Francis Fukuyama Endorses Obama

Francis Fukuyama, the prominent academic and an early intellectual defender of neoconservatism, endorses Barack Obama in the pages of the American Conservative magazine:

I'm voting for Barack Obama this November for a very simple reason. It is hard to imagine a more disastrous presidency than that of George W. Bush. It was bad enough that he launched an unnecessary war and undermined the standing of the United States throughout the world in his first term. But in the waning days of his administration, he is presiding over a collapse of the American financial system and broader economy that will have consequences for years to come. As a general rule, democracies don't work well if voters do not hold political parties accountable for failure. While John McCain is trying desperately to pretend that he never had anything to do with the Republican Party, I think it would a travesty to reward the Republicans for failure on such a grand scale.

McCain's appeal was always that he could think for himself, but as the campaign has progressed, he has seemed simply erratic and hotheaded. His choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate was highly irresponsible; we have suffered under the current president who entered office without much knowledge of the world and was easily captured by the wrong advisers. McCain's lurching from Reaganite free- marketer to populist tribune makes one wonder whether he has any underlying principles at all.

Fukuyama's undergone a shift in recent years, notably declaring the death of his own neoconservative movement in a 2006 essay.

Comments

[sposton]

The end of history, revised. ;-)

[realpolitic]

Francis Fukuyama came out years ago to say that the Iraqi war was a tragic mistake. He reversed his earlier support of American preemption and unilateralism, a foreign policy which has undermined our democracy and has lowered our standing in the world. He recognizes that the Bush presidency was disastrous and that Bush was wholly unprepared for office. Bush had core, inflexible ideological principles, which he remained true to even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. McCain seems to have no principles and is simply flailing in the wind for something that works. I do not know which approach would lead to the more disastrous presidency, but I do not want to find out. Fukuyama is correct that democracies don't work well if voters do not hold political parties accountable for failure, especially on such a grand, epic scale as that of the Republicans.

[Gib]

This election isn't a contest between Democrats and Republicans so much as between intelligence and knowledge on one side, and stupidity and ignorance on the other.

[DarthVector]

I notice a lot of people getting antsy here.

Relax folks, Francis can think. And he can change his mind when wrong.

We will need people like him, despite what ideas he held previously.

If you wanna throw him under the bus, you gotta throw every Bush voter in 2004 under the bus.

Many of them will vote Obama on Tuesday.

CHANGE, peeps, CHANGE.

[Dragonblaster]

True he did change his mind regarding his previous philosophy which is a noble trait.

I guess the one element that bothers me is the fact he signed the William Kristol plan that supported invading Iraq even if evidence did not link Iraq directly to 9-11. To support that and also say you were against "launching and unnecessary war" make no sense to me.

[TopProf]

Oh, he can think just fine. Unfortunately he is being well paid to think a certain way. So the books come out a predictable way. He can write a book. But most people employed by right wing think tanks don't write books like people in universities write books. The think tanks pay while the writer writes the books, guarantee a favorable distribution, pay for marketing, even buy them up so the books go on best seller lists, use their contacts to put the authors on C-Span and pay the authors afterwards. Profs write books on spec, some get picked up by publishers (and some don't) and are in play for an edition or two (if they're not text books), make very little money. The books get shredded after a couple of years. I've read his books and don't believe they would have been as successful as they have if he had been an independent scholar.

[RoXXanne]

Well, there's an explanation for this.

What Fukuyama supported were the original plans for the Iraq invasion: to go in with a lot more ground troops than they actually did, which would have enabled them to take full control of Iraq. They changed this at the last moment to save money.

[docterry]

One more RINO to be expelled from the GOP. It's sad really. Well maybe not.

[meemee]

This guy wrote a pretty good article published in the October issue of Newsweek titled, The Fall of America, Inc. I found it from a link on Huffington.

[bandithappy]

From the End of History to the End of the Republicans.

Way to go, Mr. Fukayama! Welcome aboard the reality based community train.

[RAFord24]

He's voting for Obama because he doesn't want to "reward republican failure". We'll take that vote. All aboard, republicans, you too can join operation CHANGE!

Vote Smart = Obama-Biden

[Eljamin]

The reasons Fukuyama lists for why he's supporting Obama are hypocritical, but telling. He's overtly saying that Obama is the best man to clean up the mess from the failed policies of the disastrous Bush presidency (as if no one could recall that he was one of the architects of the PNAC plan - which focused on the need to find a justification to invade Iraq). He even mentions the war as being unnecessary! But, I think when the neocons say "failed policies" we should understand them really to be saying "the Bush administration failed at executing our policies". It seems that many neocons now support Obama because they think he will put a more reasonable, more competent, more humane face on the underlying agenda to maintain a policy of American Exceptionalism.

Let's not forget, Obama is still talking about the "war on terror". He's still talking about Bin Laden. He's still talking about sending more troops to Afghanistan and even the need for the U.S. to take military measures into its own hands in Pakistan, if need be. Progressives might get a middle class champion back here in the "homeland" - but it would seem that the neocons are anticipating a new-and-improved, much more competent leader to carry out "exceptionalist" foreign policies that protect "American Interests" in an all too familiar way.

Will Obama disappoint them?

[Dragonblaster]

Interesting stretch, but Obama has an anti-fear message which is the complete opposite of the Neo-Conservative philosophy. Every president will try and run and carry out an American "exceptionalist' idea. Bin Laden is still in the picture because he's not dead, and was the Neo-Conservative main symbol of All Evil on Earth. When the Republican Party runs on Fear and the symbol of Unending Evil and can't even kill this guy it's a major failure to point out.

The Neo-Conservative are trying to make this a Twilight unending Struggle, but having a hot war it just does not work. You can't have a hot war and a cold war at the same time. It has drained America much faster than I think these clowns would have thought.

[Giblatsai]

This turn around by Francis Fukuyama is nigh unto a religious experience, ie. the road to Damascus and Saul of Tarsus, on his way to butcher and jail more 'followers of the Nazarene' he was blinded by the Light, and A Voice stopped him in his tracks...the time of Light IS Come, and we are witnessing the greatest groundswell of support from all quarters ever witnessed in a campaign of this kind. People from all backgrounds, religions, ethic identities and politcal persuasions are seeing the Light of Reason and the opportunity to be free of the dark and imprisoning policies of the last eight years...be it Buckley's son breaking with his place of work, and his father's baby, and declaring Obama the right man at the right time or Colin Powell or Scott McClellan or even Bill and Hillary Clinton!! The list is much too long but includes newspapers once believed to be dyed in the wool republican rags...endorsing Obama...the Light IS Come!! Hail the Chief, Obama the Brave and the True!!

[Dragonblaster]

What's interesting is this guy says he was against launching the war in Iraq but he signed William Kristol's Sept. 20 2001 document in support of providing 'full military and financial support to the Iraqi opposition' for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power 'even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack.

This guy has the intellectual and ethical spine of a jelly fish.

Neo-Conservatives really are anti-American

[Dragonblaster]

You know the neo conservative philosophy doesn't work when one of it's founders abandons ship.

Neo conservative philosophy like communism DOES NOT WORK!

[SOLERSO68]

Not that anyone cares, nor should they care about a discredited philosophy, but Neoconservatism
really began in the late 30's a 40's and began rolling over the american right in the late 50's. bill kritsols father irving, is considered "the" father. althought there were other "fathers" Like ayn rand.
anyhoo, its not this dips**t

[diod1972]

Good point. It should also be noted Fukuyama isn't really a neocon, he's neoliberal. A subtle but very important difference. Neoliberal is barely used in the political discourse in the US for some strange reason. There are a lot of ambiguities around these two terms, but I think many people (mostly those on the left who ID themselves as "liberal") confuse neocon when they really mean neoliberal. Neocon has has implications to social conservatism, while neoliberalism is the celebration of all life through the filters of free markets and some version of "democracy;" Bush could fall into both categories, which might explain some of the confusion. For more on this read Fukuyama's seminal book, which was for a long time the Bible of neoliberal philosophy and some might say the justification for global capitalism and pushing democracy on the rest of the world: "The End of History."

[MrPastel]

"McCain NcNames"...
Got any?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfsKtV_YWdg

[Jamesdean]

he is an opportunistic and nothing else. he lost credibility of his peers years ago. now he is supporting o b ama and tomorrow if wind changes he will back m c c ain.

[joeterwal]

It is obvious you mean opportunist, even though you may be too challenged to know that. Anyhow Fukuyama has not lost credibility with any of his peers, maybe a few who are not up to his level yes. BTW, his ability to revisit his though and change show a sign that he can think. More than I can say for you and your peers..

[Jamesdean]

sorry, you are right i did mean opportunist and not opportunistic. i might be challenged and unable to think but i do know that fu ku yama has changed his positions so many times and on so many issues that hardly any academic respects him anymore.

[TopProf]

Neocon disciplines of Leo Strauss follow the dictum of lying to achieve their interests. It follows that they are not to be believed. I doubt that his thinking has changed in the least.

[DeviousSoybeans]

It's funny, but every time another respected conservative endorses or praises Obama, the Right Wingnuts prattle on about how that person isn't a "real" conservative. So any republican concerned with the direction their party in which their party is turning, and forthright enough to speak those concerns aloud, is suddenly not conservative and to be dismissed? My. How conveeeeeenient.

[Jamesdean]

you missed my point, devioussoybeans.