Skip to main content

People-friendly works, does it?

People-friendly works, does it? If it does, then -- believe it or not -- Obama would have lost to Hillary, for Hillary was the one becoming a movement just before the democratic convention. Obama was seeming passive and distant (as he does now), and even though Hillary rose, he still ably won -- and not by suddenly re-acquiring the people's touch, but really just by remaining the staid-iron same. Things are more complicated than they seem. Obama was, is, always removed -- why they like that in him but not in others, is worth exploring. My guess is that they elected him in for his second act: he'll come out more when liberalism no longer reaches, when its laying, fully-extended, dead flat out on the ground, and not while he's still in a way -- by necessity -- 'filling its mission.

Obama's healthcare reform was DEEMED liberal -- it felt like it was an agenda moved (and it part it was) by a liberal impulse to attend to the vulnerable. The fact that the liberal blood has become so corporate-congested that nothing good passes through without huge sendiments of garbage coming along, doesn't mean that some of Obama's movement wasn't taken as connected to the 60s-on victory by liberals of the cultural war. ALL democrats who were once hippy/communal liberals but are now knee-deep in corporate and consumption, still are kinda still moved by that earlier huge glow of peace, love, and happiness -- and we all feel it. But a lot of democrats are actually ready to let that all go, and find wretched empoweredness in the hot glow in coal. Healthcare, I still believe, will come readily when it is linked to a more rightest movement for a fit nation, to empower the "American-seeming," "hard-working," middle-American, not when the tendency is still to take it as about tender respect and care for those who instinctively feel bullied/marginalized by "American as apple-pie." 60s on, liberalism won the cultural sphere, put rightest, neanderthal thought, fully on the defensive -- as someone like Pat Buchanan will tell you -- and "its" people was hardly the mainstream. This is what this is all about.

Link: David Axelrod and the “zeitgeist” (Joan Walsh, Salon, 21 January 2010)


Popular posts from this blog

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …