Featured Post

New book available! David Kaiser, A Life in History

Mount Greylock Books LLC has published my autobiography as an historian,  A Life in History.   Long-time readers who want to find out how th...

Saturday, April 17, 2010

Emerging from the Mist

Carl von Clausewitz's concept of military genius--the quality which in his opinion distinguished the greatest battlefield commanders--is really a more academic version of Kipling's poem If, which I gave framed copies of to both of my sons when they went off to college. The battlefield is a chaotic place as well as a very dangerous one, and the commander is invariably deluged with information and conflicting advice. A military genius knows instinctively how to distinguish the significant information from the insignificant, to know when to stick to his original plan and when to modify it, rather than to give way to momentary floods of joy or despair. Political leadership demands the same qualities, particularly in times of crisis like those in which we live. Lincoln, FDR, Eisenhower (not surprisingly), and Kennedy had those qualities; George W. Bush did not, and continually took refuge in certainty rather than take in any data at all. It is becoming clear that Barack Obama has them too. Were I to reread my posts over the last eight months or so, I would probably conclude that I need to work on them a bit more myself.

The most confusing picture of our political scene is the ceaseless drumbeat of hysterical abuse the President has to endure. With the major media now divided almost entirely into those who try to maintain at least a pretense of objectivity (like the major newspapers and networks) and those who have become completely partisan like Fox News, the negative voices, like the Confederate bombardment before Pickett's charge at Gettysburg (to which the Union artillery commander wisely decided not to reply), seem like the only game in town. Meanwhile, the actually correlation of forces remains very precariously balanced. Lacking a real liberal majority, the Democrats had to compromise key aspects of the health care bill all last year, and make a futile attempt to secure Republican support. Then came the catastrophe of the Massachusetts election, which I, like just about everyone else, took too seriously. The next day, Rush Limbaugh, speaking through one of his parody artists who channeled the President, declared it "the day that health care died." But he was wrong.

To understand the passage of the bill, we can usefully cite another great military theorist, the ancient Chinese Sun Tzu. "Men fight best on death ground," he wrote. "Put your own men on death ground." After they got over the initial shock of Brown's victory, the White House (above all, it seems, the President himself) and Congressional Democrats realized they simply could not afford this defeat. They made the necessary compromises, decided to use reconciliation, and emerged with the most significant piece of social legislation in 45 years. That was only the beginning, but it reversed the momentum.

Yet the Tea Party, if one focuses upon the media, still dominates the battlefield. . .or does it? This week the New York Times
and CBS published the results of a poll of tea partiers. They found, to begin with, that they do not represent a broad-based movement, but rather one well-to-do, white, and largely older faction of the Republican Party--a shrinking demographic, both absolutely and relatively. Their views are very different from those of other white folks, especially on the other side of the political aisle.

No one can read those figures without concluding that the Tea Party is an extremist movement within the Republican Party, one dominated by total hostility to the President and characterized by high levels of racial and economic resentment. I was delighted to see that only tiny numbers of white independents and Democrats could swallow the ridiculous idea that Obama's policies are favoring black and poor Americans, which they obviously are not. The Tea Partiers almost unanimously buy the even more ridiculous accusation that he is moving us towards socialism--the same accusation constantly leveled against Franklin Roosevelt, who also saved capitalism from its own excesses, just as Obama has done. There is, however, an interesting omission in the Times poll results. They do not give the total statistical breakdown between white Tea Partiers, other white Republicans, white independents, and white Democrats. The most recent data I can find with a quick search are two years old: collected by the Pew Research Center, they show white people almost evenly divided into Republicans, independents, and Democrats. If that is still true, then less than half of white voters think Obama is moving the country towards socialism, or that giving people benefits encourages them to remain poor, and more than half of white voters think President Obama shares their values. None of this suggests that the Tea Party will contribute anything positive to the Republican cause in November, or that the extreme right-wing candidates contending for Republican nominations in Florida, Arizona, and elsewhere will face very strong prospects.

Let me say once again that those of us who expected Obama to replay the first two years of the New Deal were very naive. Neither his majorities, nor the depth of our economic crisis, justified such hopes. Nor can he draw on a cadre of activist experts, cabinet members, etc., dedicated to new economic policies. In any case, we should all understand by now that the process of restoring the proper role of the government and enforcing a reasonable degree of economic equality is going to take a very long time. In the meantime, the Republican Party is becoming its own worst enemy. Having failed to defeat health care with an all-out assault, it is now prepared to try the same strategy against financial reform--which is obviously a far more popular cause among the American people than health care reform was. Mitch McConnell is gambling that every Republican in the Senate will buy the lie that the Democrats' bill is designed to promote further bailouts--or that the country will go along if they do. He is surely wrong on the second count, in my opinion, and he may well be wrong on the first.

