http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904787404576532623176115558.html#printMode
Some thoughts....
Steele is a great writer, persuasive and intelligent, and fairly accurate in a lot of his concepts and his message is clear about what we should think about. Certainly our era is a reaction to an era of "cowboyism" and the election of President Obama was a response that America desired change. I agree, but wouldn't go as far as to blame the President as much as Steele does.
Quote: "So, in Mr. Obama, America gained a president with ambivalence, if not some antipathy, toward the singular greatness of the nation he had been elected to lead.
But then again, the American people did elect him. Clearly Americans were looking for a new kind of exceptionalism in him (a black president would show America to have achieved near perfect social mobility). But were they also looking for—in Mr. Obama—an assault on America's bedrock exceptionalism of military, economic and cultural pre-eminence?"
At the end of the day, President Obama has been right in addressing these issues. Steele frames the "Left" and the President as the primary movers of this decline in recognizing America as the singular greatest nation in the world suggesting he is contributing to a growing sense of mediocrity in our country. Certainly a lot has taken place since Bill Clinton was President that it would be foolish to label the President and the left as the causes of our decreased economic strength in the world, and that we are in moral decline. President Obama cannot be the scapegoat for failed economic policies that were ushered in long before he was President. If anything, he has sought out to correct these problems through two major initiatives, one being through increased financial regulation and reform, a response to the financial crisis, and the second, attempting to repair a broken health care system. None of these ventures have achieved perfection, but they still are successes. The real root of the problem remains, the people in office that we elect, and how we elect them. The idea of true democracy will always fall short as long as political power is distributed within an economic system in which wealth is concentrated. How have people traditionally gotten elected? Two ways. Those people who have a lot of money, or have friends with a lot of money.
"Our national exceptionalism both burdens and defames us, yet it remains our fate. We make others anxious, envious, resentful, admiring and sometimes hate-driven. There's a reason al Qaeda operatives targeted the U.S. on 9/11 and not, say, Buenos Aires. They wanted to enrich their act of evil with the gravitas of American exceptionalism. They wanted to steal our thunder.
So we Americans cannot help but feel some ambivalence toward our singularity in the world—with its draining entanglements abroad, the selfless demands it makes on both our military and our taxpayers, and all the false charges of imperial hubris it incurs. Therefore it is not surprising that America developed a liberalism—a political left—that took issue with our exceptionalism. It is a left that has no more fervent mission than to recast our greatness as the product of racism, imperialism and unbridled capitalism.
But this leaves the left mired in an absurdity: It seeks to trade the burdens of greatness for the relief of mediocrity. When greatness fades, when a nation contracts to a middling place in the world, then the world in fact no longer knocks on its door. (Think of England or France after empire.) To civilize America, to redeem the nation from its supposed avarice and hubris, the American left effectively makes a virtue of decline—as if we can redeem America only by making her indistinguishable from lesser nations.
At home the values that made us exceptional have been smeared with derision. Individual initiative and individual responsibility—the very engines of our exceptionalism—now carry a stigma of hypocrisy. For centuries America made sure that no amount of initiative would lift minorities and women. So in liberal quarters today—where historical shames are made to define the present—these values are seen as little more than the cynical remnants of a bygone era. Talk of "merit" or "a competition of excellence" in the admissions office of any Ivy League university today, and then stand by for the howls of incredulous laughter. "
I very much see recasting our greatness as a product of racism, and imperialism, as embracing the very content of American character and idealism. Some of the righ oriented politicians out there for some reason like to call this a "lack of leadership" and "lack of CEO experience." Although the utilitarian and business aspects of society are important and are very much apart of who we are, an aspiring self responsible and hard working people, we shouldn't downplay down the importance of self reflection and the more humanitarian and justice oriented aspects of our society, and of coming to terms with our imperfections as a nation. This time in our history speaks to me very much about people having real debates about real issues, about creating a lot of noise that is what democracy is supposed to look like, and that our central to our national character and sense of self worth. Steele doesn't seem to want to embrace this which is disappointing. I feel like we have grown as a country and continue to throughout this time. I don't think we've grown out of touch with our capitalistic framework rather, we have questioned living by "the end justifies the means" vs. the other way around, that we consider the means by which we go about things in order to achieve a given end. I think we very much live in a society where those very engines of individual responsibility and initiative exist. Does anyone out there really believe that these thematics are dying? Steele needs to come to terms with the fact that no country can move forward, or makes leaps and bounds overnight. If we are recasting ourselves as he alludes to, we are better and stronger for it in my opinion and we may have just saved the way the rest of the world views us. That's a big plus and a large accomplishment in my view. Trust me, I know we have a jobs crisis.
