For some years now, the U.S. has been attempting to establish a democracy in Iraq. Obviously, the effort is going very badly and public support for the war is evanescing before our eyes. Yesterday, another Republican Senator, Pete Domenici of New Mexico, joined Senator Richard Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, in calling for a radical change of course, i.e., a draw-down of American forces followed by withdrawal.
At this point, even many supporters of the democratization effort might be satisfied by the emergence of any sort of government that could impose a semblance of order and keep the forces of Islamism at bay. We may not even get that. An abrupt U.S. pull-out might prompt a horrifically bloody war of all against all. It is difficult to see a silver lining in any of this. But as we stare into the abyss, we should also remember that history can be full of unexpected twists and turns.
In the early 1980’s, the USSR and the countries it dominated—all of them brutal, Communist police states—were trapped in what seemed like an immutable stasis. Two decades later, most of the countries of Eastern Europe are burgeoning democracies, and Russia itself, whatever backsliding is taking place under Vladimir Putin, is not the soul-numbing totalitarian edifice it once was.
How did such profound change come about? Aleksa Djilas, among the most brilliant and lucid intellectuals in Eastern Europe (and an occasional COMMENTARY contributor who writes from Belgrade), calls it “one of the most massive shifts in the balance of power that has ever occurred in peacetime,” which he traces to “change in standards of legitimacy,” as Communist authority was discredited, almost by domino effect, across the region.
This profound change had many sources, and one of them was the role played by heroic dissidents, who risked their freedom and their lives to bring liberty to their imprisoned countries. Is there an equivalent force within Iraq or within the broader Arab world? Tens if not hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are attempting to build a new life under a new government in the face of murderous attacks by terrorist extremists of various stripes. Should we give up on our efforts to help them, or should we find another path? Is there another path? Or should we just call it quits?
In his recent lecture, “What We Can Learn From Dissidents Under Communism,” worth reading in its entirety, Djilas notes that [i]n spite of all its serious flaws, liberal democracy is the great masterpiece of Western political culture and it is a great blessing that it has spread into many other parts of the world. The West has a right and a duty to do its best to make it encompass the whole of mankind.”
Ringing words, but the question still remains: does any aspect of the East European experience apply to the Middle East? The problem of Eastern Europe, it turns out, was primarily one of regimes and not the society underneath. Is that true of the Middle East, or is the problem of the Arab world not only with the regimes but with the people?
I thought BHO was a Bolshevik pal of superannuated terrorists.
Silly me.
Candidate Obama assured us that, despite his almost total lack of executive experience, he could be “The One” – all things to all people. It is increasingly clear that he is determined to try.
Bu is he really likely to sustain a semi-conservative economic program on top of a semi-conservative foreign policy that includes the determined prosecution of an active war? And is it likely that an overwhelmingly Democratic legislative branch, soon to be replete with Pols, Princesses and Clowns, will let him do that even if he wants to?
We shall see.
Can you say Permanent Majority? And Republicans have already signaled their intent to hold up Obama’s stimulus pacakge. 2010 can’t come soon enough so we can finish purging Congress of hypocritical obstructionists.
Fun fact: Obama has a 93% approval rating among liberal democrats. Another Contentions meme busted.
#1 — Although Obama is not a Bolshevik, the rest of your post is correct.
Who knows, maybe Rush and Sean didn’t just get under Barry’s skin, but into his brain. Btw, Jacob doesn’t care, he just wants to back a winner for once in his life.
Every circus needs a clown, that’s why we elected you.
Al Franken. Al Franken.
It’s becoming a bad joke, so it makes sense to have you.
Al Franken. Al Franken.
Caligula at least sent the whole horse, Minnesota just the back.
Al Franken. Al Franken.
Now excuse me while I vomit, I can taste it in my mouth.
Al Franken. Al Franken.
Well remember this is Obama’s proposal, let’s see the final bill. It seems like a bigger version of the last stimulus we had that also had tax credits and breaks on business expenses. Like with all liberal policies, this package is stimulative in terms of consumption, not production which is what we need. To call his tax proposals tax cuts is laughable, since there are no tax rate cuts to speak, even for the “middle class.” So liike the last stimulus package it will be ineffective, replete with pork, and it will add to our deficit. We need tax rate cuts and tax breaks on all capital. That is rate cuts on capital gains taxes (business and individual), corporate taxes, and the end to the death tax. So I would not call Obama a conservative yet, because we still have green collared jobs, universal health care, universal pre-school and higher education, and amnesty lurking in the wings in addition to loony liberal judicial appointments.
This is what is so remarkable about the Obama phenomenon. He said “change,” and the press never forced him to be any more specific. But change is in the eye of the beholder. Some saw what they wanted in his promise of change, some saw what they feared. No one really knew, since Obama floated through the election on a shimmering fog of rhetoric and abstraction.
Witness the disappointment of the Muslim world at Obama’s silence regarding Israel; they thought “change” meant a more pro-Palestinian policy. Witness the disappointment of the gay community, which thought “change” meant an end to the influence of evangelicals.
Apparently Obama did not mean that he would “change” much in our general foreign or economic policy. This is a big spending package still, and larded with pork, but one could imagine a similar bill from the Bush administration. Perhaps Krauthammer was right that Obama isn’t really driven by foreign policy and economic issues; he wants those things to be in the hands of competent people, so he can focus on the social transformation he really cares about.
So I suspect we’ll see the return of Barry the Community Organizer when it comes to “social justice” issues. But on foreign and economic policy, so far conservatives are getting about the best they could have hoped for: Obama really is the consummate opportunist, and he never really meant half of what he said. He said what he he had to say in order to get elected, but now he’s perfectly happy to throw his loony lefty friends under the bus if that’s what it takes to drive onward to Destination Success. Obama is about Obama; he wants to be counted among the greats, and he knows that a tax-the-rich policy would lead to further economic disaster. He’s not going to let leftist orthodoxy lead him to be an unsuccessful President. It wouldn’t be good for his reputation.
with all due respect to ms rubin, i’m still going to reserve judgment on our new president’s policies, programs and priorities until he is, you know, actually sworn in…
giddiness is unbecoming
Agreed, mds123 and Stephen, let’s not get all giddy about what seems too clever by half. What we really need is a permanent reduction in the corporate tax and a reduction in, if not outright elimination of, the capital gains rate. After all, if we’re going to talk economic stimulus, let’s talk economic stimulus. I would hope the Republicans will be neither fooled nor seduced by this attempted slight of hand, but I live in the real world. And Obama is all about Obama, nothing more, nothing less. The halo must remain without tarnish. Whatever it takes.
Who won in November?
The American people won. BHO is attempting to bridge ideological differences between the population. He can’t satisfy everyone – the radical fringe elements on the right and left will never be happy unless their visions of what America should be comes to fruition. So be it. No point in tyring to satisfy radical-fanatical extemists. BHO is making efforts to work in an agreeable manner with the opposition. There will continue to be disagreements, but there appears to be a pattern of consistent respect on the part of Obama. Though many contentions bloggers really hate the PE and don’t wish him well, please acknowlege to yourselves that he is making efforts to demonstrate courteous respect to those Americans that did not vote for him – and won’t vote for him either in 2012. The hatred that has consumed the nation has risen to unacceptable levels. I’m even watching old friends become estranged from myself and others simply due to differences of opinion. This is not good, especially when our common welfare is so intertwined. JR wrote a good piece with this blog. I’m beginning to really respect her work, though I’m not always in agreement.
sham-WOW!, I think your triumphalism is a little premature. Also, I don’t think Obama is trying to bridge ideological differences. I think he’s trying to craft a successful economic policy, and he knows that tax relief needs to be a part of any effective response to the current financial crisis. This is a good sign; it’s better than having no tax relief. But I don’t think he’s reaching out to Republicans so much as he is recognizing that a hard-left financial policy would only worsen the situation.
Still, Steven is right that these are not tax rate decreases, and the tax cuts outlined so far do more to stimulate consumption than make production and investment more affordable in the long run. So much remains to be seen. I don’t think there’s hated for the PE, just a justified skepticism, given his political history and affiliations.
#7, you are correct. This proposal that the Obama Administration is putting forth is to entice businesses and consumers to consume and not to make more prudent decisions with their money. Getting businesses to make purchases NOW as opposed to later can lead to some hasty purchases that in the long run can hurt the viability of their business.
#10 is correct that what is needed is an across the board tax cut that will benefit all citizens and that will lead to a reduction in decisions being made on tax policy.
@ #12 -
So be it. You’re entitled to your opinion, no matter how you have to spin it to confirm to your predisposed ideology. My post could hardly be called “triumphalism”. I’m not rubbing anything in your face or attempting to prove some point in a rude and belligerent manner. I just think that Obama is reaching out and attempting to be a national leader for all Americans. He is making that effort, and it ist not earning him any friends from the gay community or many of the other left-fringe groups. If you want to believe that this reaching out on his part is nothing more than “recognizing that a hard-left financial policy would only worsen the situation”, then whatever. We both have to operate based upon our individual intuitions.
And there is plenty of hatred being expressed toward Obama. Some of this is pay-back for the treatment that Bush received, but much of it is also the result of the right-wing propaganda machine that painted BHO as a terrorist-communist sympathizer, left-wing radical that intends to destroy America – as evidenced by the recent election.
Anyway, no point in talking further. I can see that we’ve hit the end of the road with this conversation.
No need to take offense, sham-WOW!. I’m just saying that it’s too early to declare that the American people won. It will be years before we know that. But I hope you’re right. The important thing is that America flourish, no matter who the President is, no matter the party he comes from, and no matter the motives behind his policies. You have to understand: I’m glad that Obama is more concerned with success than with fidelity to political ideology. I would also rather that he be concerned with success than with reaching out across the aisle. I don’t care who likes a policy and who does not; I care about whether it works. And if Obama’s concern for his own reputation is going to lead him to spurn bad ideas, then that’s perfectly fine with me.
I don’t doubt that there is hatred out there, in every direction. You had referenced hatred from Contentions bloggers. I’m just saying that I haven’t seen hatred from Contentions bloggers so much as skepticism. There’s not much, really, to hate about Obama.
#14, I don’t know what hatred towards Obama is attributable to Bush Derangement Syndrome, but I guarantee you that most if not all of the hatred that is being heaped towards Obama is probably from the things that people learned about the guy during the campaign and typical antipathy towards Democrats in general. By the by, you should do some investigating on your own about Obama’s past: the “right-wing” hardly made any of the stuff up about Obama.
Needless to say, I am in the camp of #15. I want Obama to succeed, but I am skeptical of everything he is promising. As the late Herb Stein said, “If it’s too good to be true, then it must not be true.”
Why is anyone surprised? The key person in his economic team of advisers is Christina Romer. And Romer, one of the leading lights of Cal-Berkeley’s economics department, is primarily famous for maintaining that tax cuts are as much as three times as effective in terms of providing a short-term stimulus as new government spending. In the short term stimulus department, there’s no contest — a flat dollar tax cut for everyone is as good as politically possible for providing an adrenaline shot to the economy.
Now, if the Republicans are really hell-bent on self-immolation, they’ll oppose this popular, sensible stimulus. But my hunch is enough of them will figure out that it’s as good a deal for them as it is for the country. Two things drive the current clique on Capitol Hill that has disgraced the good name of the Republican Party — self-interest, and cookie-cutter ideology based on a bastardized Cliff Notes version of “conservatism” dreamed up by Rush Limbaugh. I’m betting that self-interest wins.
The real question is what happens in the long run. Presumably, you address the $300 billion in deficits that balanced-budget-mandated state and local governments face over the next two years in order to avoid savaging local economies; you pursue policies aimed at boosting the productive capacity of our country (e.g. tax credits for renewable energy, making math and science well-taught and popular again in our schools); and you turn attention to the horrible deterioration of our infrastructure, repairing and rebuilding roads and bridges, boosting our rail network to get rid of freight bottlenecks and facilitate passenger transportation, and so on.
This is where it gets sticky. How do you pay for all this? Government or private? Here is where, for the basic sake of our democracy, we ought to have a straight up debate, conservative v liberal, that recognizes that the issue is not whether or not we should have these things — we need all of them ASAP — but how they should be paid for. As the English poet Philip Larkin once said about his hero Margaret Thatcher, at last England had someone that recognized “that if you want something, you have to pay for it.” Which means either public taxes, or individual fees. If we’re not mature enough as a country to even address that choice, we’re doomed to decline. A robust conservative movement would be pushing things like road pricing, opening up infrastructure trust funds to private railroads (perhaps as a precursor to making the funds themselves private), renewable energy tax credits, and privatizations of major state-owned industries like the TVA and Bonneville Power Administration. Today’s Republicans are dead set against all of these ideas.
Gee, I thought he campaigned on responsible withdrawl from Iraq, increasing troop levels in Afghanistan, and moving beyond partisan politics. Now that he’s elected it seems like a small cohort of liberal commentators want him to precipitate withdrawl from Iraq, also get us out of Afghanistan, and push a far left agenda. I myself think it’s refreshing to find a politician who tells us what he wants to do and then at least attempts to do it.
Furthermore, the economy needs a serious injection of stimulus right now and tax cuts are the fastest way to attain that goal. Infrastructure spending will take months if not more than a year to get ramped up because the number of projects that are “shovel ready” are limited. I’m glad to read that these tax rebates etc are not cuts in tax rates but are alternative ways to inject money into the economy – the fact that rates remain at current levels should make these measures easier to reverse once the economy recovers.
I would like to see a repeal of the Bush cuts on high income earners, capital gains, and corporate taxes. I don’t think such a tax hike would do much to reduce growth in the economy but it would help mitigate these other measures’ effects on the defecit at least slightly.
Let’s see here:
“we’re ramping up U.S. forces in Afghanistan and providing a reasonable period of time for a hand-off in Iraq,”
That’s what he promised during the campaign. Nothing has changed.
“there isn’t going to be a windfall oil profits tax or income tax hike but there is going to be a huge set of business tax cuts”
I didn’t realize that Obama’s first term has already ended, let alone begun. Business tax cuts were always promised and expected. His biggest tax proposal was to cut taxes for the middle class. Guess what? That’s going to happen. Let’s wait for our economy to stabilize or his and his economic team to decide on the best time for the windfall oil profits tax, or income tax hike for the more wealthy (which WILL EXPIRE anyways).
“and Rick Warren is giving the invocation at the Inauguration.”
Right, because Obama campaigned on division and never talked about reaching out to those we don’t agree with. Gotcha…
I couldn’t be more happy with Obama’s President-elect term. and very much look forward to his term as President of the United States.