Reagan and Obama: shining America, sinning America — 88 Comments
Yes, that nails it, and identifies exactly what’s terrifying about Obama. He is not a madman, but he believes something only a madman could believe.
Move the apple. The by-line blew your cover!
Cap’n Rusty: you’re the first to notice.
But the apple stays. Must retain some mystery!
Jean Kaufman! I should have recognized your style, and your thinking.
Great piece!
I’m suddenly seized with the anxious thought that maybe the days of this blog are numbered — that you’re planning to move on.
Please reassure!
Autumn dirt
One can smell it; sense it
Remove the jeans from the closet, she thought
A step, yes; but one of many in a lengthy process
mizpants: no such plans. But I might do more of the other types of writing, including a book I’ve been contemplating. To do that, “neo-neocon” doesn’t work too well.
I love Reagan’s speech, I don’t like the ethical shift from secular to divine, simply following a preordained destiny cheapens the real human achievement. I can over look this because weather he said it or not he was a defender of Liberalism.
A book! Hope it’s about Change. There have been others — I think of David Horowitz, for example, and Norman Podhoretz. But your approach is entirely original in its focus on the process and its stages.
mizpants: yes, it would probably be about change. Hope and change 🙂
Neo, usually I agree with the Weekly Standard’s take on things, but I have to disagree with Jean Kaufman on this.
Obama isn’t anti-American, even though his policies are detrimental to the country in the long run. He doesn’t hate the country, as much as he blasts its actions in the past. From a certain point of view, he is trying to change America from something broken and wrong to something new and progressive. He wants America to be like Europe, a progressive union where the government provides even the most basic of traditionally self-provided needs, and his mind he is improving upon the original country by modeling its growth after the Left’s Promised Land.
Our President’s view of history is a bipolar one, not singularly negative. He’s quick to praise those whose support he needs. He’s also quick to praise those whose histories are Leftist-friendly. It’s a far from positive view of America, but one that people would believe if he told them it was “realistic.” He’s a Leftist, and Leftists rarely hold the same sort of nostalgic view of American history that Republicans tend to have. By the Left’s standards, anything conservative in nature is treasonous, since obviously anything that isn’t progressive in nature is bad for the country, and thus un-American.
In his opinion, he’s returning America to a path that he thinks was intended by the Founding Fathers, even though he condemns the Founding Fathers and their vision as being “flawed.” To say that Obama is anti-American would be an overstatement. In his mind, he’s a patriot, no matter what ineffective, misguided, unconstitutional or downright stupid policies he enacts.
– G
….still looking for a pic without the d%#n apple! google google google….
Giles: who said Obama was anti-American? Not me; I never used that phrase. He thinks America is a sinner, and he will absolve and redeem it. Is a preacher “anti” his wayward flock?
Of course, he’s against the Reaganite concept of America and that of the Right, and I do not agree with Obama at all. But I never called him anti-American.
Well, whoever you really are you’ll still remain a woman of mystery to me.
Great news on the book. Get cracking. I’ll buy a copy or twenty to send to people in need.
Why do so many conclude that Obama wants America to be more European? Given his personal history (like, for example, just what attachment does he have to anything European?), it is more likely that he wants America to be more African. In fact, the Europeans have discovered that socialism doesn’t work and have been moving in a more capitalist direction. Other than Great Britain, which I think is being governed by the brain dead, no other country in the world (outside Africa) of which I am aware is deliberately moving to debase its currency, lower its standing in the world, and punish its achievers, so that we all share equally in the remaining squaller. Worse, it is making the world less safe in the bargain.
simply following a preordained destiny cheapens the real human achievement
When you find out how to change the preordained human destiny of birth, life, and death, let me know. When you find out how such a preordained destiny cheapens real human achievement given our mortality, that is.
He doesn’t hate the country, as much as he blasts its actions in the past.
Neo is right about the preacher. One of the more objectionable, in the popular sense, parts of Christian theology is the whole hellfire, brimstone, and Original Sin deal.
Well, Obama has his own version of Original Sin and the hellfire to go with his brimstone.
I stated the above before reading Jean’s post. The concept of Original Sin is not something new. Various religions have their own particular dogma on this subject.
However, this idea of the anti-God Left hailing Original Sin as important came to me mostly from Black Liberation Churches. Especially in the example led by Helen Losse, a white woman, who converted from a more pedestrian Christian branch to the Black Liberation branch after studying class warfare and Martin Luther King in college.
Those like Jeremiah Wright only solidified this New Template after the fact, for me.
Why should the concept of socialism/communism be associated with a certain geographic area?
It’s like an invasive poisonous vine that takes root and attempts to spread aggressively no matter where it finds itself.
It doesn’t matter really where it came from, it’s a problem where it’s taking root in the present.
I would suggest Obama’s particular strain of socialism is more a home grown US variant than that practiced in the old USSR, Europe, South America or even Africa. It will share certain characteristics of those variations, but retain a certain distinctive North American perspective.
Of course this doesn’t mean it will succeed any better than the rest of the variations of socialism (at least discounting misery as a form of *success*), it’s simply a slightly different strain than that present elsewhere in the world even though it shares common roots with all those other forms of socialism.
Perhaps this *americanized* version of socialism is only still alive in this country because it has not yet been successfully foisted off on the entire country all at once – leaving it’s adherents to blissfully continue in the belief that socialism just hasn’t been attempted with the *right people* in charge of it yet.
I was reading my way along, got halfway through and went back to check the byline, thinking, “Goodness, this is well-written – who is this Jean Kaufman – why haven’t I heard of her before?” Then I came to that quiet little bomb of a bio-blurb at the end, and only then comprehended the sneaky genius of the equally-quiet “Read the whole thing” that accompanied the link.
