Obama vs. the Internet vs. FISA
As you may be aware, House Democrats have been shockingly kind to the White House. The just passed FISA-”compromise” bill, which is nothing but a compromise of the rule of law and extremist corporatism, is another damning example.
Obama has come out in support of the FISA bill, which grants retroactivity immunity to telcos, grants new powers to the executives, and legalizes many of the warrantless wiretaps secretly conducted under the Bush White House.
Obama released a statement that has been widely panned and dissected.
Although there is much to say about the stance that Obama has taken, now supposedly balanced by his insistence to filibuster the retroactive immunity, it reveals something about society’s relationship with representative leadership.
Glenn Greenwald writes superbly on this:
The excuse that Obama’s support for this bill is politically shrewd is — even if accurate — neither a defense of what he did nor a reason to refrain from loudly criticizing him for it. Actually, it’s the opposite. It’s precisely because Obama is calculating that he can — without real consequence — trample upon the political values of those who believe in the Constitution and the rule of law that it’s necessary to do what one can to change that calculus. Telling Obama that you’ll cheer for him no matter what he does, that you’ll vest in him Blind Faith that anything he does is done with the purest of motives, ensures that he will continue to ignore you and your political interests.
Beyond that, this attitude that we should uncritically support Obama in everything he does and refrain from criticizing him is unhealthy in the extreme. No political leader merits uncritical devotion — neither when they are running for office nor when they occupy it — and there are few things more dangerous than announcing that you so deeply believe in the Core Goodness of a political leader, or that we face such extreme political crises that you trust and support whatever your Leader does, even when you don’t understand it or think that it’s wrong. That’s precisely the warped authoritarian mindset that defined the Bush Movement and led to the insanity of the post-9/11 Era, and that uncritical reverence is no more attractive or healthy when it’s shifted to a new Leader.
Nonetheless, Obama is a stronger and more progressive Democratic Presidential candidate than the States has ever had (in the two state-sponsored parties). It is perhaps more troubling that a “progressive” has made so many missteps recently (including his rethought foreign relations strategy, revealed at AIPACP). And troubling, too, that might represent a hypocrisy of his candidacy — John McCain, though a liar, doesn’t pretend he’s not a warmonger or dismissive of international law.
Obama is, unquestionably, a pretender. But in modern democratic states I guess that’s the best we can HOPE for.
1 trackbacks/pingbacks
You can follow any responses to this entry via its RSS comments feed. You may also leave a trackback by clicking this link.