How Excited May a Serious Person Be?
Slate's Jack Shafer, inveterate practitioner of the countercyclical twist-and-reverse, warns that "tiny tendrils of trepidation are starting to drift over the liberal members of the commentariat and the political press corps." Not because they fear Obama will lose, but because they're so enraptured by him, "so convinced that his candidacy is momentous, without parallel, and earth-shattering," so "in love with the idea of Obama, of the 'meaning' of his run for the presidency," that they're courting "performance anxiety." "How," he wonders, "do you pack all the Obama touch points--healing, hope, change, civility, the second coming of Camelot, post-boomer politician, inspirer of youth, great uniter, world president, and so on--into one story without sounding hagiographic?"
Speaking for myself, I make no apologies for hearty enthusiasm, even spells of giddiness, whiffs of overconfidence calling for iron realism which then gives way to musings about this moment's transformational possibilities, the obstacles to same, and the Meaning Of It All. What with America's long-running abdication of moral nerve, a ruinous war, piles of spectacular malfeasance in high places and manifold abominations of the last eight years, any writer alive to the moment may be forgiven a touch--or more than a touch--of the rhetoric of wild aspiration. Hell, even an analytically tinctured gloat or two about the ruptures of the conservative movement is acceptable in my book.
Is there anyone sentient who doubts that a President Obama will disappoint? That not all his choices will please? That this is a big, sloppy, self-contradictory country? That the big changes we need--on war, health care, green investment, and the regulation of a lunatic world economy--won't be accomplished by fiat? That the political system is in so many ways rusty, sluggish, designed to creak? These are subjects that, assuming we spend the next seven days fruitfully, will absorb liberal writers for years to come.
But right now, it's nothing to be ashamed of if you exult that the so-called conservatives stand to be washed out of power--not irreversibly or overnight, but for at least long enough for the party of reason to show its best stuff. Grown-ups of serious principle have a splendid chance to govern. The Obamans show strong signs that they appreciate the transformational imperatives. They've run brilliantly. So let's argue along about how to proceed if, as I expect, they'll open the doors that must be opened now. But anyone who's not thrilled by the possibilities is inert.
Of course that is the way for writers who don't want to gush or overwrite to proceed: they should have license, even after Bush is out of office, to keep reminding people about how horrible his administration really was. After all, the Bush loyalists will only be beginning their attempt to resurrect his legacy, name airports, art museums and aircraft carriers after him, and point to any detectable Obama misstep as a sign that Bush was the last true defender of America before it set off on the road to perdition.
October 28, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking for the not-overly-giddy, Obama-as-2nd-choice community:
Assuming things hold as they currently appear (always a dangerous assumption), we are the ones who are going to hold his Presidency together in the end: We don't EXPECT so much, and therefore won't be so easily disillusioned. There are ALREADY some things about Sen. Obama's campaign that I don't like (I'm a 'deficit hawk', and would like to hear some truly specific,realistic arithetic from SOMEBODY about the exploding debt and increasing deficit. I haven't. Who is going to get us back to somewhere approximating the fiscal situation Clinton left us in 2000? Neither of these guys, it would appear).
That said, I'll back him as best I can, for as long as I can. He won (so far) fair and square. I don't think to this day he SHOULD have, but he did. Of the choices I have left, he is the better. If he accomplishes little more than getting us 4 years of mildly positive trajectory away from the policy buffoonery of the majority of the last eight years, it will be an investment well made. If we're lucky enough that he might accomplish a significantly GREATER fiscally-responsible progressive transformation (with the crical help of a mature, sensible, somewhat restrained Congressional majority), I'll be overwhelmed.
Be that as it may, my mind is made-up.I'm with him until he REALLY proves to me that I shouldn't be. I'll stay thru the inevitable disappointments and half-measures. I know times are going to be hard for awhile, and I don't expect miracles. I'm exactly the type he's going to need after the 'new' wears-off, and a certain portion of his current majority has wandered back to their video games.
October 28, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm in the 'transformation' school.
If we don't get a major reform in campaign finance, the last eight years of struggle won't mean much.
Obama has made much of the need to reform the system from the malign influence of lobbyists. I would add to this, the great need to get away from the two year presidential campaign.
I read this as the change we need.
I can't maintain this level of...militancy? for another eight years.
We need to make some permanent changes to the system - another one is to revive the fairness doctrine - so that this kind of Herculean effort isn't required just to get something 'reasonable' out of an election.
Saying that, I'm definitely not in the 'crush' school. Obama's already doing his inimitable 'distancing' dance from the web - remember the rebuke to MoveOn's attempt at a 527 attack group?
"Centrism" isn't the change we need.
October 28, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well ok, I certainly know he done it; I know he dissed Kossacks several times, too.