Yippee, a book! While we’re waiting, can we still call you Neo, please? A name is a difficult thing to change …
Mrs Whatsit: yes, I thought I’d be subtle with the “read the whole thing” bit.
And please call me neo—I’ve grown used to it, and actually prefer it on the blog. I even answer to it in real life, if someone happens to wing it my way.
“preordained human destiny of birth, life, and death”
Ymarsakar, you’re making progress — good to see it 🙂
Rush Limbaugh read from this today.
Neo/Jean wrote, “Jennifer Rubin notes that Mitt Romney, speaking at a recent Foreign Policy Initiative conference, indicated “that Obama shares the view of certain ‘foreign-policy circles’ that American is ‘in decline’ and that it is his job to manage America’s decline.”
I often read Jennifer’s work. I’m not interested in seeing America’s decline.
I don’t wish to live in a mud hut, not exercise and expell is little CO2 as possible….
We are a prosperous nation who does so much good in the world.
Katrina van der Heuvel, whose name I am sure I am misspelling, announced on one of the morning talk shows this past Sunday that America is no longer a superpower. You could easily hear the satisfaction she took in saying it.
Neo,
Excellent article. Thank you for it.
Makes me look forward to the book. Can we assume the back jacket cover photo will be sans Apple?
I think it’d be cooler – more enigmatic – with apple.
Mrs,
Katrina van der Heuvel is easily one of the most gut wrenching people to watch.
Every Time I see her it is jaw dropping and angering at the same time.
How anybody could vote for ANYBODY that she represents is unbelievable.
Rush Limbaugh read from this today.
I can say I remember her when….
…. her blog had a few comments per hour…
“Jean”. Yeah, right. How do we know that’s not just another phony name?
You’ll always be Neo to us.
I don’t think Obama’s problem with America is limited to our history, or our economic system…I’m afraid he just doesn’t much like American civil society or the vast majority of the American people. See my post He’s Just Not That Into Us.
It is more than quite probable as I will save your article as one of the best I’ve ever read.
I’m ready for the book.
I’m sure that the aptly named Katrina van der Heuvel would be happy to live in a mud hut…
Or maybe it’s not “hovel” (rhymes with “shovel”) but “hoyvel” (as in “awful.”)
Your secret is safe with me, neo.
I came to mention the blown cover, but alas, too late.
Please, J,, er, Neo, get on to the book. Maybe you can beat Michael Totten to it?
Your change of mind issues are FANTASTIC.
Your takes on Obama seem to be more true than anything else I can find; they make more sense.
Thanks, again and again.
Great column, Neo,and a great coming-out party (in the old-fashioned sense of the term). I can’t wait for your book.
Did you notice this link at Weekly Standard’s Blog today?
I don’t know what’s wrong with the link,but if you click on Home, you’ll see the Winston link.
I’ll be darned. What I want to know is, when you are rich and famous will you forget about all of us little guys?
The sub-head of your article asks if America is a country in decline.
The last time that question was asked, Bill Clinton was President.
The last time before that the question was asked, Jimmy Carter was President.
And the last time before that it was asked was when LBJ was President.
Notice a pattern?
Neo. Neoneo. Neoneocon. Jean. Gene. Apple. Orange. How do we know, really, that any of these names are the real names? How do we ever solve the conundrum of identity? A neo by any other fruit, except perhaps, a grape would still a mystery be. I say we know less about the identity than we knew this morning.
Nice
What is in a name?
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Neo takes her place along a long line of others who have hidden their names so as to make loose their tongues.
Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls.
Who steals my purse steals trash; ’tis something, nothing;
‘Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed.
I thought so. If you play Dylan’s Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands backwards, you can hear the words Jean Kaufman clearly. They are in the (backward) harmonica parts.
Jean, this is a famous day, and we are happy to know you.
It’s good.
Better than most political analysis with added psychological insight.
This was my favorite part I am going to repeat it prefaced with “as I read in the Weekly Standard”:
“He believes such a downward direction is the morally proper one for America and Americans, the only way we can be forgiven our manifold sins and emerge purified through humility and sacrifice.
Obama also believes that he is the special instrument by which the nation can accomplish this transformation”
I was floundering around here trying to state that idea, but not as well. I think that is exactly right. Furthermore, I think his believers and voters see him as that instrument of destruction for America. The left voted for him because they despise the unfashionable, wal-martian (I coined that), Bible and gun-clinger Middle Class and so does he.
There is a name for that “Instrument of Destruction”: Nemesis.
Honestly, I think that sentiment is orginal to you–it’s a thing we’ve all been kicking around; that we all knew, but I think you are the first to publish it in whole.
The shining and sinning play is good…. This is going to be hard to top.
Yeah, bourgeois-living ex-hippies are forever going on about how rotten this country is and why we should be taken down a peg.
Thing is, they are the least likely to survive such a thing.
But they are both actively clue-resistant, and vile at heart. They hate, really hate, the rest of us.
In addition to the name, there was another little surprise lurking in that bio: the law degree. Though I certainly could have missed a reference over the years, I don’t think we knew about that. Is it a J.D.? If so, it makes me curious, because I think my own legal education had a major effect on the later change in my political ideas. Briefly (har de har har), in law school I learned how to think.
Sometime, Neo, if you were ever so inclined, I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on whether and how learning to “think like a lawyer” affected your ideas.
I would have liked to have seen this written a few years ago, when W tarnished the shiny city on the hill that Ron spoke so fondly of.
It makes sense. There’s a reason we all keep coming back here, (aside from the fact many of us are changers), and that is substance.
Brava!
Neo/Jean:
I look forward to more articles from this Jean Kaufman. 🙂
Good work. I look forward to the book.
Obama has a false sense of perspective, and so do some of those that sum him up from the Left. When I raise the question, in face-to-face discussions, the discussion often diverges from my point with a response such as, “well he’s biracial so actually he does have a broad perspective.”
I can’t begin the premise that race has nothing to do with his decision making abilities, but if I announce that then the conversation is over before it’s started — I don’t have to reinvent this theory because I, we, understand Leftist defense mechanisms. Obama’s problem is that he’s been indoctrinated with a Leftist point on view and approach to finding solutions, but as I critiqued early on, one of Obama’s strengthens is that he’s has shown some evidence that he is teachable — the problem with this is this could also be called confusion and indecisiveness, only now that’s he’s actually making judgment on policy is this evident, to say so before was pure solipsism, I, we, also know how the Right thinks.
As his intellectual perspective matures, but he has so many insular walls built around him, we’ll see how he grows. He has years and years ahead of him, but for now the passenger that looks like a pilot is flying the airliner and his hands are shaking and his heart is beating really fast.
Two quotes from Cicero seem very appropriate in these times:
“Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. … Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the ‘new, wonderful good society’ which shall now be Rome’s, interpreted to mean ‘more money, more ease, more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious.’”
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the carrier of the plague. You have unbarred the gates of Rome to him.” —Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.)
I would suggest Obama’s particular strain of socialism is more a home grown US variant than that practiced in the old USSR, Europe, South America or even Africa. It will share certain characteristics of those variations, but retain a certain distinctive North American perspective./
I disagree. No matter how benign, new or revolutionary an “ism” looks, they all end in tyranny and despotism.
Obama seems to see himself as a great Confessor and Redeemer; two things that is very dangerous for someone to think of himself. Because of those thougts he will not stop at anything in order for us to get right with him. Witness the Inquisition; same idea, slightly different tactics (for now).
Reagan and Obama: shining America, sinning America
That title captures the difference in point of view between left and right in the US. One perspective I brought back from working in Latin America was that I no longer viewed the US as being the “great sinner.”
Though I would agree with the liberals that the US isn’t perfect- it’s electing NObama is evidence of that.
neo: Congratulations! I’ve long thought there was a book in you.
i would have a different title, a bit shorter.
Reagan and Obama: Shining America
Both are Shining America…
if you use it in its normal sense it is making somethign polished and shine to look good.
if you know its slang usages, well, then the shortening of the title makes a lot of sense as a play on words.
—noun
16. Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a black person
17. shine up to, Informal. a. to attempt to impress (a person), esp. in order to gain benefits for oneself.
shines (Informal) Pranks or tricks.
and in the black community, putting the shine on is:
to insult someone; to deceive someone. : Stop shining me. I’m cool, man, ice. (slang dictionary)
DeWayne,
You commented:
“I disagree. No matter how benign, new or revolutionary an “ism” looks, they all end in tyranny and despotism.”
Please note that I followed the statement you quoted with this one, in the selfsame comment:
“Of course this doesn’t mean it will succeed any better than the rest of the variations of socialism (at least discounting misery as a form of *success*), it’s simply a slightly different strain than that present elsewhere in the world even though it shares common roots with all those other forms of socialism.”
As far as I’m concerned – and noted as much – the only thing socialism/communism has managed to be successful at is creating misery wherever it’s been tried.
The statement you quote – and apparently are disagreeing with – was simply responding to earlier comments musing over what government Obama seemed to most want to emulate, which kind of combined references to Britain (nation) with Europe and Africa (continents).
My point was that it really didn’t matter, that you could have an “americanized” version of socialism that was just as distinctive as versions attempted in Africa or Europe – but it would still be just as bad in the end result, and I even compared socialism to a poisonous vine and a problem to be dealt with wherever it took root.
So exactly what are you disagreeing with me on?
I’ve always thought all this America the original sinner concept said more about its believers mental makeup than it ever stated a valid political point.
Theres a masochistic flare in its assertions that I can’t help but notice.
Also….I’m curious if its actually the level of collective incompetence that gives rise to nanny state socialism. A people dumb and incompetent enough could quite possibly not function without it? I’m just sayin…..
Wolla-
Thanks for the Cicero.
Once I was able to read him in Latin, but no more, alas.
Jean, aka neo, a lawyer that does therapy? I’ll have to reset my brain on my next legal visit!
Tom,
Don’t forget the dancer and the jello lover. A fantastic mix!
To those curious about that “law degree” bit: it may be a surprise, but I’ve written about it before, although not often. Way back at the beginning of my blog career, Norm Geras profiled me, as I noted here. The intro to the profile contained the following description, written by me:
‘neo-neocon’ spent her formative years collecting degrees from various fine academic institutions. She likes to read and then sit around and think (or walk on a treadmill and think), but hasn’t yet figured out a way to make a lot of money doing that. She is a generalist and synthesizer – in other words, a jack of all trades and master of none. ‘neo-neocon’ has been (and in some cases, still is) a social science researcher, writer, editor, ballet teacher, law school graduate, theatre critic, marriage and family therapist, wife, mother, gardener and friend.
I stand by that description.
One more note and then I’ll go back to thinking about other things. Neo – I’m getting a strong sense that you are driving some of the (middle-aged) men in here a little wild. Call it male intuition. Luckily, I’m already married to a Neo Neocon type minus the jello (her thing is stinky cheeses) and ballet. But, she too likes to sit around and think when she has time and does the walking / threadmill thing too.
I’m taken.
But I enjoy Neo’s writing immensely. 🙂
Neo,
This is OT, but I offer it because it might appeal to your interest in reading.
The English language German culture site has an article on Herta Mueller, the latest Nobel prize winner, including an excerpt from one of her books.
You’ve been in the battle, but now will be thrust to the front lines. Our support goes with you.
