President Obama Needs The Left To Raise Hell!!

( – promoted by buhdydharma )

Interesting interview President Obama had with Busisness Week last week.   This part reveals a key political strategy:

But the last point I would just make in terms of the operating economic philosophy here: My working assumption has always been, if the market could do it better, have the market do it. I have very little confidence in, as I said, some sort of command-and-control regulatory regime.

snip

But I will tell you that if you talk to ordinary Americans right now, they feel at least as cynical about business as they are about government. And part of my motivation here is to channel what is going to be, I think, a lot of populist energy in a constructive way that does not end up preventing us from continuing to be the most dynamic, innovative economy.

msnbc

More after the fold.

Let me focus narrowly on the point:

And part of my motivation here is to channel what is going to be, I think, a lot of populist energy in a constructive way that does not end up preventing us from continuing to be the most dynamic, innovative economy.

There has to be populist energy (scary left wingers) putting pressure on business for Obama to be able to compromise these desires for change with business, so Obama can settle for half a loaf and “channel [that] populist energy in a constructive way.”

Unless we fight for EFCA, cap and trade (or maybe “Command and Control” regulations, to use Obama’s parlence), and single payer, for REAL changes that threaten the status quo, President Obama’s portrayal of himself as the bulwark between revolution and reform has little persuasive power.

If business thinks people just will follow whatever Obama says, they are not afraid.

So where’s the populist energy?  President Obama’s entire strategy depends on people out there fighting for change far beyond what he is willing to deliver.  Then he can compromise that change, channel that energy, so business and the current economic and social structure is not deeply threatened.

Without people with pitchforks truly asking for real change that threatens our system, his strategy will fail and we will not even get the tepid reforms for which he fights.

Also on Daily Kos:   http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

27 comments

Skip to comment form

    • TomP on August 3, 2009 at 3:54 pm
      Author

    the limits of reform.  

  1. is no longer “dynamic” or “innovative” — that ended thirty-five years ago, with the elite decision to base the world economy on dollar hegemony.  See, specifically, Michael Hudson’s Super-Imperialism: the US especially, owning the world’s reserve currency and thus being the world’s free rider, is hardly going to come up with lots of “dynamism” or “innovation” under the current dispensation.  

    What’s needed, at this point, is a flood of post-capitalist innovation.  Single-payer is a start; cap-and-trade is a ruse.  I think we (the “Left”) need to get away from being “progressive” in the sense which has pretty much been the object of the political class’s domestication over those last thirty-five years, and start behaving like post-capitalists.  It is time, then, to roll back, and to phase out, the capitalist system as a whole.  

    Hillary Clinton’s failure at negotiating climate change agreements with the Chinese is emblematic of this.  If neither the US nor the Chinese can agree to give up capitalism, what point is there in agreeing upon consumption limitations in the fuel which keeps the capitalist system in its necessary trend of expansion, here as well as there?

    • Joy B. on August 3, 2009 at 5:33 pm

    …just another way to keep the proletariat fighting each other instead of their gentried Masters. “You wingnuts go be disruptive and so stupid nobody will take you seriously. Then you progressives go do the same thing, your way, we’ll take bets on Wall Street on who will win.” But of course, no one wins anything, because the people don’t matter. They’re just the ones who do the work and pay the bills. All we’ll ever get from the Big House is another shakedown.

  2. more in terms of evolution vs revolution. Maybe Marx was right and the cappies on steroids will buy that rope. I found Naomi Klein’s shock Doctrine to have a surprisingly happy ending. Community, local economies. The corporate, too big to fall, model is offing itself. IT offers nothing much to real people except crap products that are for the most part useless. I think it will be up to the people create their own dynamic innovative economies. Here in OR we are one of the leading producers of solar panels and organic farming is up and becoming a viable contender for our regional economy. Since these corporations do not benefit our society I hope more and more we will develop our own regional solutions that are sustainable, local, and deal with  peoples real needs. Wall Street is useless to all except the moneychangers.      

    • robodd on August 3, 2009 at 9:25 pm

    attacking townhalls, I think the conservatives are using this strategy too.

    I believe the republicans think that since they have devastated unions, democrats will not be able to stimulate the democratic populace.  They might be right, at least this point.  Long term, they are wrong and this will backfire, IMHO.

    • TomP on August 3, 2009 at 9:26 pm
      Author

    this to the front page, buhdy.

Comments have been disabled.