Thought-Factory.net Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion philosophy.com Junk for code
parliament house.gif
RECENT ENTRIES
SEARCH
ARCHIVES
Commentary
Media
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
Cartoons
South Australian Links
Other
www.thought-factory.net
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

Obama: anti-government Democrat? « Previous | |Next »
January 30, 2011

In Obama, Incorporated in the New York Review of Books blog David Bromwich says that Obama’s 2011 State of the Union address was notable for:

the warmth with which he has embraced the premises of his opponents: in matters affecting public life and the economy, government is now said to be the problem, and private enterprise the solution; and far from deregulation having been a major cause of the financial collapse, the way to a healthy economy now lies through further deregulation. This rhetorical concession, adopted as a tactic, will turn against Obama as a strategy. The enormous budget cuts, for example, which he volunteered to make yet steeper will work against the ventures in job-creation which he has asked for without giving particulars.

Bromwhich adds that all Obama's general pledges now bear the stamp of the corporate ideology. This ideology assumes that the energy, initiative, and technical knowhow that contribute to our society the objects and experiences most valued by Americans originate in the private sector and are generally stunted, impaired, adulterated, or degraded by public supervision.

America, according to Obama “out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world” through “free enterprise” in the private sector and by cuts—“taking responsibility for our deficit”—in government.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 4:08 PM | | Comments (1)
Comments

Comments

Wow.
That's as bad as the cocky-cack Labor politicians go on with when they're in government.
I think it goes back to a categorical misunderstanding, encouraged by politicians and media, in the public understanding of what "government" is.
It can be grassroots, upwards from, by and for the people, or some thing imposed from above,as in banana dictatorships, or a hybrid or shopfront for repressive tolerant corporatism in advanced countries where populations can be bought off without too much trouble for the system.
As Obama's spiel makes clear, the masses are schmoozed into accepting the conditions imposed by force in less fortunate places as status quo.
But let's have no doubt, whoever is the actual government in Australia, it certainly ain't politicians.
A look in boardrooms here and offshore and in places like Washington, London and Beijing, would give us a better understanding of who the real"government" is, as to source amd imposition of rule, beneficial or otherwise..