TNR BLOGS

January 08, 2009 | 8:20 PM
January 08, 2009 | 8:00 PM
January 08, 2009 | 6:03 PM

January 07, 2009 | 12:20 PM
January 07, 2009 | 12:13 PM
January 07, 2009 | 9:41 AM

January 08, 2009 | 6:31 PM
January 08, 2009 | 4:13 PM
January 08, 2009 | 2:50 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

January 08, 2009 | 5:12 PM
January 08, 2009 | 3:25 PM
January 08, 2009 | 1:16 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
06.02.2008
The Case Against Obama Supporters

Jim Sleeper, an Obama supporter himself, makes the case against other Obama supporters. The whole thing is worth a read, but I thought this part was particularly provocative.

I fear that too many young whites with bright prospects have no really serious intention of redressing the growing inequities which the neoliberal world that employs them is spawning, not just between themselves and poor blacks on the Southside but, these days, between blacks and blacks, and women and women, let alone between cool young whites like themselves and the declasse, lumpy white and Latino workers all around them.

Not that my young friends defend wholeheartedly the system in which they're prospering. To their credit, it makes them uncomfortable. But they grasp at mostly symbolic gestures of a politics of moral posturing that relieves racial and class guilt and steadies their moral self-regard with smallish contributions to Obama, an Ivy alum whom they trust to help those people on the Southside without dragging them too deeply into it; without reconfiguring how we charter our corporations and re-construe the private and public investments that employ upscale young whites and well-behaved non-whites; and certainly without redistributing their own bright prospects and future prerogatives and second homes.

That's definitely something to chew on.

--Jason Zengerle 

Posted: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 9:26 PM with 33 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

primwallflow said:

Wait, I was supposed to have a 2nd home to vote for Obama? Shit, I'm not even halfway there!

February 6, 2008 4:50 PM

blackton said:

Hey, chew on this. And Jim Sleepers great contribution to remedying the worlds injustices is to write a blog? My hero. Hey Sleeper, lead by freaking example. I know plenty of young Obama supporters from upscale backgrounds who do a hell of a lot more than you are doing. And the ones who don't, well at least they recognize the proper role of government in redressing past wrongs. You freakin twit.

February 6, 2008 4:55 PM

blackton said:

And take a look at Sleeper's bio, he has spent his life working in elite Universities and writing books, God forbid he teach for a few years in an inner city school, or far worse, go and work in the third world because then the world would be deprived of his wisdom. I genuinely hate assholes like this making ivory tower pronouncements on what is wrong with young people today.

February 6, 2008 5:00 PM

glacialspeed said:

Isn't this just a criticism of upscale Democratic voters in general?  Is there any difference in what Hillary demands of her supporters?  You could replace "Obama" with "Hillary" and have a statement that is equally true.

February 6, 2008 5:01 PM

virginiacentrist said:

Those two paragraphs perfectly describe my apathy towards economic problems and racial divisions! It's like that guy is reading my mind!  I'm being serious. I don't want to heal the world or bring about harsh economic change. I could care less!

Seriously - this guy is spot on.

February 6, 2008 5:05 PM

forrestnash said:

Isn't it an important distinction that he's talking about a certain (small) subset of Obama supporters? You make it sound like he's characterizing ALL Obama supporters, which would be, well, stupid.

February 6, 2008 5:09 PM

ryanmacd said:

I hate to get all ad hominem and crap, but exactly what would the median TNR writer know about the world non-upscale whites live in?

As someone who has had to scrape, crawl, and claw my way up the social ladder from a double-wide upbringing, I can tell you that I feel no connection with some privileged Goldwater baby from the tawny Chicago burbs who "found religion" on social issues "35 years ago" while ensconced in the oh-so-salt-of-the-Earth Yale freaking Law School.

Give me a break..."symbolic gestures of the politics of moral posturing?" Screw you.

February 6, 2008 5:11 PM

jmurph79 said:

Just to save some of the more vociferous Clinton supporters around here some time:

Yes, this does prove beyond any reasonable doubt that all of us Obama supporters are young, unemployed, political newbies that only like him because he gives good speeches.  Yes, we're only supporting him because we like the symbolism of supporting an African American candidate.  No, none of us have ever voted before and won't even actually vote in the general election- we just like to go to rallies and cheer because all of our friends are doing it.  And also for the speeches, which, again, are what really excite us.  Yes, we all went to Ivy League schools, were in frats, and have way more money than Clinton supporters.  And, finally, yes, we are all morons.

