« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
For The TPM/Obama Intellectual Crowd...What Do You Think of this Article from "Reason Magazine?"
Obama as the End of Identity Politics as We've Known Them
(And I Feel Fine)
Terry Michael | June 10, 2008
We are nearing the end of American identity politics as we know it.
Bearing that gift to those who prize the individual over the tribal is a messenger who shared a Hyde Park neighborhood with Milton Friedman, though with a public record that suggests he is more statist than classical liberal.
But Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), can’t be categorized that simply. He is, rather, an intellectual and ideological work in progress. Not stuck in cable-babble caricatured time, he may be traveling the circuitous path many “liberal-tarians”—or libertarian Democrats like me—treaded as we grew and found our way back to the self-reliant values that informed our pluralistic democracy. We lost those values in the Industrial and Progressive eras, when advocates of centralized planning prized society’s perfection over individual liberty. While Obama’s positions don’t exactly channel the Cato Institute, his departure from usual Democratic Party left-liberalism is reflected in the left’s suspicion of him for not having all the 162-point plans of Sen. Hillary Clinton, or spewing the syrupy populism of trial lawyer to the underclass, Sen. John Edwards.
To me, this suggests the beginnings of a journey away from the Great Society mind-set of the Democratic Party. I was a 1960s teenage political junkie who wanted to complete the New Deal, with wealth redistribution and “social justice” managed from Washington. I morphed into a 1980s DLC centrist, embracing mushy “progressive” politics as a halfway house from statist liberalism. Now in my own sixties, I have rediscovered the founder of my party, Thomas Jefferson, in an information era in which we are desktop-empowered to seek our own way and make our own choices, much like the agrarian age inventors of our political system.
I can’t claim to know exactly where Obama is on this ideological continuum. He may not even know. But in his personal evolution, he has moved from the white world of boy Barry in Hawaii and Indonesia, to left-liberal enclaves at Ivy League colleges engaging with young conservatives, to a kind of noblesse oblige organizer bearing the white man's burden (half, in his case) on the streets of Chicago. He went from a young state legislator too aloof, in too much of a hurry for his colleagues in Springfield, to a failed U.S. House candidacy against former Black Panther Bobby Rush, hobbled by an inability to translate the language of the Harvard Law Review to the vernacular of the street. From that latter experience, he drew lessons allowing him to grow as a politician, hearing and incorporating some of the style of the black preacher—including the one who was to later cause him so much grief. He returned to Springfield after that failed congressional bid a different man.
He seems to be a grounded but still searching, an intellectually curious 46-year-old, with a breadth and depth of life experience that will help him make informed choices in a pluralistic democracy that demands its leaders split a lot of differences.
Compromise is a word doctrinaire libertarians find more appalling than appealing. But there's a lot that is appealing in Barack Obama.
Look at his health care plan. While it certainly won’t satisfy free-market purists, it relies on private insurance coverage, encourages portability and choice, promotes competition, and allows purchase of prescription drugs from other countries. It wasn’t by accident he proposed fewer government mandates for purchasing coverage—and was pummeled for it in every debate by the politician who, back in 1993, seemed to seek personal control of a big chunk of our economy. Though drugs and crime can be political minefields for an urban black candidate who has acknowledged marijuana and cocaine use, Obama has no hard line positions in favor of neo-prohibition and has made promising comments about pulling back from America’s status as one of the world’s most prolific jailers. Immediately, his election will restore America's reputation around the world as an opponent of interventionist elective wars.
But perhaps most important to libertarians, his election will put the Jesse Jacksons, the Al Sharptons, and the white identity politics liberals out of business. No longer will they be able to peddle victimology or mau-mau their way through the political landscape, demanding diversity training, minority contracts, or other tribal reparations from bigots they find behind every bush. The myth of unassimilable “minorities” dies when a majority white nation selects a leader “of color,” just as religious social distance was diminished when a majority Protestant country chose a Catholic a half-century before.
There is no perfect leader in the wings. I'll settle for one whose election will signal the end of the world of racial politics as we know it. And, with a nod to R.E.M., I'll feel fine about it.
Terry Michael is director of the non-partisan Washington Center for Politics & Journalism. He came to Washington in 1975 as press secretary to newly elected progressive Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.).
MyBlog: http://ProteanPerspectives.blogspot.com





Comments (15)
Heh heh. I feel fine with it. Or, at least, with those parts that didn't go over my un-intellectual head.
June 15, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good article - plenty of background and interesting factoids. Thanks.
June 15, 2008 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
LisB and AS,
I've just recently started visiting the Reason site.
I think both of you would really enjoy the diversity and intellectual depth of some of the articles they publish. So far, it seems truly non-partisan...and not all the articles are college professor stuff.
IMHO, reading that site has helped me transcend most of the junk on the political web; but the articles can't always be "breezed" through; sometimes they require re-reading sentences or paragraphs...usually the sign of stuff worth reading.
Some very interesting takes on issues...blows nonsense-sites like Politico and HuffPost away.
