On Lacking Heroes and Good Ideas
October 13th, 2009 § 4 Comments
News of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to yet another war profiteer was received with shock from both sides of the political spectrum when Barack Hussein Obama was named the winner last week. American historian, intellectual and long-time peace activist Howard Zinn’s reaction was fair and to the point:
I was dismayed when I heard Barack Obama was given the Nobel peace prize. A shock, really, to think that a president carrying on two wars would be given a peace prize. Until I recalled that Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, and Henry Kissinger had all received Nobel peace prizes. The Nobel committee is famous for its superficial estimates, won over by rhetoric and by empty gestures, and ignoring blatant violations of world peace.
Conversely, famed right-wing radio-host Rush Limbaugh shared Zinn’s dismay and disapproval, although for different reasons:
He’s not only the first post-racial president; he’s also the nation’s first post-accomplishment president. He has risen above incompetence. He’s now judged on wishful thinking. Gore, Carter, Obama…Don’t worry about it, Mr. President, your day is coming. Gore, Carter, Obama, soon Bill Clinton, you see a pattern here, folks? Liberal sellouts get this prize.
The following latter part of Limbaugh’s spiel is cited because quoting the hate-monger is a necessary evil. No matter how confused and demented his ideas may be, he is referred to by many as the voice of millions of American Republicans:
George Bush liberates 50 million Muslims. Ronald Reagan liberates hundreds of millions of Europeans, saves parts of Latin America. Any awards? No. Just derision. Obama gives speeches trashing his own country and he gets a prize for it. This actually makes total sense when you look at who these Nobel people are, these elite Norwegians, Europeans. They love what Obama is doing. And this fully exposes, folks, the illusion that is Obama. This is a greater embarrassment than losing the Olympics bid was, and Obama got it right. He knows exactly why he was given this award. The elites of the world are urging him, a man of peace to not do the surge in Afghanistan, they are urging him not to take on Iran. If you want to get serious about this for a minute that is what this is really all about.
The fact that two polar opposites in the American political sphere actually agree with one other about Obama is symbolic of an ironic trend that is currently surging through American political debate. Admittedly, Obama’s centrist positions leave almost everyone wanting to push him off the fence, but isn’t it ironic that many factions of the Left and Right are constantly united by what amounts to incessant criticism of this one person? Most Leftist rage also seems to be directed specifically at Obama rather than at the Democratic Party as a whole, an imprudent mistake in and of itself. Lest we forget that for all the people who cite him as a liar for failing to close down Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp, only a few have provided any meaningful commentary about how his own party’s refusal to back up his initiative actually aided the Republicans in voting out this possibility in the first place. Perhaps even more importantly, the Left’s constant and seemingly insatiable disapproval of the President’s decisions and indecisions have also succeeded in keeping the spotlight off the Republican Party – a tactical advantage over the Left that the Right didn’t even have to work for.
Certainly, as Tariq Ali noted on Democracy Now! this past Friday, there are many people who are far more deserving of the prize, but rather than join the likes of Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly in bashing Obama for winning the award (remember, he had no control over the committee’s decision) wouldn’t it be more effective to use it as a peace promoting incentive?
Writer and filmmaker Michael Moore issued two posts on his website following the news of Obama’s win. His initial response was in line with many other prominent progressives in arguing that Obama didn’t deserve the prize, which was uncharacteristic of him considering his unwavering support of Obama in the past. However, after considering the Right’s response to the President’s win, Moore modified his stance with a second post and did something the Left does not engage in nearly as much it needs to considering all its failures – Moore turned his critical eye away from Obama and onto himself:
I went back and re-read what I had written. And I listened for far too long yesterday to the right wing hate machine who did what they could to crap all over Barack’s big day. Did I — and others on the left — do the same?
Heroes are the ones who implement good ideas in this world.
The ancients called this world “Endurance” for a reason… even though I might change that now to “Unendurable”.
Interesting note and I’m still thinking about what you wrote, however what I’m left with right now is that Obama is not a leader. He actually follows which is the politician in him and which we now know is what he really is and not much more.
Some politicians can turn out to be real leaders but it would seem Obama may not be among them. This is disappointing to me and I think a number of others as his campaign was about leading and, if I remember correctly, in a new direction. So, very disappointing he is just a politician.
Unfortunately, I’m viewing him now as a hypocrite, as well as just a politician, as he keeps giving the same campaign speeches over and over which promise he’ll be something other than just a politician.
He keeps implying in the stale speeches he’ll lead.
There are lots of good ideas out there. Here’s one, get carbon emissions under control, unless this happens not much more really matters really does it? The Middle East, US Wars, left/right arguments, god crap vs rationality, etc. etc. etc.. Should we play Climate Roulette (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091026/hertsgaard)? No, but yes we will it seems with the likes of Obama – nice guy he maybe.
If Obama was a leader maybe he’d assist other EU leaders and what seems to be an urgency understood in Asia in over coming nonsense and dealing with the problem. But I think not, as he is just a politician and a hypocritical one too boot.
So there are good ideas out there galore and maybe only one really important one for the human race right now.
Moore’s maudlin trite is just that banal kumbaya shit.
A guy – Obama – was elected in a cloud of euphoria as a politician for change which means, unless I’m mistaken to be a leader. But now, it is up to those, that already told him what to do, to make him do, what he said he’d do. Why have elections at all. Maybe a whole new form of gov’t is needed which wouldn’t include electing people to do what they say they will do. Maybe recall should be automatic after a year, accompanied with a public whipping but only as a modest incentive you know, if the promises to keep don’t come before the damn sleep (I apologize to Frost).
As I said, he is a major, major disappointment, in effect a dud I think. The Nobel thingy was funny and not likely to change anything other than adding to the undermining of the “prize” – though hard to fool actual humans about who is and who isn’t a real prize winner. The clowns that are awarded the prize are always known as clowns except within elite gated safe havens from which they rarely venture out.
Climate Roulette Link:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20091026/hertsgaard sans ?
Sorry.
Nice analysis Jasmin.
Re: this comment someone left: “A guy – Obama – was elected in a cloud of euphoria as a politician for change.”
Perhaps that’s where we have it wrong. Maybe there was some truth to the cynics who claimed that Obama, like other inexperienced minorities, got elected to take the “career suicide job” no other self-respecting professional really wanted. Just a thougt..