February 6, 2008 5:12 PM

purcellneil said:

So, here's the interesting part.  Obama's approach to change is all about participation, about people coming together for a shared purpose and working together to achieve the change they desire.  Or did I misunderstand his bio?  

Is it possible that some of his supporters don't get that - yes, of course.  

Is it necessarily fatal, if some folks work at making change happen, and others just vote for it? No, not at all.

Maybe some of us are the dimmest points of light (to borrow from GHW Bush), but not everyone who "supported" the civil rights movement actually marched with George Romney and Dr King, right?

It is easy to sneer at comfortable, privileged, self-absorbed liberals who vote for change agents like Barack Obama, but otherwise tend to their trust funds and weekend getaways.  But they could all be Young Republicans, blocking change at every door.  It's a no-brainer that we are better off with a significant number of the former.

Neil

February 6, 2008 5:15 PM

maxblum13 said:

This idiot needs to read some more about black power.

February 6, 2008 5:22 PM

blackton said:

Jason, well it looks like we TNR readers have chewed on it, and spit it out. This Sleeper wouldn't last five minutes here with a posting like that.

February 6, 2008 5:24 PM

jhildner said:

I, for one, am always recongifuring how we charter corporations. (?)  I'm doing that right now, as a matter of fact.  I'm also reconstruing our public and private investments.  That's right.  I'm both reconfiguring and reconstruing -- at the same time.  This guy knows nothing of me or my work.

February 6, 2008 5:27 PM

epicciuto said:

My Lord. He sounds like a Nirvana fan circa 1991, "That clueless jock, he's just singing along to some hit song, he doesn't really GET it. Not the way I do."

How condescending.

February 6, 2008 5:32 PM

blackton said:

thanks people, hilarious postings.

February 6, 2008 5:44 PM

jhildner said:

I think it's fair to say that the "lumpy' among us could do a lot better than Sleeper as an advocate and call to conscience.  I bet he's just projecting.  After all, his rant about what's in the hearts and minds of a few people he's watching TV with isn't supplemented with any *quotes* or *specific observations* (except that he witnessed some "hooting" and Edwards's mill line and Hillary's experience line).  So, it's based on nothing except his own sour lament that "these damn kids today aren't revolutionaries.  All they do is *vote* and *actively support a candidate for office.*"

February 6, 2008 5:44 PM

Gavriel Meir-Levi said:

True, true, but we're willing to be led.  If Obama leads us, we'll soul search with him and do more.  If he sells out (which he won't) then we'll flake.  I think we know he won't flake which is why we like him so much... he's actually helping us be the people we really want to be!

Thanks Barack :)

February 6, 2008 5:52 PM

blackton said:

jhildner, your first posting was hilarious.

February 6, 2008 5:53 PM

jet said:

Regarding the specific voter Sleeper is refering to, I'm with him.

That doesn't include the Obama supporters here that read TNR and have seemed to turn up on this blog; and I agree with blackton, there are some funny comments posted here.

There is a young 'yuppy'/NIMBY class that is supporting Obama.  I've been to the rallies and seen the same crowds Sleeper is mentioning.  This is similar to the 'latte-sipping' liberal TNR has criticized before for liking liberal ideas to make them feel good, but would rather have something right of Bill Clinton's economic policies when it come to reality.

I guess what I'd take away from Sleeper and Zengerle's post is that Obama still has to do a better job reaching out to that middle class working group that would prefer Clinton or Edwards in the fall.  If not, this group's going to be vulnerable to a John McCain who does connect with an independent middle class voter come November.

February 6, 2008 6:07 PM

Rhubarbs said:

jet, fair enough, but how does anything you write in any way relate to Sleeper's thesis? I mean, we have several recent examples of presidential candidates who have captured middle-class voters, and none of them did so by calling for a reconsideration of the concept of corporate personhood or overturning the capitalist free-market system, which seems to be what Sleeper is chiding Obama's supporters for not having the stomach to do.

The really amazing thing, when you think about Sleeper's article, is that for it to be a valid argument, several things must be true:

- Hillary Clinton, and all of her supporters, are in favor of overturning the legal status of corporations;

- Most of America's black voters have second homes;

- Most of Iowa's white voters are upper-class neoliberals.

Plus, since when are America's problems "on the Southside"? I know it's a catchy Moby song from like 1998, but come on. That's conflating the problems of urban ghettoization with the problems of overall income inequality, and using Chicago-specific language to boot. It's especially inapt, given that Obama actually won the Chicago Southside vote. The sad thing is that writing pablum like this is more likely to help than hurt someone on a tenure track in the social sciences.

February 6, 2008 6:50 PM

thejauntyboulevardier said:

what is most interesting from this sleeper - and others - is that to support an AA candidate, any AA candidate be he Barack, Jesse, or Al, is to automatically signal either a blinkered racial perspective - if you're black - or if you're white, a deluded eliding and at the same weird time, acceptance of an economically determined class system that benefits you and screws others.

Black candidates, like John Shaft, sure are complicated dudes....too bad they ain't easy to understand, like McCain or Romney or Clinton. Now those are canidates whom one can support without making jim sleeper's fevered brain work overtime...

February 6, 2008 6:55 PM

lymon1 said:

blackton, did Virginacentrist steal your login id or something?  

If you made Barrack Obama pro-life and John McCain pro-choice, how many of those suburban collegeites would flip on that issue alone?  That's why Obama, like most other candidates other than the rare Tsongas/Perot/etc. never tell the voters those "hard truths" they sometimes allude to -- sacrifice is not in today's electorate's vocabulary, young or old.

February 6, 2008 7:03 PM

dbhuff said:

I'd just like to point out that Obama has not just collected donations, but organized.  100s of thousands of people.  This network can be tapped and used by his leadership.  These are all people who've already demonstrated they will do quite a lot to help him, and who are unhappy with the current state of affairs.  I don't think that network just goes away when he's elected...

February 6, 2008 7:14 PM

arsonplus said:

I just have to say, I'm a little sick of being told I'm evil for having benefited from the "creative" economy. It's not like the service and manufacturing sectors are under represented in our national politics,  

February 6, 2008 7:32 PM

virginiacentrist said:

Let me add that most of these young folks are actually out doing field work - knocking doors, calling, etc...

February 6, 2008 7:37 PM

jhildner said:

Besides, it's "South Side," not "Southside."

February 6, 2008 7:40 PM

blackton said:

lymon, what hard truths? most people are plenty aware of the hard truths they face every morning they get up and go to work, we don't need hard truths, and you can't win selling pessimism. I don't agree with all of Obama's solutions, but I agree with a lot of them. Is that so bad?

February 6, 2008 7:58 PM

epackard-02 said:

Looks like Ken Baer is trying to make lemonade out of the Hillary's lemon on February 5th.  She should have done much better -- according to the CW of the past several months, or year even -- but she only achieved a near tie with herself barely on top.

As far as Jim Sleeper goes, whatever.

Did I read the part about the second home correct?  He was pointing out that the young people he met haven't dreamed of a second home, which is somehow bad because they need to at least dream of a second home so that they know what they are losing when it -- or the prospect of it -- is redistributed away from them?

February 6, 2008 7:58 PM

jhildner said:

Lymon:  What's your point?

Everyone:  I get pretty sick of this stupid derision of "suburban collegiates," "yuppie/NIMBYs," consumers of premium coffee, etc.  Basically, there seems to be a lot of resentment built up around the idea that there are (1) young people (2) getting a quality education (3) who have good prospects (4) some of whom will go on to earn a relatively high salary in the workforce (5) who voice concern about others facing legitimate hardship (6) who are generally pretty liberal (7) who tend to be cynical about politics (8) who are impressed with Obama's message and appeal (9) who volunteer for him and otherwise actively support his candidacy and (10) who are nonetheless not inclined to follow the examples of Che Guevara or Abbie Hoffman.

What is there to hate so much about any of that?  Why Sleeper's rage?  How does jet know a NIMBY when he sees one?  Is s/he holding bottled water?  This is such childish bullshit.  Here's an idea:  Let's give folks the goddamn benefit of the doubt once in a while instead of sitting in a corner of the room stewing: "God, I hate that stupid kid, what does he know, little capitalist poser bitch."

February 6, 2008 8:02 PM

jet said:

Rhubarbs

On Sleeper, consider the case for chartering our corporations.  This is an issue that Jon Chait has nailed for example, one of the Republican House members from Delaware, on.  This is not a foreign concept for long time TNR readers.  Or that corporations, such as Stanley corp threaten to charter their corporations in the Caymans to avoid corporate income tax.  Even Rep. Senator Chuck Grassley on the Senate Finance committee complained loudly about that.

Unless you agree that corporations that do most of their business and most of their management inside the relatively safe thanks-to-our-national-defenses borders should not have to pay for it.

Most likely this is what Sleeper is referring to when he discusses this in his post.  It's not as alarmist as you make it  

As for jhildner's distress at me knowing NIMBY's?  Sounds like I hit a nail on the head.  But, I won't gloat.  Instead, I'll just say that the recent influx of poor inner city residents to my part of the world has brought a lot of distress to my local coffee shop for the 'elite' of all ages.

In fact, at one point a couple weeks ago, a signed reader editorial in one of the local daily's complained about the very same hypocrisy.  That's how I know there are NIMBY's amongst the crowd Sleeper refers to.

I hope you're right about the NIMBY"s though jhild as I rather think that when the time comes, we're all willing to do that work to reverse the damage that Bush has done.

February 6, 2008 9:02 PM

guyminuslife said:

Could've just come out and called Obama the "magic Negro."

Don't expect young, well-heeled whites to vote en masse for radical, structural change from any candidate. Don't expect them to rebuke the institutions that have rewarded them (us) so handsomely. "Progressive" does not necessarily imply immediacy.

February 6, 2008 10:06 PM

jhildner said:

Jet, I'm not saying there are no NIMBY's.  I just don't understand the assumption by Sleeper that Obama's supporters are somehow uniquely hypocritical for no other reason than that some of them are young and poised to be realatively well-off.  I don't like Starbucks.  I hate Starbucks.  Sushi pisses me off.  I like Dunkin Donuts coffee.  I like food that was not only killed but cooked.  Yes, I'm yuppie lawyer scum.  But my heart doesn't belong to a BMW.  It belongs to an Infiniti.  God, I love that car.  So beauitful.  But I digress.  My point is, these sorts of little derisive stereotypical jabs at "latte liberals" in which we all seem to enjoy luxuriating are cute to a point but dumb if taken anywhere near as seriously as Sleeper takes them.  No, the kids who are excited about Obama are not revolutionaries.  Guess what?  Neither is Obama.  He's a reformer -- a visionary, even -- but not a revolutionary.

When Sleeper talks about "reconfiguring how we charter our corporations," he's not talking about tax shelters.  (If so, that's pretty small bore to throw out as the epitome of what kids should be doing with their lives instead of working in business or business services.)  He's ludicrously vague about what he has in mind, but I have a feeling he's talking about something bigger and more fundamental, such as the power of large corporations in our society, their legal personhood, and, above all, their fundamental and sole purpose, which is to make a legal profit for their shareholders.  These are things that no candidate (or person) is going to abolish or fundamentally alter.  Nor should they try.  Negative and unfair social effects of these money-making economic arrangements can be intelligently mitigated.  To oversimplify, Democrats are congenial to that effort and Republicans not so much.  Non-revolutionary Democrats are not hypocrites for not wanting to up-end the basic order.  They truly don't want to do that.  Nor are they hypocrties for wanting to hire the person whom they think can bring about the reforms they want, even if they don't plan to spend much time on the front lines themselves.

What personal sacrifice would satisfy Sleeper?  What are the minimum hours of community service one must perform before one can support Obama without a charge of hypocrisy?  What is the minimum expenditure of money?  How much reconfiguring and reconstruing are required?  Must we all make the impressive choices Obama made in his life?  Sleeper sure didn't.  Hypocrite.

February 7, 2008 12:28 AM

blackton said:

right on jhildner!!!

February 7, 2008 11:14 AM

The Plank said:

The backlash begins: A fair amount of punditry regarding Barack Obama's campaign for president has

February 7, 2008 1:21 PM