But very few, if any, pictures. =)
FB
June 15, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, thanks for the new site. My Right-Leaning Independent sister might like it too.
I have to admit, I only read HuffPo for the blogs now. It's become very sensationalist over there over the past two years that I've been reading it. Politico doesn't do much for me but I like Roger Simon sometimes. I turned my sister onto RealClearPolitics which she now adores, and even my mom is reading that one.
Destor, I am looking forward to meeting you at the July 19 TPM-Aholics gathering in Brooklyn. You ARE going, AREN'T you??
June 15, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
No wonder your sister and mum like Real Clear Politics, Lis. Most of the articles are from the right. Plenty of polemics there to feed their prejudices!
If you're interested in worthwhile sites, you might enjoy The New Republic. (tnr.com)
June 15, 2008 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, yes, I've read a number of their posts.
June 15, 2008 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really appreciate this because a lot of anti-Obama Dems have been claiming lately that Obama is the choice of libertarians. I didn't quite get it. I'm a self-described libertarian democrat and I was probably more worried that Obama lacks libertarian bonafides so when people called him that I wondered why.
This Reason article seems to get at it. It's not a conscious libertarian leaning, it's that he's younger, not defined by great society liberalism and maybe just naturally more of an individual.
I'm glad you brought this to my attention. I'd also like to see Democrats reach out to libertarians. On the issues where we agree (right to privacy, freedom in our social lives) we have a lot to gain from one another. Of course I don't mean weirdo libertarians who don't want to pay taxes to fix potholes but there are people who are just into social, artistic and personal freedoms who should be voting Democratic.
June 15, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
destor23,
I also consider whatever political leanings I have as libertarian.
I commented the original article on Reason website.
My comment was very positive, except I indicated that I was not convinced Obama really fits the profile they are painting of him....I just don't know.
FB
June 15, 2008 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Over at halfpasthuman.com, they say identity politics is over this year.
As an "intellectual" - for my money the best website is globalresearch.ca. Good for libertarians AND progressives ..
Obama is just a HRC clone, led by Zbig and Robert Rubin.
June 15, 2008 9:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
ladybroadoak,
Familiar with globalresearch.com; rate it high, but reluctant to call it the "best."
Your profile, however, is strong as an ox. But still reluctant to call it the "best." =)
FB
June 15, 2008 9:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
CORRECTION:
globalresearch.ca
June 15, 2008 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Obama is just a HRC clone, led by Zbig and Robert Rubin."
Don't forget that Jim Johnson is also a Bilderberg and Trilateralist.
I have a begrudging respect for Zbiggy's "imperial" (sic) genius and I find it preferable to the passing Neocon insanity, but let's not forget that the supranational monetary elite are firmly in control of Obama. As a left-libertarian myself, I can't quite reconcile my desire for "change" and "hope" with the fact that Obama can be counted on to continue the disastrous monetary policies that have brought this nation to bankruptcy.
By the way, maybe identity politics has taken a breather, but this is still largely about personality cults.
June 18, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting.
I think anyone who wants to pin any ideological label to Obama is going to be disappointed. It's one of the things I most like and respect about him. (But maybe that says more about me than it does about him - I have an almost visceral reaction against most `ists` and `isms`: all they tell me is that the person has a closed mind - has announced their unwillingness to countenance any notion that doesn't conform to their particular ideological box, whatever it is.
Whatevr, anyone who does want to pin a label on him should stop and take notice of what he's already told us: `I'm a practical kinda guy.` (Indiana) Says it all, doesn't it?
I think you can predict that on any issue he'll seek viewpoints from as broad a range of sources as possible and then steer his way through them to what he thinks is the most problem solving solution.
Here's an interesting article written about him by someone (clearly a fan) who's known him for a long time. The author goes over the top on one thing: asserts that Obama is not a compromiser. That clearly isn't true: we only have to look at how he agreed to the watering down of his nuclear safety legislation to know that.
(Maybe I'm being unfair to the author there: perhaps she wasn't arguing that Obama won't compromise - only refuting the idea that that's a principal characteristic - strong pattern.)
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/open_university/archive/2008/06/12/obama-the-university-of-chicago-democrat.aspx
Back to this post, I disagree with Michael's penultimate premise. There are going to be fixed limits to what Obama can achieve if he wins the presidency. Expectations will be so damned high - so many people will be disappointed and the identity politics interest groups will still have plenty to bleat about. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if he ends up having more problems with the left than he does the right!
June 15, 2008 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's an interesting article that I think is far more to the point.
It's building on the one Michael Barone wrote a little while ago defining the two camps of Democrats as `academicians` and `Jacksonians`.
It's a good read - if rather unnerving. (And if you can bring yourself to dip into the Weekly Standard. )
`It's not race, it's arugula`
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/215hpooz.asp
June 15, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, this is why I preferred Clinton. he will get my vote, but I hope that he doesn't do a Nixon in China sort of thing and undo the New Deal - something a Democrat could do where a Republican could be blocked.
June 15, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment