Bashing Obama's Dream?
Submitted by Sybil Liberty on September 2, 2008 - 12:13pm.
2008
Tuesday 02 September 2008
by: Steve Weissman, t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Hearing Barack Obama speak last week in Denver, I found it hard to avoid bittersweet memories of Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech at the March on Washington in August 1963. How far our country has come! And how much further we have yet to travel on Dr. King's road to peace and social justice! For me, one memory stands out, a small piece of history that throws new light on why many progressives find themselves faulting Obama for moving toward the right wing of the Democratic Party.
A few days before the march, a battle-scarred hero of the civil rights movement came to the University of Michigan to practice the speech he planned to give in Washington as chairman of the Student Non-violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC). John Lewis was - and is - an Old Testament prophet, and his words heaped moral fury on President John F. Kennedy, a man whom young civil rights activists at the time did not see as on our side.
If JFK wanted to support meaningful political and economic rights for the poorest black share croppers, that was good, said Lewis. If JFK did not, the movement would rise up without him like Sherman marching through Georgia.
Inspired, several of us from Ann Arbor trooped off to Washington. There we were, right in front of the Lincoln Memorial, waiting for Lewis to give his speech and singing, "If Kennedy gets in the way, we'll roll right over him."
How wrong we were! On that day at least, JFK rolled right over us. If Lewis insisted on giving his speech as he had written it, the Rev. Eugene Carson Blake of the National Council of Churches threatened to withdraw from the list of speakers, as did other Kennedy supporters. Lewis softened his remarks. We continued to sing. And no one heard us.[...]
[...]Today, the social dynamics are back to front. The civil rights movement has become history. The antiwar movement has grown quiescent. Progressive Democrats of America and other groups are just starting to show their strength. And aside from Netroots Nation and some stirring in the unions and among immigrant groups, the only thing resembling a mass social movement is the awesome electoral campaign that Obama has created around himself.
A candidate-centered movement can certainly win an election, but can it bring green energy, green jobs and universal health care once the election is over? Obama's recent moves to the right suggest the answer, as does the rightward shift away from Bill Clinton's populist message during his first term. For Obama's hopes to become real, America needs an independent progressive movement that is bigger than even the most inspiring political leader, and powerful enough to counter the inevitable onslaught from Wall Street democrats and foreign policy hawks, neo-libs and neo-cons, and an army of highly paid lobbyists.
Just because George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are leaving the White House in January, Big Oil will not slip into the sunset; arms makers will not beat their swords into ploughshares, and managed-care conglomerates will not make serious health care a higher priority than their corporate profits. Few on the top want the America that Obama has promised, and even if elected with an overwhelming mandate, Obama cannot deliver on his promises without millions of Americans who know how to keep up the post-election pressure on Congress, on the corporate media and on him.
Change we can believe in, change that we need, requires a mass movement we can count on. No independent mobilization, no serious change. But the missing movement is not Obama's fault, and organizing it is not his job. It's ours, as progressives. And, in my opinion, it's bogus to bash Obama for giving in to Robert Rubin and Zbigniew Brzezinski if we're not building a political force to outpush them.
Should we point out where we think Obama falls short? Absolutely. Anything less would distort a reality that's there for everyone to see. But Obama's hope is America's hope, and if we do not work our hardest to elect him president even as we build an independent progressive movement, we will have squandered the best opportunity our country might ever have. So, let's get on with the job. To paraphrase the old rallying cry, "Don't Moan, Organize."
»
A VETERAN OF THE BERKELEY FREE SPEECH MOVEMENT AND THE NEW LEFT MONTHLY RAMPARTS, STEVE WEISSMAN LIVED FOR MANY YEARS IN LONDON, WORKING AS A MAGAZINE WRITER AND TELEVISION PRODUCER. HE NOW LIVES AND WORKS IN FRANCE.
http://www.truthout.org/article/bashing-obamas-dream
Obama said it. It's not about him, it's about us.
wasn't it Kevin? Everything I wish I were able to put into words from a credible former activist. I thought the "John Lewis/JFK Experience" was the perfect anecdote from Weissman.
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
"It does not take many words to tell the truth". Chief Joseph, Nez Perce
- the main topic of conversation this afternoon and evening has been regarding Kevin's comments/behavior (as well as those of others) over the past several days.
Please, please - ignore his posts. He, specifically, and everyone else generally, have already been warned that insults and personal attacks will no longer be tolerated by anyone on this board.
So - please, ignore his comments so it doesn't flare up again - no matter how irritated they may make you.
Your efforts will be greatly appreciated, lol!
kelly
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
Kelly, I don't believe that Kevin insulted or personally attacked me in his post. Granted, his opinion clearly offended Gabriele.
I believe that Gabriele's purpose was to insult both Kevin and me for something Kevin felt to be true (altho God knows the cw here says he is wrong) and which she took exception to.
Kevin didn't start a flame war on this diary, Gabriele did, and yet you call him out by name.
I'd certainly be curious to know how the new moderating standards will address the issue of insults and personal attacks made in this manner, by proxy? I'm sure you're aware it's been a common practice here.
thanks
I started a flame war? That's news to me.
"It does not take many words to tell the truth". Chief Joseph, Nez Perce
if you read above, I believe you will see how this flame war began with your comment to Kevin
and this one:
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/16444#comment-326217
which I was foolish enough to respond to...
you're allowed to denigrate and the rest of us are required to tolerate
I should aspire to that of course, it's the only way to return this blog to "civility"
perhaps one day I will achieve such heights
My post to Gabriele on this thread had nothing to do with this thread except that it was where a flame war was about to start up again, and by Gabriele's comment back to Kevin. Gabriele had just logged in and wasn't aware of the earlier discussion of being put on moderation.
My intent was to let her know and warn her off responding with flame to anything to which she took offense. Not too many others were logging in at that time last night to post, so Gabriele's response to a post was the one I saw first.
Apologies for the short highjack of the thread.
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
"The Kevin Initiative" for blog moderation"? That's what this sounds like.
I don't think that's right or fair. Something needs to be done of course, but the new principles you have adopted for restoring "civility" on the blog now, would have served this community better during the primary cycle when the vitriol spewn was allowed to build to frightening levels.
Singling out one user at this point in time is just plain wrong.
but that's only my opinion of course
I have things to do elsewhere now
unfair to Wes, that too many of us have been too often incapable of keeping a civil tongue in our heads and acting like the intelligent adults we're supposed to be, since he's the one who eventually has to pay the cost.
Yes, the vitriol during the primary was worse - on all sides. Yes, I wish it had stopped then. And we all could have done that as none of us had a gun at our heads compelling us to be rude and insulting to each other. But we (the community at large) didn't stop, did we?
So now, on a site that has prided itself on never censoring anyone, never banning anyone (save advertisers), never administerily deleting the posts and comments of its members, prefering its ability to self-moderate - the admins now have to step in and threaten people into behaving like civilized adult human beings again.
That's unfair to us too. It's also disappointingly sad.
Sybil - I honestly don't care who said what, who started it, who thinks they are right and who thinks they are wrong, past or present. I don't think Kat does either. We're all wrong. And it stops now.
So please, I implore you, and anyone else who might be tempted to bring up the "well they were worse to us in the primararies, and what about what Susie did to me last week, or what about what Johnny said four months, six days, twenty-two hours and eight minutes ago to me..." ad naseum. Don't care. Don't want to hear it.
If some of you chose to live in the world of past slings and arrows cast on this board - please do it somewhere else.
Today is a fresh start for everyone, and with one simple thought that is no longer a suggestion, but a rule: be polite and respectful to each other. Personal attacks and insults to each other, or to candidates which then inflame others to respond in personal attacks, are no longer acceptable and will get you put on moderation...the FIRST time you do it.
It's that simple, and not open for debate.
"Our public servants work for us - we don't work for them. We have an obligation, as citizens of this country, to always remember that - and to never let them forget it." - DeadMessengers
Should we point out where we think Obama falls short? Absolutely. Anything less would distort a reality that's there for everyone to see.
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/15747
Nick Kelly
Wes Clark could still secure America as a national security candidate.
need a dream.
Look what's happened in the years since GW took over and offered us none.
"thou shalt not scold"
maybe you should have that painted on your cabinet Gabriele?
...goddesses know you did more than your share of it during the primaries. Badgering in fact. Badgering those who weren't able or willing to climb on Hillary's wagon.
"thou shalt not badger"...now there's a thought
I'm not sorry I read it, but I think the guy's more out of touch than I am. e.g.:
Obama's recent moves to the right
I tend to dismiss this interpretation as media spin. Obama came on as the person who could attract Republicans, as opposed to Hillary, who was polarizing (allegedly) and about whom everyone had already made up their mind. But that fits in with:
the rightward shift away from Bill Clinton's populist message during his first term
apparently this guy missed the election of 1994, the great Republican coup in Congress, and the necessity for Bill to live with greatly reduced powers, and compromise to get anything done. The fact that he played a bad hand well spoke well of him, IMHO.
