Skip to main content

My Thoughts on the U.S. Election (2008)

Image
By
I remember seeing a particular advertisement on the BBC for the 2008 Presidential Election in the United States, claiming that it would be a vote that would affect issues the world over, "from the war in Iraq to peace in the Middle East". That's the usual caffeinated hyperbole you get from people who nag at you and knock at your door, telling you to "go out and vote!" As if voting is going to change anything? Elections don't build nations (and that's the topic of an upcoming post, I promise you that), but election results are nonetheless important.

To be frank, I was quite surprised that Barack Obama was elected to the Presidency. I bet my brother and a couple of friends that McCain would win, not that I supported that old geyser in the first place. I should have considered that he was committing political suicide by giving his VP candidacy ticket to Sarah Palin, an inexperienced Alaskan governor, all-around "hockey mom", and redneck who just loved to rail constantly against Obama without backing her own stances.

Nor was I particularly interested in Obama, either: politics being politics, I'm not holding anything against for or against him until he actually does something. Regardless, the lesser of two evils will be in the White House starting January 20, 2009. Yes, I know his speech following his victory was moving and tear-jerking to his groupies, but I don't take words. I consider actions. The previous U.S. presidents have railed on the same things over and over again prior to their terms in office.

One of them ended with a stain on the blouse of an intern.

My point is that while I admire Obama's charisma, I will still keep him in the limelight until he actually turns country policy around. The same goes for the Middle East: his policies sound more hawkish than Hillary Clinton (who herself is a disaster of epic proportions). At best, Obama may actually bring stability to the Middle East, but I don't see him as some sort of messianic figure that will help the Middle Eastern people back up on their feet: it would be against American interests to tip over tyrannical governments that serve their interests.

He might not be in any shape or form able to tip the scales of the Israeli-Palestine conflict towards the middle and/or find an equitable solution to both sides. Then again, American intervention is what's making it worse in the first place.

The campaign itself was fraught with the usual immaturity of political bipartisanship and bantering. I wonder if it's going to be any different in the next 4 or 8 years should the Americans re-elect Obama in 2012. Either way, I'm not holding my breath.

Salaam, from Saracen
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Politics as an "Outflow of Culture": Unmasking Racism in today's Socioeconomic Scene

By
A common yet grave fallacy is to assume that (the actions of) (part of) the infrastructure of a particular country at a particular time and place is derived from a singular cause, of which a metaphysical nature attributed to said cause would be even more so. That said, attributing (a perception of) (failed) politics as an "outflow" of a country's culture is in my honest opinion a crock of bull. I'm not denying that culture and politics are related: there clearly is a relationship between the two in the broader historical context. However, this reductionist outlook panders to more than your garden variety racism, itself being built on misinterpretations and misunderstandings. Why is that? First of all, consider that politics and culture are mutually exclusive concepts, although their definitions may not appear to be so on the surface. Politics (according to the pseudo-omniscient Wikipedia [1] ) is a process by which groups of people make collective decisions. The...
Post a Comment
Read more

Book Review: "The Third Chimpanzee" by Jared Diamond

By
Jared Diamond is sort of a rock star in the sphere of biogeography (and science in general depending on your perspective). He is more a doom-sayer than a soothe-sayer, a prophet warning of the destruction of society and mankind as a whole. His magnum opus and prophetic text " Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies" has received accolades from a variety of sources, the least of which was the Pulitzer Prize in 1998. Having read that book myself, I came into his lesser-known essay " The Third Chimpanzee " with the expectation that it would be entertaining and enlightening at the same time. Gladly, I was not disappointed, but a glaring issue exists that I will address later. The first book published by Jared Diamond, " The Third Chimpanzee " explores the progression of human evolution in four parts. In the first, he explores the biological premises of our relationship to two other primate species, the common and pygmy chimpanzees (now c...
Post a Comment
Read more

On "Leviathan", by Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury (Part 1: On Man)

By
Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan , or The Matter, Forme, and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiastical and Civil,  is a veritable juggernaut (pun intended) of a book. It is Hobbes' magnum opus, having been circulated widely by the turn of the 17th and 18th Centuries at a time when England was plunged into civil war. Rather than rebel against the new political order (a war crime according to Hobbes which I will revisit later in this post), Hobbes' central thesis is to submit to the absolute authority of an established commonwealth (preferably, in Hobbes' point of view, a "Christian" one), which he compares to the overwhelming biblical sea monster, the Leviathan. Having just finished reading it, I would like to convey my thoughts on his central themes in as short a post as allowed by the breadth of the knowledge he passed on with this read. For this post, I will stick to part 1 (On Man), and deal with the subsequent parts of the book in later posts. Summary of P...
Post a Comment
Read more