The Democrats' Ideological Stupor
Published in Le Figaro
(France) on August 3, 2008
by Chizoba Nnaemeka (link to original)
(France) on August 3, 2008
by Chizoba Nnaemeka (link to original)
Translated from
by Elizabeth J. Newton.
Edited by .
It has become, in various verbal forms, the soundtrack of the youth of this generation, American or not: “How was George Bush able to mess up this country so much?”, “Am I hallucinating or is your President just doing whatever he wants?”, “Look at how precarious the world’s situation is thanks to Bush’s actions (or inactions).” Whether I’m in a café in Paris, in Cambridge, or in Frankfurt, I can be sure that if I overhear the words “screwup,” “imbecility,” “arrogance,” they will soon be accompanied by their companions “Bush,” “Karl Rove,” and “Republicans.” Depending on the circumstances, I could add “Wall Street” and “hedge funds” to this grouping.
Anti-Bush chanting is so ubiquitous that it seems to me to have lost all meaning. So I invite the readers of this blog to help me rewrite it. This is no longer a vague denunciation of Bush’s presidency as digestible, imprecise, impulsive. These pronouncements are in fashion, and the more the end of his term approaches, the less they are scrutinized. The more one frequents the left-wing liberals of American cities (New York and San Francisco), the less one is inclined to articulate clearly and concretely the faults of the current administration. (The same goes for practically all of Europe.)
In 2008, it no longer requires any effort to be a Democrat. An ideology that until recently had to try very hard to be taken seriously has grown pompous with its new prestige and attracts all sorts of people who confuse the Democratic platform with uncertainty, anger or humiliation. This tangle is certainly useful to the Democratic candidate, but the party is far too optimistic, ambitious, open, and fair to see its program reduced to a simple referendum on the Bush years.
In addition, we expect much more of our candidate than the political algebra of the past month: McCain + proposal = Barack Obama – proposal + “it’s a continuation of the Bush agenda.” Well, okay, but what are your plans, Mr. Obama, and when will you present them without ridiculing your rival? Go ahead; show your ideas and your teeth, and stop reacting to McCain’s gaffes.
So we sink into an intellectual laziness, ignoring other Bush critics who don’t support the Democratic platform, like the Libertarians and their hero Ron Paul. The enemies of our enemies are not necessarily our friends… but we have to speak to them. And while we’re on the subject, Democrats, let’s talk among ourselves. Ever since the forgettable quadrennial of Jimmy Carter,* the Republicans have designated themselves the architects of American values and political language. The party of the strong, the brave, and the decisive; the Republicans transformed the Democrats—without much difficulty—into the cowardly, the weak, and the yielding.
In the Republicans’ United States, the word “socialism” is brandished like a weapon, and those who dare speak of health insurance or social security qualify as traitors. According to Republican mathematics, nuance, patience, and compromise are equivalent to perfidy. The consequence, 20 years later, is a candidate who spends more time defending himself and a Democratic majority in Congress, which has still not garnered up the courage to end the war in Iraq (out of fear of being called cowards by their Republican colleagues). Even though the American people had voted for disengagement by electing Democrats in the 2006 elections.
But back to the subject of this post and the anti-Bush music I was discussing. After an extra-judiciary, quasi-papal seven-year term, in the course of which the Bush administration behaved like an infallible and untouchable little political group, Congress and the Supreme Court are not only hardening their tone; they deign to condemn or annul actions of Bush & Co. So, I pray you to cite, as specifically as possible, which actions of the Bush clan illustrate for you the incompetence, deafness, and obstinacy of their team. Abridged rights, promulgated laws, unsigned treaties, etc.
Knowing the audience of this international blog, I debated, for a moment, the intelligence and pertinence of such an exercise. But having never been disappointed, nor surprised by the superiority of the American political knowledge of foreigners compared to that of the average American, I told myself that you would have much to contribute.
So, please produce your concrete list of the ravages of the Bush administration. Perhaps included in this sum, actions brought about by Bush’s associates…and those that preceded** his arrival at the White House. Happy August and good luck with the research.
*who, thanks to his charitable work, was able to write himself a new chapter and to soften the gaffes and blunders of his presidency.
**Al Gore, certainly, would cite this…
Anti-Bush chanting is so ubiquitous that it seems to me to have lost all meaning. So I invite the readers of this blog to help me rewrite it. This is no longer a vague denunciation of Bush’s presidency as digestible, imprecise, impulsive. These pronouncements are in fashion, and the more the end of his term approaches, the less they are scrutinized. The more one frequents the left-wing liberals of American cities (New York and San Francisco), the less one is inclined to articulate clearly and concretely the faults of the current administration. (The same goes for practically all of Europe.)
In 2008, it no longer requires any effort to be a Democrat. An ideology that until recently had to try very hard to be taken seriously has grown pompous with its new prestige and attracts all sorts of people who confuse the Democratic platform with uncertainty, anger or humiliation. This tangle is certainly useful to the Democratic candidate, but the party is far too optimistic, ambitious, open, and fair to see its program reduced to a simple referendum on the Bush years.
In addition, we expect much more of our candidate than the political algebra of the past month: McCain + proposal = Barack Obama – proposal + “it’s a continuation of the Bush agenda.” Well, okay, but what are your plans, Mr. Obama, and when will you present them without ridiculing your rival? Go ahead; show your ideas and your teeth, and stop reacting to McCain’s gaffes.
So we sink into an intellectual laziness, ignoring other Bush critics who don’t support the Democratic platform, like the Libertarians and their hero Ron Paul. The enemies of our enemies are not necessarily our friends… but we have to speak to them. And while we’re on the subject, Democrats, let’s talk among ourselves. Ever since the forgettable quadrennial of Jimmy Carter,* the Republicans have designated themselves the architects of American values and political language. The party of the strong, the brave, and the decisive; the Republicans transformed the Democrats—without much difficulty—into the cowardly, the weak, and the yielding.
In the Republicans’ United States, the word “socialism” is brandished like a weapon, and those who dare speak of health insurance or social security qualify as traitors. According to Republican mathematics, nuance, patience, and compromise are equivalent to perfidy. The consequence, 20 years later, is a candidate who spends more time defending himself and a Democratic majority in Congress, which has still not garnered up the courage to end the war in Iraq (out of fear of being called cowards by their Republican colleagues). Even though the American people had voted for disengagement by electing Democrats in the 2006 elections.
But back to the subject of this post and the anti-Bush music I was discussing. After an extra-judiciary, quasi-papal seven-year term, in the course of which the Bush administration behaved like an infallible and untouchable little political group, Congress and the Supreme Court are not only hardening their tone; they deign to condemn or annul actions of Bush & Co. So, I pray you to cite, as specifically as possible, which actions of the Bush clan illustrate for you the incompetence, deafness, and obstinacy of their team. Abridged rights, promulgated laws, unsigned treaties, etc.
Knowing the audience of this international blog, I debated, for a moment, the intelligence and pertinence of such an exercise. But having never been disappointed, nor surprised by the superiority of the American political knowledge of foreigners compared to that of the average American, I told myself that you would have much to contribute.
So, please produce your concrete list of the ravages of the Bush administration. Perhaps included in this sum, actions brought about by Bush’s associates…and those that preceded** his arrival at the White House. Happy August and good luck with the research.
*who, thanks to his charitable work, was able to write himself a new chapter and to soften the gaffes and blunders of his presidency.
**Al Gore, certainly, would cite this…