Politics is the art of the possible. It is not holding others, or even oneself, to impossible standards.
I must not have read it quite the same way as you did. Obama always promoted himself as reaching out to R's and Indies, but at the beginning of his campaign, he was rated by National Journal as one of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate. His shift on telcom immunity enraged liberals and that's what I believe started the "move to the right" spin by the media. In nearly all presidential campaigns that I recall, Dems always move to the right after the primary as a matter of course.
I definitely agree with you about the art of politics being the art of the possible.
but that's what politicians do. It isn't necessarily a betrayal, though. Henry Clay, the Great Compromiser, was famous for saying he would rather be right than president. I'll admit the FISA compromise didn't outrage me. After 9/11 the telecoms made good faith efforts to help the Feds (and it was public. I remember that.) The compromise ensures that any future data gathering will be supported by warrant, as it should be. So I don't think it's a betrayal of principle.
As for Dems moving to the center, so did Republicans. Both parties, realizing that people are sick of polarization and partisanship, nominated candidates who have reputations for working well with the opposite party. That's very hopeful.
Yes, it's pretty much standard procedure that both parties move to the center after gaining their party's nomination. It's nothing new tho, so I don't personally find it all that hopeful - they rarely live up to the campaign rhetoric. God knows gw did not. Nothing fiscally responsible or compassionately conservative about the past 8 years.
Bashing Wes Clark's dream. Hillary was his number one. Now he's a good player, as he alsways puts the country before himself. But I still have no reason to believe that he does not, in his true heart, support Obama as much as he does Hillary in his heart.
And I'll go with my heart, since I'm not in the position he is in. I am 100% convinced that if he were given a choice between Hillary and Obama, he would choose her.
Yes, sure, he's the one right now, and he's doing what he can to keep Democrats in power. But...I do not for one moment think that he believes in Obama as much as he believed in Hillary. And for that matter, I believe in him even more.
yes, sure
"It does not take many words to tell the truth". Chief Joseph, Nez Perce
This article makes a good case.
But if we use this site as an example of the hope Obama is supposed to be inspiring, there certainly is much work to be done.
"It's about us."
Who is "us"?
The negative comments made toward fellow posters here, the continual denigrating, who is the "us"?
John F. Kennedy,
Dr. King,
Barack Obama
do not speak to people in mean words, their message was not sent by continual put-downs. Instead, they reached out to our shared humanity, and it was our shared humanity, our shared beliefs and hopes for the better that ignited their movements.
And I see from your comments below you do not share the "us" this writer or Obama speak of. The Obama supporter who continually berates others and thereby misrepresents Obama, does the most harm to his campaign.
So who exactly is the "us"?
I know you weren't here last night and your question doesn't rise to the level mentioned below, but you should read Kelly's post.
It applies to ALL sides. Civility will return to CCN, one way or the other
Thank you, Kat.
This is why I am surprised to see:
"thou shalt not scold"?Submitted by Sybil Liberty on September 3, 2008 - 10:20am. "thou shalt not scold"
maybe you should have that painted on your cabinet Gabriele?
...goddesses know you did more than your share of it during the primaries. Badgering in fact. Badgering those who weren't able or willing to climb on Hillary's wagon.
"thou shalt not badger"...now there's a thought.
*****
...hence my comments above.
I will leave it alone as you have requested.
I read more than I contribute to this blog. For a month or two I did not read the blog. I was busy with many things.
I started reading in June and was very surprised. What once was civil discourse was now sniping and bashing. Against friends.
I read daily thinking it would stop, but it never did.
I understand the differences of opinion. However, posting links to websites, downrating other posters who do not share your view, and the daily b*tch slapping turned me off.
I do not want another Republican to be elected. McCain will continue the failed policies of Bush. So I have a choice. I live in a state where my vote does matter. O is the candidate, not my first choice.
I am not going to sit home and fume. I will vote.
I notice some posts from bloggers from Liberal states. I am a transplanted Northeasterner. Living in this state with so many Social Conservatives is enough to make me pull every strand of my hair out....one by one. That is why I will vote for O.
I complained about the tone a long time ago, and was actually contemplating writing a diary to complain, but the delay in finally cracking down will inevitably contribute to charges of favoritism. Don't let that stop you, just be evenhanded.
Thanks for this Sybil.
Barack Obama and Joe Biden 08
http://barackobama.com