Obama in Germany; or 'Giving out Fish'
I'll appologize staight out for a couple of things. The title, based on the old "teach a man to fish" addage, assumes almost a critique of leftist social policy, which it is not. It does, however, fit what I want to talk about, though I'm not sure that the option of "teaching how to fish" would solve any of the problems addressed below. The other thing is my almost absolute ignorance of the Democratic primaries, so anything that is said in ignorance, if you could just show me where I'm off, word.
Anyways, Obama gave a speech in Germany yesterday, which attracted over 200 000 people. Transcript: http://www.kcpcrepair.com/dr/content/obama-germany-speech-transcript
It is full of much of what I have come to expect from Obama's speeches, which is difficult to communicate, but, to me at least, boils down to a new choice of narrative and rhetoric. Any time I have seen or read what Obama says, it seems so empty. It seems so appeasing to the specific words that people want to hear, that I'm afraid it is these memes tat people respond so emotionally to, without any consideration for the substance of what Obama is actually saying.
From the German speech:
The fall of the Berlin Wall brought new hope. But that very closeness has given rise to new dangers -- dangers that cannot be contained within the borders of a country or by the distance of an ocean.The terrorists of September 11th plotted in Hamburg and trained in Kandahar and Karachi before killing thousands from all over the globe on American soil.
As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.
Poorly secured nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, or secrets from a scientist in Pakistan could help build a bomb that detonates in Paris. The poppies in Afghanistan become the heroin in Berlin. The poverty and violence in Somalia breeds the terror of tomorrow. The genocide in Darfur shames the conscience of us all.
...
Now the world will watch and remember what we do here -- what we do with this moment. Will we extend our hand to the people in the forgotten corners of this world who yearn for lives marked by dignity and opportunity; by security and justice? Will we lift the child in Bangladesh from poverty, shelter the refugee in Chad, and banish the scourge of AIDS in our time?
Will we stand for the human rights of the dissident in Burma, the blogger in Iran, or the voter in Zimbabwe? Will we give meaning to the words "never again" in Darfur?
That sounds awesome, right? Like he picked very specific policy criticisms from the left and just said that he would fix them. Lets list what he is alluding to solving:
-Integration of international intelligence and terrorism fighting agencies
-combating CO2 emmissions from factories both domestic and foreign
-reducing the impact of CO2 on the planet (which presumes carbon capture technology)
-Securing Russian Nuclear sites
-Preventing the spread of nuclear science
-destroying the drug trade in Afghanistan
-Fixing Somolia
-ending Darfur genocide
-bring security and justice to al corners of the world
-ending child poverty
-house refugees
-end aids
-ensure human rights in nations like Burma, Iran, and Zimbabwe
-prevent other genocides
So, don't get me wrong, I don't actually think any of those are bad ideas, in principal. I don't believe any of them are within Obama's control, and political intervention into these issues, to me at least, seems doubious.
Some are ok, Russia should be engaged in non-proliferation and it is potentially possible. However, in light of what has been seen in the Arab press following the ICCs charge against the president of Sudan, preventing genocide in Darfur would require America creating a new Iraq type situation. Without going point for point with Mr. Obama, my position is that while these might sound good, the attempt to implement some will cause more global disaster than Bush has.
And here is what I mean by giving out fish. He is doing it in 2 ways. The first is the most obvious. He is suggesting the use of government power to directly make people's lives better, rather than giving them the tools to better themselves (I'll admit this could be off, I'm not aware of Obama's specific policies regarding these issues, but I have not seen him say anything that would suggest he is not just talking about expanding the power of the American government to try and help people in other countries). Like I said above, maybe that is the only solution to these problems, I don't know.
The second way is the one I am more interested in. Lets think of the promises, the memes themselves as the fish. By saying the words "never again in Darfur" he is giving everyone who wants a solution in Darfur a fish. He isn't teaching them to fish, ie, he doesn't seem to address what options may be available in elliminating aids, just assures people that it will be eliminated, as though the only detriment to solving aids was that the American president wasn't paying attention to it.
Blah, this is probably at the TLDR point anyways, so I will leave it with this. By no means is this an attempt to sway personal political opinions about candidates. I am airing a concern I personally have, and to be honest, would love to be wrong about this one. I am not trying to make a case for John McCain, and do not personally support his campaign. I am also not trying to tell people not to vote, or to challange any systemic part of this issue. I really am interested in discussing Obama's rhetoric as it relates to pandering to specific leftist criticisms of the Bush presidency.