The Administration is also pursuing a long-term strategy abroad. The news from Afghanistan is worse than ever, but the nuclear summit and the arms control treaty with Russia were important steps towards a very different world, and very gratifying to this particular historian, who has been calling for such steps here for years. The Republicans are threatening to oppose the treaty as well--the exact step which turned their hero Barry Goldwater into a fringe candidate in 1964, after he railed against the Test Ban Treaty with the Soviets. The Administration has also made clear to Israel and the world that the policy enunciated by George W. Bush in his first Administration--that Israel will keep whatever land it wants in a peace treaty--no longer obtains. That will not magically open the door to peace but it will promote more debate in Israel.

Our new civil war is a peaceful one, for which we should be thankful. Had Lincoln in 1861 or 1862 been able to tell the northern people just how much the war was going to cost and how long it was going to last, he probably could not have secured their support. Because young people are not dying by the thousands, however, we can be more honest. We are slowly trying to undo the orthodoxy of the last thirty years, while facing an aroused and totally obstructionist Republican Party. It will take time both to develop new ways of thinking, and for the Republicans to learn the error of their ways. The President, by refusing to panic, has set a good example. Let us try to follow it.


Anonymous said...

Apparently Bubba Clinton didn't have those qualities.

As he confesses himself:

Clinton: Rubin and Summers Gave Me Wrong Advice on Derivatives, and I Was Wrong To Take It


Aunt Katie said...

Great comments on current events, through the prism of American party politics.
many thanks.
rather than the alter ego,
aunt Katie.

is said...

At first glance these frothing tea baggers appear to be simply the latest incarnation of the American Far-Right. However these folks are not as ideologically driven as they first seem - their mouths were shut tight from 2001-2008 when spending went through the roof. They are instead, as you mention, radical Republicans. Party before country is the rule for these folks. Mix in some racism, and you have the modern day tea bagger movement.

Cathy said...


Anonymous said...

56% Say It’s Okay To Oppose Supreme Court Nominees Over Ideology Or Judicial Philosophy

"56% of U.S. voters believe it
is fair for a U.S. senator to
oppose an otherwise qualified
court nominee because of
disagreements over ideology or
judicial philosophy. "


Anonymous said...

Poll: 4 out of 5 Americans don't
trust Washington

"The government's been lying to
people for years. Politicians make
promises to get elected, and when
they get elected, they don't
follow through," says Cindy Wanto,
57, a registered Democrat from
Nemacolin, Pa., who joined several
thousand for a rally in Washington
on April 15 - the tax filing
deadline. "There's too much
government in my business. It was
a problem before Obama, but he's
certainly not helping fix it."


Anonymous said...

Dr. Kaiser:

you lamented about the unavailability of Pew Polls.
Here's a brand new one.
Perhaps it will help your skewed
partisan perspective.

Distrust, Discontent, Anger and Partisan Rancor
The People and Their Government


Anonymous said...

If less than half think we're going in the wrong direction, then the dems should be in good shape come election time. Time will tell.

Chuck Connors said...

"...comments that are both abusive and anonymous will be deleted."

More accurately; comments you don't agree with will be deleted.

Your assessment is still wrong. Obviously we have different world views. It should prove interesting to see which one survives and which one doesn't. I'll light a candle for you.

Anonymous said...

Let me first say I am an academic teaching at a a southern law school, a retired Marne Colonel and a graduate of the NWC, and I find much of your broadside categorizing the so-called tea party movement as you do to be inaccurate and clearly biased. I wonder if you have bothered to inform yourself directly about such matters rather than apparently taking the descriptions and distortions of others as truth. I have instead taken it upon myself to find out by taking the time to attend a number of them, including that held in Washington DC last September 12 where many tens of thousands of what appeared to me to be quite reasonable, intelligent and yes,even that evil word now equated by even our own administration as extremist, patriotic.

Anonymous said...

it is not just the undoing of the Congressional actions of the last thirty years, but the actions set forth with the passing of the "Great Society" package of Bills and entitlements. It is human nature for those that seek to receive a free ride to exploit the system to obtain it.