ETHOS

By Eric Augenbraun

“Why should I, as a progressive, vote for Obama?” I recently asked an Obama supporter desperately trying to compel me to change my party affiliation from Independent to Democrat. Of course, I had no intention of switching. I have heard all the arguments before and have yet to be persuaded.

“I serve as a blank screen…on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” -Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope

“Well, Obama is the only candidate who has opposed the war in Iraq from the outset,” the Obamamaniac began.

True indeed! Though isn’t it convenient that he was also the only candidate who was not in the Congress in 2002 to vote on the war. This is, of course, beside the point. What the Obama man was trying to say was that his candidate is the true “anti-war” candidate. It has a certain Orwellian quality that in this country someone who has voted for every single war spending bill, has stated repeatedly that he would consider using nuclear force on Pakistan, has stated that he would crack down on Iran, has refused to commit to any plan to remove troops from Iraq by 2013, and has stated that he is in favor of increasing the size of the military by 100,000 troops can position himself as the anti-war candidate. Obama, like his party, is thoroughly committed to maintaining U.S. domination of Middle Eastern resources and politics. He may be against the way the war has been executed, but one must be a skilled in the art of intellectual contortion to believe he is at all “anti-war.” Meanwhile, more than 4,000 U.S. troops and likely over 1 million Iraqis have been killed over 5 years of this unjust occupation. The anti-war movement can’t repeat its mistake from 2004 and throw its support behind another pro-war candidate.

“Okay, but he supports universal healthcare,” said the campaigner, slightly flustered.

“Oh really? So he supports single payer healthcare?” I replied.

“Well, uh, no. Not exactly.”

No. In fact, Obama voted against the single payer health care bill HR676. Obama is not interested in challenging the healthcare and pharmaceutical corporations who make healthcare so unattainable for the more than 50 million without it and the service so poor for working and middle class people who have it. While he has said he wants to make healthcare more affordable, his plan for reform operates on the corporations’ terms. This is understandable as he tries to position himself as friendly to the corporate agenda and attempts to attract their support.

“Fine, but he is a better candidate than Hillary or McCain.” I could hear the first signs of desperation in his voice.

Alright, sure. My dog is a better candidate than McCain. As for Clinton, from what each candidate has revealed about their respective platforms, it’s hard to distinguish Obama’s positions from the largely party-line centrism advanced by Clinton. However I think Ralph Nader’s formulation says it best: “The problem with voting for the lesser of two evils is that at the end of the day you still have evil.”

“I just think it would be an historic change to finally have a black president. It’s a sign that there is hope for the future.”

Click link to continue reading entry:

I know, I can’t complain. I am talking to an Obama partisan so I should have expected to hear “hope” and “change” uttered at least once. Many other people I speak to make a similar argument. While it is completely apolitical and painfully abstract, sadly, given the decidedly neoliberal character of his platform, it is the most compelling reason I have heard to vote for him yet. We cannot underestimate the historical importance of having a black candidate with a legitimate shot at becoming president. But we also must not favor a personality or identity over the actual political positions and past voting record of that candidate.

“But if you don’t vote for a candidate with a chance of winning you are wasting your vote! You are going to vote aren’t you? How could you take for granted such an important right?”

Cue the moralism. I guess if I don’t vote for Obama I will also be damned to hell, right? I don’t pretend to be a logician, but let’s unpack that first statement. I have already made clear that I don’t see Obama’s agenda as being nearly as progressive as it is cracked up to be and I am very much opposed to many of the things he purports to stand for. I think Eugene V. Debs’ famous quip captures my belief quite well: “It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don’t want and get it.”

Member #123226 of the Obama fan club…er…”movement”

Progressive social and political change comes from below – from the mobilization of ordinary people to demand change from those in power. History bears this point out: from the mobilization of enslaved people to bring about the end of slavery, to the labor movement in the 1930’s, to the Civil Rights movement. Even Obama himself has incorporated this message into his campaign rhetoric, but the throngs of his zealous supporters embody an important contradiction. While in many respects it resembles a social movement, the support for Obama should not be seen as anything more than a campaign to get the man elected. Certainly voting is an important form of political participation – but it is the most passive form of participation. Progressives should not be focusing all of their time, energy, and resources on getting one person elected (we saw where that got us with Kerry), we should be focused on building an independent movement big enough to present a real threat to those in power and end this war, win universal healthcare, improve our education system, end unemployment, and ensure everyone a living wage. With its single minded focus on electoral politics and by sweeping many progressive activists into its ranks, the Obama campaign serves to demobilize already existing social movements and limits our ability to rebuild them after November 4th.

By this point, the Obama supporter realized that about 40 potential Democratic votes had vanished down the street in the time it took him to make his fruitless argument.

“Look, I have to get back to work. If you change your mind, here’s a voter registration application,” he said with an ounce of resignation and a dash of annoyance in his voice.

“Thanks,” I said, taking it to be polite (though I really hate to waste paper.)

The Obama campaign is not all bad of course. It has been truly encouraging to see the base of young people and people of color who have coalesced around the campaign – and his success to this point is a sign that the political climate in this country is shifting. People are fed up with eight years of the neo-cons and Obama has emerged in this context as a blank slate onto which people can project their hopes and aspirations for the future. Unfortunately, when so many people have such different understandings of the meaning of a single campaign, some people are bound to be disappointed. Even Obama agrees with that – those are his words, not mine.