The Sixth Principle
Endless analysis in coming months will focus on the meanings of this election, and the interpretations will be as varied as the analysts' many biases. For there is something here for everyone. This was a cyclical referendum with the pendulum bound to swing back to Democrats. The president-elect represents a new, post-Clinton, beyond centrism, post-racial, new politics, internet-driven phenomenon. The nation is fed up with neoconservative imperialists, radical fundamentalists, and failed supply-siders. And so on.
For those more interested in what happens next, where we go from here, the possibilities are intriguing. President-elect Obama can be a good president, one who reconstructs the best of 20th century economics, foreign policy, and security. Or he can be a great president, one who begins the process of the creating a new 21st century economy, new alliances abroad to address new realities, and new military structures to respond to transformed warfare.
Great presidents do not emerge from quiet times; they arise in times of chaos and crisis. Even those who enter office with modest aspirations in such times are often forced by circumstance to resort to a boldness not available to leaders in more conventional times. And if, as with Lincoln, Roosevelt, and very few others, they have a mandate, even one granted from the people out of desperation, they have the very rare chance for greatness and a place in history.
To aspire to a great transformational presidency, Barack Obama must combine with his own bold instincts policies and policy-makers who are imaginative, creatively experimental, and sufficiently confident in the sound judgment of the American people to keep us informed and involved and to engage us in the transformations that must occur. Barack Obama was elected for change, but as he himself repeatedly said, it is a question of "change for what."
The "what" is the process of governance. Moderation, pragmatism, and bipartisanship are necessary, but they do not represent a theory of governance. There have been five large governing ideas in American history: the Founders created a federated republic on an unprecedented scale; Jefferson believed in a transcontinental nation; Lincoln asserted national unity over state's rights; Roosevelt established a national community; and Truman confirmed that security was international in scope.
Barack Obama now has the opportunity to add a sixth great principle: to preserve the American promise we must transform our nation for a new and vastly different century.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
GREAT COLUMN OF REAL IDEAS ! To think what may have been in 1988... but i hope that O will read this and have frequent discussions on a range of policies/ideas with GARY HART. HART is as bright as they are on scene today... may his talents be well used in an O admin.....
I am a big fan of yours, Gary Hart. I admire your visionary qualities and your logical reasoning powers which comfort me in these chaotic times. I wish you were going to be an Obama senior advisor. He could use an encouraging and honest voice in his ear.
I would have voted for you for president, just so you know.
I would hope that the sixth principle would comprise the theory that the state can be a rational actor in the process of social and economic change.
Obama has a great opportunity to put that theory to work in the case of General Motors (the automotive/machinery industry).
Will he simply view the problem as an argument to be won in 24 and 48 months while feeding his political dependents or will he set an example as an agent who was willing to break eggs to make omelet and come up with an industry that operates on a whole new model while using energy and emissions more efficiently and providing cheaper cars, all of which will have a huge payoff to society as a whole.
If the latter, then we will see a much smaller industry employing fewer people and that will have incremental political costs but when the payoff comes Obama will be untouchable. Let us see if Obama is just smart or if he is truly "great".
Yes, yes and yes to "post-Clinton, beyond centrism...great transformational presidency..."
Senator Obama is in the exact position of the Robert Redford character in the film The Candidate. The question looms for him: "What do we do now?"
The approach that will work is for Barack to throw bipartisanship under the bus and run a progressive public interest presidency that is (essentially) the equal and opposite of Bush's private/corporatist/special interest presidency.
The federal government and the issues it is involved with have grown so complex that the only way a president can be effective is through use of the power of appointment. He can appoint people with a fervent commitment to the public interest in every post of consequence, and empower and trust them to in turn make the right (progressive public interest) sub-appointment and policy choices in their domains. Otherwise, the whole project of "change" will bog down and the miasmic force of status quo (private interest) inertia that is the default position of contemporary America will reassert itself.
Obama's bipartisan centrism appears to be a winning political formula, but it will eventually become a gloss on the status quo, disappointment tens of millions of Americans, and go the way of all fads. To succeed he will have to drill down into the crevices of American society and recruit many good people now quietly going about their business without a lot of recognition.
Eric C. Jacobson
Public Interest Lawyer
Culver City, California
"The president-elect represents a new, post-Clinton, beyond centrism, post-racial, new politics, internet-driven phenomenon."
Beyond centrism?
I recall something about the Yes votes on tort reform, Cheney' energy bill corporate giveaways, endorsement of Condi Rice and repeated absenteeism on women right to choose bills.
Let's not count the chickens before they're hatched, shall we.
"Cheney' energy bill corporate giveaways"
Obama did not choose to run on the issue of reversing Bush era tax breaks for energy companies, though he dallied with a windfall profits tax when oil futures were at their highest. His energy policy focus is "climate change," a gaggle of financial interests branded as environmentalism with cap and trade being the foremost pusher, also nukes and natural gas interests looking for an edge to force up coal prices to allow them to raise their own and remain competitive. The earnest goal of "energy independence" has been coopted into the climate change branding and soon we will have proponents making the case that cap and trade in the electricity markets somehow will spur "energy independence" although we (excluding Hawaii) import no oil for electricity generation and oil only accounts for 1-2 % of our electricity generation.
Mandatory participation in the CCX is on its way. Watch for the moment McCain and Obama appear together in unity to "save the world" or some such facially lofty goal.
Transform us how Senator Hart?I mean I see people being so engaged via the internet.Look at how the netroots practically co-opted the Democratic party.But how would you define this sixth principle?
Mr. Hart, I was privileged to hear you speak 4 years ago just before another election did not turn out as well. I thought you identified what is wrong with American politics as you other person has. You said the rise of fundamentalism all over the world, in all major religions, results from people unnerved by how quickly their worlds are changing, making them embrace the ideas that they are comfortable with from the past, that make them feel secure. I thought that was spot on. It explains why the fundamentalism is in the parts of the country and the world that are not keeping up with the change.
You've become a statesman that everyone should listen too. If things had turned out a little differently you would have made a great president.
Mr. Hart. You have been a whispering voice of reason in this nation's political dialogue for years. This is your victory too Sir. You also have won!
To leave Jacksonion democracy out of this analysis seems bizarre to me.
Maybe I'll see Senator Hart and the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner some day and I'll ask him about it.
The 21st century came late to American shores (by about 8 years) but it is at last beginning to dawn!
Thank you, Mr. Hart.
Amazing results - this was an EMD - Election of Mass Destruction.
Goodbye warmongers!
I am not American, and I wish your great nation the best, but please, who are these reactionaries who cry of creeping socialism and communism when they have probably lived or studied under neither? It would seem some of the biggest noisemakers are people who don't know or care what the definitions of these ideologies are. Cry free market economy all you want, most of us couldn't handle it and you don't have it. America is like plenty of other countries: private enterprise alongside government regulation, although you may be close to a banana republic in your rich/poor gap by now.
Best of luck...the world will need it.
"The Americans will do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the alternatives."
- Winston Churchill.
Firewood
Cheer up, Firewood. No one here was listening to the reactionaries. And since we HAVE now exhausted all the alternatives, watch us do the right thing!
Well said Gary; Kudos to you..!
Change has come to America. When massive media convinces selfish voters Reagan Republicans are neo-conservative imperalists, change has come. When traditional values voters are cast as radical fundamentalists as threatening as Islamic fundamentalists, change has come. When capitalism is buried as supply side economics and socialism is presented as the better option, change has come. And when Hart can use Lincoln to justify federal domination of every aspect of life, change has come, but none of it for the better.
http://allanerickson.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/barn-sour-nation/
"neo-conservative imperialists"
The voters were thinking about Iraq? Remember what James Carville said about the economy?
And what did McCain offer? At least Obama offered "Change".
I think you need to study basic socioeconomics. Supply-side economics isn't the only form of capitalism. Indeed, pure capitalism doesn't exist on Earth, because it fundamentally will lead to monopolies, which eliminates the competition necessary for market pricing models for services, wages, and goods. Socialism actually has a definition, you know, and the idea that anything that isn't supply-side economics is by default socialism is indicative of vast ignorance on the subject.
Let us be clear here, we ALL vote on our values. I have values, and I vote on them. I just don't share the same values as the "Value Voters". In fact, I find that what they call a "value", I call bigotry. "Values voters" is a code-word for fundamental religious voters, most specifically Christian fundamentalists. These voters believe they have a right to legislate their religious tenants for the rest of us to follow, which undermines my Constitutional Right to chose my own religion. The attempt to legislate religion and codify it into government has a name, and it is not Democracy. It is Theocracy. The idea of democracy is dependent on the right to formulate your own opinion and dissent, even on religion.
These Theocrats need to stop pretending they've been awarded a copyright and/or trademark on "Values", and stop pretending to be the sole possessors of "values". It is absurdly fallacious.
Outstanding comment, Antigone. As Dante said, "Names are the consequences of things." Conservativism is a pseudo-philosophy which delights in arbitrarily reassigning the meanings of words. Orwell pointed this out many years ago, and sometimes it seems conservatives have studied Newspeak in order to replicate the work of Big Brother.
They want to redefine the meanings of all political terminology, starting with "democracy". How can these alleged conservatives be so indifferent to the history of language? And why don't their brains work right?
To me "traditional values" of the United States of America have been things like decency, tolerance, generosity, toughness, and kindness. The current self-proclaimed owners of "traditional values", in my experience, share none of those values. Their values seem rather to be extreme intolerance, hatred, greed, and fear. And those values, and those people have indeed been threatening and destructive to all Americans. Including themselves. "Traditional values" has become simply a deceptive cover.
To me "traditional values" of the United States of America have been things like decency, tolerance, generosity, toughness, and kindness. The current self-proclaimed owners of "traditional values", in my experience, share none of those values. Their values seem rather to be extreme intolerance, hatred, greed, and fear. And those values, and those people have indeed been threatening and destructive to all Americans. Including themselves. "Traditional values" has become simply a deceptive cover.
Change is coming to America. With the first gesture of appointments, the suggestion of Robert F. Kennedy for EPA, Obama makes an important signal to his major supporters that CO2 cap and trade will be instituted. This will be perceived as reaching across the aisle to Hank Paulson and the Wall Street traders and the Chicago Carbon Exchange traders.
Remember this day. This was Obama's first tangible action signalling change.
I agree one hundred percent and I think the world agrees to a high degree but if Morning Joe is any indication the South disagrees with you one hundred percent and that's a huge problem.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
