There is rare quality of subtle insight in this latest opinion piece by Fouad Ajami, “Obama and the Politics of Crowds” in which – once again - someone recognizes what Sen Obama is. Or to be more precise what he is not.
On the face of it, there is nothing overwhelmingly stirring about Sen. Obama. There is a cerebral quality to him, and an air of detachment. He has eloquence, but within bounds. After nearly two years on the trail, the audience can pretty much anticipate and recite his lines. The political genius of the man is that he is a blank slate. The devotees can project onto him what they wish. The coalition that has propelled his quest — African-Americans and affluent white liberals — has no economic coherence. But for the moment, there is the illusion of a common undertaking — Canetti’s feeling of equality within the crowd. The day after, the crowd will of course discover its own fissures. The affluent will have to pay for the programs promised the poor. The redistribution agenda that runs through Mr. Obama’s vision is anathema to the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and the hedge-fund managers now smitten with him. Their ethos is one of competition and the justice of the rewards that come with risk and effort. All this is shelved, as the devotees sustain the candidacy of a man whose public career has been a steady advocacy of reining in the market and organizing those who believe in entitlement and redistribution.
A creature of universities and churches and nonprofit institutions, the Illinois senator, with the blessing and acquiescence of his upscale supporters, has glided past these hard distinctions. On the face of it, it must be surmised that his affluent devotees are ready to foot the bill for the new order, or are convinced that after victory the old ways will endure, and that Mr. Obama will govern from the center. Ambiguity has been a powerful weapon of this gifted candidate: He has been different things to different people, and he was under no obligation to tell this coalition of a thousand discontents, and a thousand visions, the details of his political programs: redistribution for the poor, postracial absolution and “modernity” for the upper end of the scale.
It was no accident that the white working class was the last segment of the population to sign up for the Obama journey. Their hesitancy was not about race. They were men and women of practicality; they distrusted oratory, they could see through the falseness of the solidarity offered by this campaign.
Read the whole thing here at the Online Wall Street Journal. You do not have to register.
I found more difficult to follow his rather erudite explication of crowds and of crowd psychology/dynamics and why – ultimately – all those enthusiastic crowds are at least as much cause for concern as for optimism in the Obama camp.
This is how Ajami – with his background growing up in Egypt – puts it:
America is a different land, for me exceptional in all the ways that matter. In recent days, those vast Obama crowds, though, have recalled for me the politics of charisma that wrecked Arab and Muslim societies. A leader does not have to say much, or be much. The crowd is left to its most powerful possession — its imagination.
From Elias Canetti again: “But the crowd, as such, disintegrates. It has a presentiment of this and fears it. . . . Only the growth of the crowd prevents those who belong to it from creeping back under their private burdens.”
The morning after the election, the disappointment will begin to settle upon the Obama crowd. Defeat — by now unthinkable to the devotees — will bring heartbreak. Victory will steadily deliver the sobering verdict that our troubles won’t be solved by a leader’s magic.
I might disagree with that last sentence. Have we ever learned that lesson? After all the politicians elected, trillions of dollars spent, all those bills and laws and court decisions and social programs – have we ever truly learned that lesson?
Some of us know Orson Scott Card mainly because of his work as a science-fiction writer. Ender’s Game and Speaker for the Dead are still my favorite works by Card. Not as many people know he is also a committed Latter Day Saint (aka Mormon although I try not to use that term) who can be quite independent in both his theology and his politics. He is also a Democrat and a newspaper columnist.
More taxes, runaway budgets, and resulting deficits (his promises sound great – even to me – but what will they cost?);