Editor's Note: This is the second installment of a six-part series by Jim Wallis reflecting on the past two years and painting a post-election vision for people of faith and Sojourners. To read more from Jim and join in a discussion with other Social Justice Christians check out his blog at God's Politics.
Scriptures say, "Without a vision the people perish," and soon after he was elected, the president let the vision perish and the people soon followed. Without it, a vacuum formed and allowed the growth of a different sort of movement. Most unexpectedly, after the new "progressive" moment in January 2009, the "new populism" in America is now decidedly on the Tea Party Right; sparking an anti-Obama, anti-Democrat and anti-government movement; questioning the president's religion, patriotism and even his birth place; and tinged clearly by some with an ugly racial edge. The "movement" is now on the other side of the political aisle. A campaign of "Hope and Change," and "Yes We Can" was slowly replaced with the governance of diminishing expectations and "They Won't Let Us." But people who feel that they are perishing can be both afraid and angry.
Washington politics has been frozen solid, with no movement or motivation to try and solve the problems of the nation. Obama's hoped-for politics of solutions has been replaced by that of scapegoats. We have seen the opposition party adopt a politics of sabotage more intense than any in years. And newly elected politicians who view bi-partisanism as an act of betrayal won't help. The normal negativity of the campaign season was further amplified by the Roberts Court decision to remove all limits on the political spending of America's corporations, unions and other outside special interests. With no transparency required, the election was shaped by shadowy phantom interests that nobody knows and no one can hold accountable.
Then, of course, there is the 24/7 overtly ideological and partisan pounding of a right-wing media machine that is both "unfair" and "unbalanced," but has much more capacity to shape public discourse than the rudderless and shallow mainstream media that seems to have no moral compass except falling ratings. The left-wing blogosphere mimics the right and channel surfing between the political talk shows on both sides of the ideological divide reveals shows and hosts whose political views are very different but otherwise sound more and more alike in tone and style. On American cable television and talk radio, honest and robust political discourse has been replaced with an ideological food fight.
Civility has died in America, and urgent pleas for a more truthful and respectful public discourse from both religious leaders and former lawmakers from both parties have been ignored by a media that just loves a perpetual conflict narrative. But many in the country still long for a more moral and civil tone in our political discussion. Could civility become sexy in the repetitive shouting match which is now American politics?
A failure of communication, which the White House has now begun to acknowledge, is not a deep enough analysis of the problem. Nor is the conservative counter that the real issue is how bad and unpopular Obama's policies are. The problem is not that Obama has tried to do too much, or not enough, depending on your political point of view. The deeper problem is this: Washington, D.C. is wired to block social change. And the system is "not on the level" as Obama has complained in his more frustrated moments. Those who want change have naively overestimated how much a new young progressive president could really do. And the new president was over-confident about how much he could accomplish with his powers of persuasion, convincing logic, sincere desire to transcend partisan divisions and the knowledge that he is often the smartest person in the room. What has still not been really understood by Obam's White House, by most of his supporters and by a media that mostly focuses on who's up and who's down in Washington during any given week is this: It takes a movement.
Jim Wallis is the author of Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street, and Your Street -- A Moral Compass for the New Economy and CEO of Sojourners. Get e-mail updates from Jim Wallis
Jim Wallis: It Takes a Movement: The Next Steps
Tea Party in Election 2010: A more potent brew in red states : Hot ...
Election 2010: A Disaster for Peace by Justin Raimondo -- Antiwar.com
2010 Election Archive for Right Now - Inside the conservative ...
Obama Ahead of Election 2010: The Secrets of His Success - TIME
After GOP landslide of Election 2010, what next for Obama ...
Election 2010 is a big call for change with jobs and the economy ...
"Taylor thinks the FDA wastes too much time on food safety inspections at meat packing plants. Further, he believes that one of their main problems is that they have to slow down their line speed too much."
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/fox-guard-henhouse-former-monsanto-vp
"And while in that role, Hylton specifically objected to a recommendation from DOJ's Office of Inspector General that called for limiting "the amount of profit a state or local jail can earn for housing federal prisoners."
http://criminaljustice.change.org/blog/view/obama_nominates_private_prison_profiteer_to_top_doj_post
i hope my faith isn't too shaken when my prayers go unanswered.
Could it be that we need to hear only a sermon of the Gospel from God, as given by Him and as believed for 2000 years, to a people who want everything changed to their own way of thinking, living and believing. Just the truth as Christ presented it.
Too hard?
As a theologically conservative/traditional Christian, I feel quite frustrated by any TRUE action for social justice. I think there is a great need to balance social justice with the traditional doctrines and priorities of Christianity, rather than junking the latter as most liberal "Christians" do. Most of what passes as social; justice activism blames external forces for everything while ignoring personal vice and irresponsibility. True social justice is not anti-male, anti-white, or anti-family. It is wrong to pit groups against each other, as liberals do. Since I am partly autistic, I know about true disadvantages. Most so-called social justice activism promotes greed, emulation, revenge, and materialism rather than a just and equitable standard of living for all. What we need is a truly BIBLICAL approach to social justice. Paul took a stronger stand for social justice than any Marxist, socialist, or Feminist when he condemned greed in Ephesians 5:5 and Romans 1:29, and when he taught that one must be content with a sufficiency in 1 Timothy 6:6-8. For social justice to succeed, we need to work together for it; demonizing all "white males" is a counterfeit of social justice.
President Obama’s Accomplishments:
http://www.thepoliticalcarnival.net/2010/03/president-obamas-accomplishments/
Obama Reduces Deficit By 103.6 Billion . . .
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2010/09/14/obama-reduced-federal-deficit-by-103-6-bil-down-13-from-2009/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Jobs created under Bush Vs. Obama:
http://politicalirony.com/2010/02/06/jobs-lost-bush-v-obama/
These are radical movement words that have been used many times.
TY ,
I think you're contradicting yourself slightly with this. You admit that the right controls the dialogue, yet you fault the left for playing by its rules. Unfortunately, so long as the right's brand of repressive, shout-'em-down politics dominates the media, the left has no choice but to respond in kind. One huge difference is that, as much as Keith or Ed rant, they RESEARCH their rants. They tell what is, to the best of their knowledge, the truth.
"Those who want change have naively overestimated how much a new young progressive president could really do."
Obama is a weak leader who, as Paul Krugman correctly points out, caves into the slightest pressure. The Repubs tagged him as a wimp from the word go, and, tragically, he's done his best to fulfill their image of him. It's not a question of quantity but quality. For instance, Obama's health care success would be something to marvel at IF it weren't a watered-down mess subject to even further stripping-down by an opposition party emboldened by his poor leadership showing.
Now the danger. Two parties that have no room for people or government, who gain power by the swing vote are in danger from that very voter. A swing voter has had to choose from the least bad to the least good in every election. Until 2013.
In 2011 the American party will begin a series of comments using modern media to show that America needs a new direction in politics. That may be a movement but not what you expected. This upstart party will point to examples by both parties that have made America where it is today. It will also state that America can do better. That by rebuilding, retooling and reeducation we can change the landscape of politics and Americas future.
Meanwhile, the hucksters and sloganeers who understand this, will sneer their way back to power screaming bromides about class warfare, Socialism and lower taxes for the rich. We face a long, dark era of sophistry and fear while voters dawdle, continuing to fall for what they see as an easier, softer way sold by those who best understand how to manipulate message while redirecting voters' attention to everything but that which matters. There is no "movement" in the offing.
During the months running up to the election I began to ask myself, "what do you do if two of our Rights, as citizens of these United States, are diametrically opposed?" I came to the only viable conclusion: you compromise. Our great Nation works when there is compromise.
So, upon this foundation a new party shall be born.
Please visit http://thompsoninthehouse.blogspot.com to learn about my position on the important issues facing our Nation.
Jacquelyn K. Thompson
You want to outline how US recessions have nearly all been caused by foreign powers? I'd be interested in knowing what your sources are. No economic history I've ever read has ever claimed that.
We're as capable as any other nation of shooting ourselves in the foot.
Auldphart
There are other examples. I could cite. Blaming the world for problems that we created is wrong, and fundamentally un-American.
This discourse, in its future installments, needs very badly to explore this very important point: "this is High Crime." Yep... do-re-mi. M-O-N-E-Y. The willingness, among the officeholders of public Power, The perversity that would sell an entire nation in exchange for a piece of paper inscribed, "I promise (somehow, someday) to pay thirty pieces of silver."
The forces in this country that sincerely want social change, and that elected a President in the hope and expectation of getting it, were promptly frustrated by the same old enemy: pure cash payments of millions of dollars a day. (Literally. Verifiable.) Never mind the fact that the most venerable documents in our nation call-out against it by name.
We know that "the love of money is the root of all evil," and the maxim that "you cannot serve both God and Mammon" can be applied in many different ways. We cannot rise above evil merely by aspiring or wishing to do it. We must, as a society, as "the many," align ourselves against "the few" who would literally betray us; "the few" who make it their business so to do.
This crime is so entrenched in the power-structure of our society that it clamors for legitimacy, even to the point of (successfully) persuading the highest court to declare that it is "constitutional" to do what a thirty-one word clause emphatically and specifically forbids.