But take a look at the current status of the Reader Blog section on this site for one instance, with personal playground fights going on worse than, say any Congressperson of the last 200 years could think up. If these represent some of the better political minds of "netroots," these are the best they have to offer, wouldn't you too distance yourself? If it is the case, as Gitlin says, "Grown-ups of serious principle have a splendid chance to govern"? I really have to say that having a first filtering criteria of "grown-ups" is not a bad one. There's a lot to say for that, it's not even "centrism" to want to start with grown-ups with realistic expectations and some control over ego involvement.
Have you read "Audacity of Hope"? Consider taking seriously the idea that he doesn't like special interest groups ("good" cause or "bad" cause) having too much control over the executive branch. That breaking down the red/blue divide wasn't rhetorical pretty talk with him. That what you're probably looking at in an Obama presidency: the wishes of majority rule, executed by grown-ups, more times than not. Call it centrism if you wish, call it "netroots" special interests can go to hell if you wish.
October 28, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
After the past 8 years, we should allow ourselves to savor this moment in U.S. history, and I am seriously looking forward to standing in line next Tuesday.
That said, I think most of us hope for greatness but would settle for a middling competence.
The FISA vote was the first big disappointment. The next is that, for me, the republicans cannot lose big enough next week. Third is that most elected democrats can be bought and sold in a manner very similar to republicans.
October 28, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The enthusiasm should be over the opportunity to work now to demilitarize our society. There will be a possibility to engage in open discussion on this question. It is important that this discussion include that the militarism virus infects democrats as well as republicans. Remember that oxymoron 'humanitarian war' was an invention from the left and was applied to the Serbs by democrats. I have no idea what Obama's instincts on this are, but I do believe he will be open to hear what we will be saying and perhaps open to begin to reverse this military-industrial society we have become.
October 28, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's an interesting discussion of this post on Ezra Klein as well.
I think we're actually underselling the potential of the next eight years. Over the last thirty years, we took one step back. Now is the moment when we get to take two steps forward.
I'm not saying this because I think Obama is a dyed-in-the-wool radical, or because I think he's a genius. Let's say he's just a pretty smart guy who represents the mainstream of the Democratic Party.
We're still much better positioned now than we have been for decades, because this is going to be the first administration in a very long time that doesn't have to drag the Southern past of the Democratic party around like a ball and chain.
Obama will be our first Democratic president since JFK who doesn't come from the South. And he'll have a strong Congressional majority that doesn't depend *at all* on Dixiecrats. I don't expect a revolution, but I do expect a reasonably high level of party unity in pursuit of a moderate center-left agenda. And compared to the last forty years, that sounds pretty sweet.
October 28, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Transformational!
"Grown-ups of serious principle have a splendid chance to govern."
Amen to that.
October 28, 2008 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Were any of you in this blog alive during JFK's Presidency? My boss makes fun of me for feeling "hopeful", and my belief that Obama is "transformational". Is this how people felt when JFK was alive?
October 28, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nixon supporters might have thought it transformational, in the worst way.
I remember the assassinations of John, Martin, and Bobbie.
That was transformational.
WE THE PEOPLE, LOST
October 28, 2008 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep I remember it well. I supported Humphrey during the primaries and felt that progressive democrats lost big time when Kennedy won. After the Bay of Pigs, the Cuban missile crisis and escalation of the war in Viet Nam my fears were confirmed.
October 28, 2008 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am very excited...I'll be honest.
For me this hopefully will be the successful culmination of the fight you and your fellow progressives in the 60's began Todd. It has been a long tough journey. At various times (the Nixon years, the 'Reagan Revolution' and even as recently as 'The Bush Mandate'/The Rove 'Permanent majority' pipe dream) I have been discouraged. But I ask did the people who started the movement in the 60's, notably including yourself, at the time ever envision a day when a woman would come ever so close to being a nominee of a major party and the person who edged her out for the nod would be a man of color who is now on the cusp of being elected President of the United States?
I wasn't part of your generation. I followed as a child of the 70's. But not being far removed from the 60's I fully embraced the hope for a better America that was born in that decade. And even more have embraced hope for a better America since. Sometimes progress can be agonizingly slow but progress cannot and will not be denied as long as the struggle for it is not abandoned...
Yeah I think it is fine for serious people to be excited...and seriously so.
October 28, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here is a contrarian reading of the same Slate article.
October 29, 2008 4:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting take by Todd Gitlin. Relevantly, as many prominent experts have noted, Obama is a member of Generation Jones–born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and GenXers.
Here is a column by Clarence Page about GenJones in last week’s Chicago Tribune: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-oped1022pageoct22,0,2775732.column
And this new 5 minute GenJones video features many top pundits (including David Brooks, Clarence Page, Dick Morris, Juan Williams, Karen Tumulty, Howard Wolfson, Michael Barone, etc.) specifically talking about Obama (and Palin’s) membership in Generation Jones, as well as the surprisingly big role that GenJones is now playing in this election: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Ta_Du5K0jk
October 29, 2008 7:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama is a member of Generation Jones–born 1954-1965, between the Boomers and GenXers."
Oh, you mean *the Yuppies.* Well. I can see why they wanted to re-brand themselves.
October 29, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink