Skip to comments.The New New Deal
Posted on 06/14/2010 11:10:55 AM PDT by RicocheT
IN PRESIDENT Obama, conservatives face the most formidable liberal politician in at least a generation. In 2008, he won the presidency with a majority of the popular votesomething a Democrat had not done since Jimmy Carter's squeaker in 1976and handily increased the Democrats' control of both houses of Congress. Measured against roughly two centuries worth of presidential victories by Democratic non-incumbents, his win as a percentage of the popular vote comes in third behind FDR's in 1932 and Andrew Jackson's in 1828.
More importantly, Obama won election not as a status quo liberal, but as an ambitious reformer. Far from being content with incremental gains, he set his sights on major systemic change in health care, energy and environmental policy, taxation, financial regulation, education, and even immigration, all pursued as elements of a grand strategy to remake America. In other words, he longs to be another FDR, building a New New Deal for the 21st century, dictating the politics of his age, and enshrining the Democrats as the new majority party for several decades to come. Suddenly, the era of big government being over is over; and tax-and-spend liberalism is back with a vengeance.
(Excerpt) Read more at hillsdale.edu ...
This is not only a New New Deal, it is (in the words of Joe Biden) “a big F@#king Deal”.
FDR didn’t have people raised on “Atlas Shrugged”.
Excellent and perceptive article. Thank you for posting it.
Ping. This is a good one.
This excellent article is most insightful in how it distinguishes between the Obamatons and their predecessors, the New Dealers and early 20th century Progressives.
Though the latter also wanted “fundamental transformation”, they were hopeful for the future and sought change to improve a good America to a better America. We know that their schemes were addle-headed, but most had their hearts in the American idea.
The Obamatons have a dismal view of the future, and seek to change a fundamentally bad America (”For the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country”) to socialist America that is mediocre at best.
Obama’s worldview is not very different from that of the Liberals who elected and ran Jimmy Carter’s administration in the heady days after the Fall of Saigon. Problem is that Obama still believes it all, and we have too many voters who aren’t old enough to remember what a disaster it was.
‘we have too many voters who arent old enough to remember what a disaster it was’
Guess they’re going to have to find out for themselves.
An excellent article.
However, the article mentions but perhaps understates the differences between 1960s liberalism and contemporary liberalism. Contemporary liberalism is a liberalism of factions, such as blacks, females, unions, the impoverished, and so on. In the mid and late 1960s, at least in academia, there was less consciousness of factions and more rhetoric associated with brotherhood or cross-identification of the struggles of oppressed peoples and the need for unification against “the Man” (perhaps national corporations). Only later did “the Man” become interchangeable with “white male.”
The current political climate provides a launching pad for the Balkanization of the US. Obama is the first president that approves of this Balkanization. Obama cannot lead because he advocates not just the organization of factions, but that each faction narrate its own unique truth to power as a means to power and fulfillment. With so many factions trying to get their share of the pie, no one will ever be entirely satisfied. Tis postmodernism carries with it the seeds of its own destruction.
“the Balkanization of the US”
That’s been called “divide and conquer”.
I found this article on my monthly Imprimis a few days after you did and thought it superb. Excellent insight and very clear writing.
Turns out, Charles Kesler is a professor at Claremont College in Claremont CA (a bastion of conservatism!) and writes for *their* newsletter, the Claremont Review of Books. www.claremont.org
When FR gets a little goofy and there’s nothing newsworthy going on, there’s some terrific reading over there.
Kesler is married to Sally Pipes!
You added an interesting insight in your reply to this excellent article, thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.