Neo-
Congratulations. Fantastic work. Great Article.
Then yesterday, as I was ironing (yes my life is THAT glamourous), I heard Rush reading from your article. Wow! Thank you so much for your work. I appreciate the opportunity to comment,and I support you work. Thank you.
I’ll try not to hold the law degree against you. 😉
Book on “Hope and Change”?
If you need a ghost writer, I heard Ayres and Axelrod might soon be interested.
“that Obama shares the view of certain ‘foreign-policy circles’ that American is ‘in decline’ and that it is his job to manage America’s decline.”
It struck me that FDR and the original Progressives had this very same idea about America and the economy back in their down with America time. Why are these people so negative when the entire American experience is of a people who overcome adversity? Are they like the Prozac party. Is that why they want to spread some cash around rather than try to prompt a recovery?
What an ignoramus the man is!
“. . .I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot. . . .”
Does he not know the struggles over the issue of slavery among the framers? Does he not know that without the agonizing compromise they came up with, there would have been no Union? Does he not know that Jefferson said “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.”?
And his only steady job before becoming a pol was as a constitutional law professor?
Artfldgr sez:
“i would have a different title, a bit shorter.”
Upon reading this, I facepalmed so hard I gave myself a concussion.
RE: America in decline
As others have pointed out, this is not new. FDR and his thought so. Kissinger and Nixon’s foreign policy were steeped in it.
Also,
Yeah, bourgeois-living ex-hippies are forever going on about how rotten this country is and why we should be taken down a peg.
Thing is, they are the least likely to survive such a thing.
But they are both actively clue-resistant, and vile at heart. They hate, really hate, the rest of us.
I know anecdote doesn’t equal data, but I’ve found this to be true, as well. I’m fairly misanthropic, but I don’t wish evil on anyone, I would just like to be left alone. Others want you (and me) to suffer.
Obama just won the Nobel Peace Prize.
I am speechless.
Oh. My. God.
Well, I guess the award to Obama settles the issue of whether the Peace Prize is worth anything more than the prize in a box of Cracker Jacks.
I confess, the funny comments that Instapundit is posting right now make it easier to bear. For instance:
“It’s a peace prize, not a peace peace prize.”
and a link to a post headed thusly:
Don Draper wins Nobel Peace Prize
Can’t cry, might as well laugh.
Neo, I’ve been lurking here and enjoying your blogging for over a year now. I don’t usually leave comments on blogs but can’t resist saying how delighted I am that you’re publishing a book. Your arguments are always well-reasoned and reasonable and your particular viewpoints unique and illuminating. It doesn’t surprise me that you don’t attract trolls to your blog, making it an even pleasanter place to stop by. I wish you every success with your book; you can count on (at least) one sale on this eastern side of the Atlantic.
Also — I’ll be interested to read your views on Obama’s latest ‘success’. Here in the UK the reaction so far (outside the BBC) has been incredulity and, interestingly, annoyance. The sheen is beginning visibly to tarnish.
This will be nothing to the annoyance being felt in certain circles in the US, I’m sure, although for different reasons. It looks very much as though America is being patronised by the Euro-Liberal ‘elite’.
Wonderful piece of work at the Weekly Standard, Neo. It’s always deep and satisfying yet never too long.
With writers like you and readers who avidly follow your synthesizing work, can this country be in decline for long? Don’t think so and certainly hope not.
Alfred Nobel, for whom the prize is named, was an armaments dealer and inventor of explosive compounds. (I read that he originally wanted to call his most famous invention “Nobel’s Safety Powder” -but settled on “dynamite” instead.)
His decision to use a large part of his fortune to endow the prize-giving was prompted by a premature obituary written by a French journalist who said “the merchant of death is dead.” Nobel wanted to leave a better legacy.
The Peace Prize is a joke nowadays – blatantly, offensively political, and an embarrassment. As a legacy, it ranks up there with the Winchester Mystery House in San Jose, conceived by the spiritually-crazed heiress to the Winchester fortune as a propitiatory offering to the spirits of those slain by her family’s rifles.
And man, is it a weird place! Stairways to nowhere, rooms that have windows in the floor, occult stained glass and more. It creates the same kind of fun-house atmosphere as the Peace Prize giving these days. My husband and I roared with laughter when we heard the announcement this morning – what else can you do?
Neo, you have so captured what so many of the liberal elite feel. They have their man in office.
Hi Jean, Great article comparing Reagan and Obama. But I suspect that Obama is less interested in redeeming America than in redeeming his vision of himself. Someone who sits in judgement of an entire nation ought to have an acute sense of right and wrong. Yet Obama distanced himself from Reverend Wright, Van Jones, Ayers, etc. only after these people were revealed publicly as less than exemplary characters. Likewise in foreign policy Obama seems to have no interest in human rights unless there is an opportunity to point an accusing finger at America or the West. The Tibetans suffering from Chinese oppression or the Iranian protestors fighting for freedom are left dangling in the wind. My guess is that Obama is a product of ethnocentric politics and throughout his life has had to reconcile the painful failure of his own Muslim-African heritage in the global community versus the tremendous success of Western civilization with America as its crown jewel. It is not America’s and the West’s failures that angers Obama, rather it is their success. His policies of undermining America are probably the unfortunate consequence of identity politics.
PS Anyway Jean it is wonderful to have a name to go with the apple. Glad to have you here in New England too! I’m just finishing up writing a book myself. My recommendation, for what its worth, is to do your writing early in the day. But please don’t give up your blog!
Scottie:
I am disagreeing with Obama’s brand of Socialism retaining a distinctive North Americanism.
My point is that no matter where you start on the trail, all the isms end up in despotic, dictatorial regimes that look exactly the same.
And, with your explanation, and further reading, I don’t think we disagree at all… LOL
Hi Neo,
Suggestion for possible book title:
“Tao te Jean- the book of political changers”
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Yes, that nails it, and identifies exactly what’s terrifying about Obama. He is not a madman, but he believes something only a madman could believe.
Move the apple. The by-line blew your cover!
Cap’n Rusty: you’re the first to notice.
But the apple stays. Must retain some mystery!
Jean Kaufman! I should have recognized your style, and your thinking.
Great piece!
I’m suddenly seized with the anxious thought that maybe the days of this blog are numbered — that you’re planning to move on.
Please reassure!
Autumn dirt
One can smell it; sense it
Remove the jeans from the closet, she thought
A step, yes; but one of many in a lengthy process
mizpants: no such plans. But I might do more of the other types of writing, including a book I’ve been contemplating. To do that, “neo-neocon” doesn’t work too well.
I love Reagan’s speech, I don’t like the ethical shift from secular to divine, simply following a preordained destiny cheapens the real human achievement. I can over look this because weather he said it or not he was a defender of Liberalism.
A book! Hope it’s about Change. There have been others — I think of David Horowitz, for example, and Norman Podhoretz. But your approach is entirely original in its focus on the process and its stages.
mizpants: yes, it would probably be about change. Hope and change 🙂
Neo, usually I agree with the Weekly Standard’s take on things, but I have to disagree with Jean Kaufman on this.
Obama isn’t anti-American, even though his policies are detrimental to the country in the long run. He doesn’t hate the country, as much as he blasts its actions in the past. From a certain point of view, he is trying to change America from something broken and wrong to something new and progressive. He wants America to be like Europe, a progressive union where the government provides even the most basic of traditionally self-provided needs, and his mind he is improving upon the original country by modeling its growth after the Left’s Promised Land.
Our President’s view of history is a bipolar one, not singularly negative. He’s quick to praise those whose support he needs. He’s also quick to praise those whose histories are Leftist-friendly. It’s a far from positive view of America, but one that people would believe if he told them it was “realistic.” He’s a Leftist, and Leftists rarely hold the same sort of nostalgic view of American history that Republicans tend to have. By the Left’s standards, anything conservative in nature is treasonous, since obviously anything that isn’t progressive in nature is bad for the country, and thus un-American.
In his opinion, he’s returning America to a path that he thinks was intended by the Founding Fathers, even though he condemns the Founding Fathers and their vision as being “flawed.” To say that Obama is anti-American would be an overstatement. In his mind, he’s a patriot, no matter what ineffective, misguided, unconstitutional or downright stupid policies he enacts.
– G
….still looking for a pic without the d%#n apple! google google google….
Giles: who said Obama was anti-American? Not me; I never used that phrase. He thinks America is a sinner, and he will absolve and redeem it. Is a preacher “anti” his wayward flock?
Of course, he’s against the Reaganite concept of America and that of the Right, and I do not agree with Obama at all. But I never called him anti-American.
Well, whoever you really are you’ll still remain a woman of mystery to me.
Great news on the book. Get cracking. I’ll buy a copy or twenty to send to people in need.
Why do so many conclude that Obama wants America to be more European? Given his personal history (like, for example, just what attachment does he have to anything European?), it is more likely that he wants America to be more African. In fact, the Europeans have discovered that socialism doesn’t work and have been moving in a more capitalist direction. Other than Great Britain, which I think is being governed by the brain dead, no other country in the world (outside Africa) of which I am aware is deliberately moving to debase its currency, lower its standing in the world, and punish its achievers, so that we all share equally in the remaining squaller. Worse, it is making the world less safe in the bargain.
simply following a preordained destiny cheapens the real human achievement
When you find out how to change the preordained human destiny of birth, life, and death, let me know. When you find out how such a preordained destiny cheapens real human achievement given our mortality, that is.
He doesn’t hate the country, as much as he blasts its actions in the past.
Neo is right about the preacher. One of the more objectionable, in the popular sense, parts of Christian theology is the whole hellfire, brimstone, and Original Sin deal.
Well, Obama has his own version of Original Sin and the hellfire to go with his brimstone.
I stated the above before reading Jean’s post. The concept of Original Sin is not something new. Various religions have their own particular dogma on this subject.
However, this idea of the anti-God Left hailing Original Sin as important came to me mostly from Black Liberation Churches. Especially in the example led by Helen Losse, a white woman, who converted from a more pedestrian Christian branch to the Black Liberation branch after studying class warfare and Martin Luther King in college.
Those like Jeremiah Wright only solidified this New Template after the fact, for me.
Why should the concept of socialism/communism be associated with a certain geographic area?
It’s like an invasive poisonous vine that takes root and attempts to spread aggressively no matter where it finds itself.
It doesn’t matter really where it came from, it’s a problem where it’s taking root in the present.
I would suggest Obama’s particular strain of socialism is more a home grown US variant than that practiced in the old USSR, Europe, South America or even Africa. It will share certain characteristics of those variations, but retain a certain distinctive North American perspective.
Of course this doesn’t mean it will succeed any better than the rest of the variations of socialism (at least discounting misery as a form of *success*), it’s simply a slightly different strain than that present elsewhere in the world even though it shares common roots with all those other forms of socialism.
Perhaps this *americanized* version of socialism is only still alive in this country because it has not yet been successfully foisted off on the entire country all at once – leaving it’s adherents to blissfully continue in the belief that socialism just hasn’t been attempted with the *right people* in charge of it yet.
I was reading my way along, got halfway through and went back to check the byline, thinking, “Goodness, this is well-written – who is this Jean Kaufman – why haven’t I heard of her before?” Then I came to that quiet little bomb of a bio-blurb at the end, and only then comprehended the sneaky genius of the equally-quiet “Read the whole thing” that accompanied the link.
Yippee, a book! While we’re waiting, can we still call you Neo, please? A name is a difficult thing to change …
Mrs Whatsit: yes, I thought I’d be subtle with the “read the whole thing” bit.
And please call me neo—I’ve grown used to it, and actually prefer it on the blog. I even answer to it in real life, if someone happens to wing it my way.
“preordained human destiny of birth, life, and death”
Ymarsakar, you’re making progress — good to see it 🙂
Rush Limbaugh read from this today.
Neo/Jean wrote, “Jennifer Rubin notes that Mitt Romney, speaking at a recent Foreign Policy Initiative conference, indicated “that Obama shares the view of certain ‘foreign-policy circles’ that American is ‘in decline’ and that it is his job to manage America’s decline.”
I often read Jennifer’s work. I’m not interested in seeing America’s decline.
I don’t wish to live in a mud hut, not exercise and expell is little CO2 as possible….
We are a prosperous nation who does so much good in the world.
Katrina van der Heuvel, whose name I am sure I am misspelling, announced on one of the morning talk shows this past Sunday that America is no longer a superpower. You could easily hear the satisfaction she took in saying it.
Neo,
Excellent article. Thank you for it.
Makes me look forward to the book. Can we assume the back jacket cover photo will be sans Apple?
I think it’d be cooler – more enigmatic – with apple.
Mrs,
Katrina van der Heuvel is easily one of the most gut wrenching people to watch.
Every Time I see her it is jaw dropping and angering at the same time.
How anybody could vote for ANYBODY that she represents is unbelievable.
Rush Limbaugh read from this today.
I can say I remember her when….
…. her blog had a few comments per hour…
“Jean”. Yeah, right. How do we know that’s not just another phony name?
You’ll always be Neo to us.
I don’t think Obama’s problem with America is limited to our history, or our economic system…I’m afraid he just doesn’t much like American civil society or the vast majority of the American people. See my post He’s Just Not That Into Us.
It is more than quite probable as I will save your article as one of the best I’ve ever read.
I’m ready for the book.
I’m sure that the aptly named Katrina van der Heuvel would be happy to live in a mud hut…
Or maybe it’s not “hovel” (rhymes with “shovel”) but “hoyvel” (as in “awful.”)
Your secret is safe with me, neo.
I came to mention the blown cover, but alas, too late.
Please, J,, er, Neo, get on to the book. Maybe you can beat Michael Totten to it?
Your change of mind issues are FANTASTIC.
Your takes on Obama seem to be more true than anything else I can find; they make more sense.
Thanks, again and again.
Great column, Neo,and a great coming-out party (in the old-fashioned sense of the term). I can’t wait for your book.
Did you notice this link at Weekly Standard’s Blog today?
http://artofmanliness.com/2009/09/03/motivational-posters-winston-churchill-edition-part-i/
Enjoy!
I don’t know what’s wrong with the link,but if you click on Home, you’ll see the Winston link.
I’ll be darned. What I want to know is, when you are rich and famous will you forget about all of us little guys?
The sub-head of your article asks if America is a country in decline.
The last time that question was asked, Bill Clinton was President.
The last time before that the question was asked, Jimmy Carter was President.
And the last time before that it was asked was when LBJ was President.
Notice a pattern?
Neo. Neoneo. Neoneocon. Jean. Gene. Apple. Orange. How do we know, really, that any of these names are the real names? How do we ever solve the conundrum of identity? A neo by any other fruit, except perhaps, a grape would still a mystery be. I say we know less about the identity than we knew this morning.
Nice
What is in a name?
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.
Neo takes her place along a long line of others who have hidden their names so as to make loose their tongues.
Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls.
Who steals my purse steals trash; ’tis something, nothing;
‘Twas mine, ’tis his, and has been slave to thousands;
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed.
I thought so. If you play Dylan’s Sad Eyed Lady of the Lowlands backwards, you can hear the words Jean Kaufman clearly. They are in the (backward) harmonica parts.
Jean, this is a famous day, and we are happy to know you.
It’s good.
Better than most political analysis with added psychological insight.
This was my favorite part I am going to repeat it prefaced with “as I read in the Weekly Standard”:
“He believes such a downward direction is the morally proper one for America and Americans, the only way we can be forgiven our manifold sins and emerge purified through humility and sacrifice.
Obama also believes that he is the special instrument by which the nation can accomplish this transformation”
I was floundering around here trying to state that idea, but not as well. I think that is exactly right. Furthermore, I think his believers and voters see him as that instrument of destruction for America. The left voted for him because they despise the unfashionable, wal-martian (I coined that), Bible and gun-clinger Middle Class and so does he.
There is a name for that “Instrument of Destruction”: Nemesis.
Honestly, I think that sentiment is orginal to you–it’s a thing we’ve all been kicking around; that we all knew, but I think you are the first to publish it in whole.
The shining and sinning play is good…. This is going to be hard to top.
Yeah, bourgeois-living ex-hippies are forever going on about how rotten this country is and why we should be taken down a peg.
Thing is, they are the least likely to survive such a thing.
But they are both actively clue-resistant, and vile at heart. They hate, really hate, the rest of us.
In addition to the name, there was another little surprise lurking in that bio: the law degree. Though I certainly could have missed a reference over the years, I don’t think we knew about that. Is it a J.D.? If so, it makes me curious, because I think my own legal education had a major effect on the later change in my political ideas. Briefly (har de har har), in law school I learned how to think.
Sometime, Neo, if you were ever so inclined, I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts on whether and how learning to “think like a lawyer” affected your ideas.
I would have liked to have seen this written a few years ago, when W tarnished the shiny city on the hill that Ron spoke so fondly of.
