obama’s intellectual creativity — or he fears leading real change because of what his liberal friends might say.
Absent a commitment to real change, his aspiration to be the “community organizer-in-chief” for America means one thing, and one thing only. Barack Obama, his sights set firmly on a left-wing past that did not work, is determined to organize us into 300 million Oliver Twists.
Which is to say, to make of us all a society of beggars.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online
Diana| 11.11.08 @ 12:54AM
I'll go along with your argument that "community organizing" and socialism create dependency on government and thus don't work, but your argument is based on old frames of reference when you apply them to how you think President-Elect Obama will govern this country. You apparently missed the trail of ideas Obama left behind on his road to the White House, or you might have noticed when he said that he realized "community organizing" doesn't work, and that this was one of the reasons he decided to run for political office.
Throughout his life and especially during this campaign, Obama has shown himself to be a pragmatist whose priority is solving problems by collaborating with others. While you cling to your ideology and obsess over old "isms," he moves beyond them to see what government must do in a time when the problems are so monumentally huge that no individual can solve them. "Government" to paraphrase Obama, "does what we cannot do for ourselves individually." We can't build roads or schools, we can't fill pot holes. And sometimes, we as a society, hit a concrete wall. Mistakes repeated often enough and long enough finally reach a peak of disaster. That's when government must step in to provide rescue action and steer a new course.
Now you can call that socialism, and continue to labor under the negative associations of the word, but I call it problem-solving, which is what governments are made to do.
Our taxes are not a give away, citizens are not ATM machines, we pay taxes with the tacit agreement that government will do things on behalf of the common good, especially when the individual would be crushed under the weight of the problem (e.g. Katrina).
Obama believes that a democratic government exists to serve the people, especially when there is trouble. Sometimes that trouble is collective, other times it is individual. Some people, for whatever reason, just fall through the cracks and need help to get back on their feet (unemployment ), or they are too old to walk on their feet anymore (social security). You call that socialism, I call it civilization. I would even go so far as to call it "Christian" ("Love thy neighbor as yourself").
You want government to run like a cold machine, utterly detached from the concerns of the citizens it is meant to serve, Obama knows that if government is not humanely responsive to its citizens it will fail.
We can have a free market economy without a free-for-all, we can have rugged individualism without being cast off to struggle on our own when the advantages are not equally available to each and everyone. If for no other reason than self-preservation, letting people fall off a cliff will only drag everyone down with them.
The rational seems to work for the bankers, why not for the people? Wall Street didn't seem to have any qualms or inhibitions about begging the tax payer for a $700 bailout (and are begging for "more"). The people don't have to beg, they can, and ought to demand, because it's their money. Tax payer money does not belong to the government, the government holds it in trust, for the people, or at least it ought to.
So the question comes down to, what is government for, why do we need it?
President-Elect Obama answered that question. You just weren't listening.
Occam's Tool| 11.2.12 @ 5:36PM
Diana:
after the horrific damage President Obama has done to our country over the last four years, with the TRILLIONS of dollars added to the deficit, the BEST unemployment statistic of his career being 7.8% (caused by massively massaged data), our credit rating being dropped, health insurance going HIGHER as a result of Obamacare with FEWER people covered, Iran on the verge of getting nukes, the Middle East taken over by Islamists, the European Union being a) taken over by Islamists and b) aging and shrinking and c) going bankrupt, and finally: our Ambassador being cornholed and murdered by Islamists on 9/11/12 and the government being COMPLETELY ineffective in the latest hurricane to hit our shores; after all that, don't you feel like a blithering idiot for posting this moronic missive above?