Steele goes onto downplay the "liberal quarter" where historical shames are made to define the present while saying we no longer have competitions of excellence and merit even in Ivy League Universities. This is complete BS. We still live in a country where you have to go out and make the best of your life everyday, where each person is called to make themselves, to create and recreate themselves and aspire toward self improvement. Not everyone will fit this mold or aspire to become great. But no individual can succeed on their absolute own. No individual can exist successfully without the community and no community exist succesfully without the individual.
The recent argument coming up again and again in this country has been over wealth distribution. Is it really every man for himself? Is it really about this rugged individualism that the tea partiers are promoting, where social saftey nets fall away and where we give seniors $15,000 stipends that they can use as a revised Medicare system (part of that classic GOP Ryan budget Plan that we all remember). Middle class incomes have fallen in the last 10 years, while the upper echelon has seen huge gains despite the country's financial woes. Chuck Schumer has been a staunch advocate of this fact and I think it should raise concerns about the direction our country is heading in.
Steele criticizes the 1960's saying our education system has been enfeebled due to moral and cultural relativism since this time. Developing a new voice and the emergence of a new social consciousness which emerged in the 60s are just as much about our roots as is our sense of developing that creative genius and motivation behind creating a flourishing business and what it takes to do that. The 60s are an essential part of that sense of expression, creativity and freedom that lies within all of us. Not all of us would have been hippies, sure. The 60s were a time where we sought to overcome an more conservative era and find a new voice. But whether it be in an artist finding and demonstrating value through their sense of self expression or a business man thinking of a new and creative way to do business, these are BOTH things that make America great.
Ambivalence is healthy to a point, I admit. But Steele seeks to frame the President has indecisive and lacking the right leadership. In my view, every President no matter who they are runs the gaunlet of criticism and degredation. Once again, hopefully everyone paid attention to the efforts he made to compromise and be a pragmatist on many levels. I applaud the President for addressing issues like racism, unbridled capitalism and imperialism. While many criticize him for the economy, albeit quantitative easing might not be the best of choices, the President and his team of Economic Advisers have bent over backwards to help the Economy. Yes he still in fact gets blamed for the unemployment figures. Unemployment for those that don't know, is a lagging economic indicator the President has been criticized for the past two years as if he is the primary cause of this mess we are in. Companies have barely begun to hire despite making record profits because they have to wait for 3-4 quarters of consecutive growth to pass by before they actually even hire. Something everyone probably doesn't know. I guess if I were to criticize the President for anything, it would be for trying to take on too much, but I cannot rightfully blame him for the jobs mess.
If I am a proponent of anything in the midst of our country suffering from job loss, unemployment and a lack of a better health care system, we must advocate for private industry as a whole to develop a different mode of existence, to do things in private industry that create opportunities for Americans. We can learn something from European style governments who in coordination with private industry, strive to do more to create healthy work environments for their workers, from more time off, to better public transportation. Google in America requires their workers to take mandatory time off to create things and to become more free thinking...I mean, who wants ot work in a cubicle for the rest of their life anyways.
The people that don't want government in their business, and government to stop spending, always seem to look for help from the government when their companies are running into the ground because they lacked the moral and ethical character to abide by good principles to begin with (case in point - LTCM in the 90's and markets that lacked sufficient regulation up through the financial crisis and beyond). The President decided to seriously address these (which of course got major flack from Republicans). As liberals and conservations, democrats and republicans will admit, the government cannot keep footing the bill. This is one criticism of the baby boomer generation...that we started spending too much! Other solutions are essential moving forward.
The New America
I would have been stoked with a single payer health care system, but insurance companies are too embedded in the market. I would enjoy more public transportation throughout the country, but our economy caters and nurtures oil companies and the individual consumer vs. taking strides together and collectively and collaboratively to improve public infrastructure that at the same time supports the environment. I'll admit getting everyone on the same page is tough.
Republicans have been united on the attack against President Obama, the most vocal being Michelle Bachman, Rick Perry, Sarah Palin and Mit Romney. Now these candidates will have to discuss the future of America that involves actual ideas. They've made relativistic statements without any substance that only serve to deligitimize the President. It's typical GOP political theatre.
Don't allow politicians to peg the president has someone who is encouraging, promoting or supporting a welfare socialist state or anything of the sort. Our President is a true model of a success story in America. Accusations suggesting our President is creating mediocrity in the United States is absolutely baseless. His life is a testament to what it means to not lead a mediocre existence and certainly with his staunch advocacy for education and health care, he only aims to heal a broken nation or to capture it's essence - that very essence in my opinion is what the political right does not accept as part of their ideology. Not only is our country great for the opportunity it creates, where you can truly go out and do and become anything you want (certainly it's not a game for the weary of heart), but we are also great for the types of programs we provide for senior citizens that are there for you and I when we retire and suffer a loss of income. That is what also makes our country great.
At times he may be professorial, but I believe he is the greatest President of our generation.