It makes sense. There’s a reason we all keep coming back here, (aside from the fact many of us are changers), and that is substance.
Brava!
Neo/Jean:
I look forward to more articles from this Jean Kaufman. 🙂
Good work. I look forward to the book.
Obama has a false sense of perspective, and so do some of those that sum him up from the Left. When I raise the question, in face-to-face discussions, the discussion often diverges from my point with a response such as, “well he’s biracial so actually he does have a broad perspective.”
I can’t begin the premise that race has nothing to do with his decision making abilities, but if I announce that then the conversation is over before it’s started — I don’t have to reinvent this theory because I, we, understand Leftist defense mechanisms. Obama’s problem is that he’s been indoctrinated with a Leftist point on view and approach to finding solutions, but as I critiqued early on, one of Obama’s strengthens is that he’s has shown some evidence that he is teachable — the problem with this is this could also be called confusion and indecisiveness, only now that’s he’s actually making judgment on policy is this evident, to say so before was pure solipsism, I, we, also know how the Right thinks.
As his intellectual perspective matures, but he has so many insular walls built around him, we’ll see how he grows. He has years and years ahead of him, but for now the passenger that looks like a pilot is flying the airliner and his hands are shaking and his heart is beating really fast.
Two quotes from Cicero seem very appropriate in these times:
“Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. … Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the ‘new, wonderful good society’ which shall now be Rome’s, interpreted to mean ‘more money, more ease, more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious.’”
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city. But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the carrier of the plague. You have unbarred the gates of Rome to him.” —Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.)
I would suggest Obama’s particular strain of socialism is more a home grown US variant than that practiced in the old USSR, Europe, South America or even Africa. It will share certain characteristics of those variations, but retain a certain distinctive North American perspective./
I disagree. No matter how benign, new or revolutionary an “ism” looks, they all end in tyranny and despotism.
Obama seems to see himself as a great Confessor and Redeemer; two things that is very dangerous for someone to think of himself. Because of those thougts he will not stop at anything in order for us to get right with him. Witness the Inquisition; same idea, slightly different tactics (for now).
Reagan and Obama: shining America, sinning America
That title captures the difference in point of view between left and right in the US. One perspective I brought back from working in Latin America was that I no longer viewed the US as being the “great sinner.”
Though I would agree with the liberals that the US isn’t perfect- it’s electing NObama is evidence of that.
Pingback:Nolanimrod
neo: Congratulations! I’ve long thought there was a book in you.
i would have a different title, a bit shorter.
Reagan and Obama: Shining America
Both are Shining America…
if you use it in its normal sense it is making somethign polished and shine to look good.
if you know its slang usages, well, then the shortening of the title makes a lot of sense as a play on words.
—noun
16. Slang: Disparaging and Offensive. a black person
17. shine up to, Informal. a. to attempt to impress (a person), esp. in order to gain benefits for oneself.
shines (Informal) Pranks or tricks.
and in the black community, putting the shine on is:
to insult someone; to deceive someone. : Stop shining me. I’m cool, man, ice. (slang dictionary)
DeWayne,
You commented:
“I disagree. No matter how benign, new or revolutionary an “ism” looks, they all end in tyranny and despotism.”
Please note that I followed the statement you quoted with this one, in the selfsame comment:
“Of course this doesn’t mean it will succeed any better than the rest of the variations of socialism (at least discounting misery as a form of *success*), it’s simply a slightly different strain than that present elsewhere in the world even though it shares common roots with all those other forms of socialism.”
As far as I’m concerned – and noted as much – the only thing socialism/communism has managed to be successful at is creating misery wherever it’s been tried.
The statement you quote – and apparently are disagreeing with – was simply responding to earlier comments musing over what government Obama seemed to most want to emulate, which kind of combined references to Britain (nation) with Europe and Africa (continents).
My point was that it really didn’t matter, that you could have an “americanized” version of socialism that was just as distinctive as versions attempted in Africa or Europe – but it would still be just as bad in the end result, and I even compared socialism to a poisonous vine and a problem to be dealt with wherever it took root.
So exactly what are you disagreeing with me on?
I’ve always thought all this America the original sinner concept said more about its believers mental makeup than it ever stated a valid political point.
Theres a masochistic flare in its assertions that I can’t help but notice.
Also….I’m curious if its actually the level of collective incompetence that gives rise to nanny state socialism. A people dumb and incompetent enough could quite possibly not function without it? I’m just sayin…..
Wolla-
Thanks for the Cicero.
Once I was able to read him in Latin, but no more, alas.
Jean, aka neo, a lawyer that does therapy? I’ll have to reset my brain on my next legal visit!
Tom,
Don’t forget the dancer and the jello lover. A fantastic mix!
To those curious about that “law degree” bit: it may be a surprise, but I’ve written about it before, although not often. Way back at the beginning of my blog career, Norm Geras profiled me, as I noted here. The intro to the profile contained the following description, written by me:
I stand by that description.
One more note and then I’ll go back to thinking about other things. Neo – I’m getting a strong sense that you are driving some of the (middle-aged) men in here a little wild. Call it male intuition. Luckily, I’m already married to a Neo Neocon type minus the jello (her thing is stinky cheeses) and ballet. But, she too likes to sit around and think when she has time and does the walking / threadmill thing too.
I’m taken.
But I enjoy Neo’s writing immensely. 🙂
Neo,
This is OT, but I offer it because it might appeal to your interest in reading.
The English language German culture site has an article on Herta Mueller, the latest Nobel prize winner, including an excerpt from one of her books.
http://www.signandsite.com/
I suspect that next week they will have even more.
Here the corrected version:
http://www.signandsight.com/
You’ve been in the battle, but now will be thrust to the front lines. Our support goes with you.
Neo-
Congratulations. Fantastic work. Great Article.
Then yesterday, as I was ironing (yes my life is THAT glamourous), I heard Rush reading from your article. Wow! Thank you so much for your work. I appreciate the opportunity to comment,and I support you work. Thank you.
I’ll try not to hold the law degree against you. 😉
Book on “Hope and Change”?
If you need a ghost writer, I heard Ayres and Axelrod might soon be interested.
It struck me that FDR and the original Progressives had this very same idea about America and the economy back in their down with America time. Why are these people so negative when the entire American experience is of a people who overcome adversity? Are they like the Prozac party. Is that why they want to spread some cash around rather than try to prompt a recovery?
What an ignoramus the man is!
“. . .I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot. . . .”
Does he not know the struggles over the issue of slavery among the framers? Does he not know that without the agonizing compromise they came up with, there would have been no Union? Does he not know that Jefferson said “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.”?
And his only steady job before becoming a pol was as a constitutional law professor?
Artfldgr sez:
“i would have a different title, a bit shorter.”
Upon reading this, I facepalmed so hard I gave myself a concussion.
RE: America in decline
As others have pointed out, this is not new. FDR and his thought so. Kissinger and Nixon’s foreign policy were steeped in it.
Also,
Yeah, bourgeois-living ex-hippies are forever going on about how rotten this country is and why we should be taken down a peg.
Thing is, they are the least likely to survive such a thing.
But they are both actively clue-resistant, and vile at heart. They hate, really hate, the rest of us.
I know anecdote doesn’t equal data, but I’ve found this to be true, as well. I’m fairly misanthropic, but I don’t wish evil on anyone, I would just like to be left alone. Others want you (and me) to suffer.
Obama just won the Nobel Peace Prize.
I am speechless.
Oh. My. God.
Well, I guess the award to Obama settles the issue of whether the Peace Prize is worth anything more than the prize in a box of Cracker Jacks.
I confess, the funny comments that Instapundit is posting right now make it easier to bear. For instance:
“It’s a peace prize, not a peace peace prize.”
and a link to a post headed thusly:
Don Draper wins Nobel Peace Prize
Can’t cry, might as well laugh.
Neo, I’ve been lurking here and enjoying your blogging for over a year now. I don’t usually leave comments on blogs but can’t resist saying how delighted I am that you’re publishing a book. Your arguments are always well-reasoned and reasonable and your particular viewpoints unique and illuminating. It doesn’t surprise me that you don’t attract trolls to your blog, making it an even pleasanter place to stop by. I wish you every success with your book; you can count on (at least) one sale on this eastern side of the Atlantic.
Also — I’ll be interested to read your views on Obama’s latest ‘success’. Here in the UK the reaction so far (outside the BBC) has been incredulity and, interestingly, annoyance. The sheen is beginning visibly to tarnish.
This will be nothing to the annoyance being felt in certain circles in the US, I’m sure, although for different reasons. It looks very much as though America is being patronised by the Euro-Liberal ‘elite’.
Wonderful piece of work at the Weekly Standard, Neo. It’s always deep and satisfying yet never too long.
With writers like you and readers who avidly follow your synthesizing work, can this country be in decline for long? Don’t think so and certainly hope not.
Alfred Nobel, for whom the prize is named, was an armaments dealer and inventor of explosive compounds. (I read that he originally wanted to call his most famous invention “Nobel’s Safety Powder” -but settled on “dynamite” instead.)
His decision to use a large part of his fortune to endow the prize-giving was prompted by a premature obituary written by a French journalist who said “the merchant of death is dead.” Nobel wanted to leave a better legacy.
The Peace Prize is a joke nowadays – blatantly, offensively political, and an embarrassment. As a legacy, it ranks up there with the Winchester Mystery House in San Jose, conceived by the spiritually-crazed heiress to the Winchester fortune as a propitiatory offering to the spirits of those slain by her family’s rifles.
And man, is it a weird place! Stairways to nowhere, rooms that have windows in the floor, occult stained glass and more. It creates the same kind of fun-house atmosphere as the Peace Prize giving these days. My husband and I roared with laughter when we heard the announcement this morning – what else can you do?
Neo, you have so captured what so many of the liberal elite feel. They have their man in office.
Hi Jean, Great article comparing Reagan and Obama. But I suspect that Obama is less interested in redeeming America than in redeeming his vision of himself. Someone who sits in judgement of an entire nation ought to have an acute sense of right and wrong. Yet Obama distanced himself from Reverend Wright, Van Jones, Ayers, etc. only after these people were revealed publicly as less than exemplary characters. Likewise in foreign policy Obama seems to have no interest in human rights unless there is an opportunity to point an accusing finger at America or the West. The Tibetans suffering from Chinese oppression or the Iranian protestors fighting for freedom are left dangling in the wind. My guess is that Obama is a product of ethnocentric politics and throughout his life has had to reconcile the painful failure of his own Muslim-African heritage in the global community versus the tremendous success of Western civilization with America as its crown jewel. It is not America’s and the West’s failures that angers Obama, rather it is their success. His policies of undermining America are probably the unfortunate consequence of identity politics.
PS Anyway Jean it is wonderful to have a name to go with the apple. Glad to have you here in New England too! I’m just finishing up writing a book myself. My recommendation, for what its worth, is to do your writing early in the day. But please don’t give up your blog!
Scottie:
I am disagreeing with Obama’s brand of Socialism retaining a distinctive North Americanism.
My point is that no matter where you start on the trail, all the isms end up in despotic, dictatorial regimes that look exactly the same.
And, with your explanation, and further reading, I don’t think we disagree at all… LOL
Hi Neo,
Suggestion for possible book title:
“Tao te Jean- the book of political changers”