A Thinking Reed

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed" – Blaise Pascal

Obama’s interventionism

Though they’ve been united in their loathing of the Bush administration and its conduct of the war in Iraq, there’s always been a division on the Left between interventionists and non-interventionists. The former deplore the means the Bushies have employed, while latter also oppose the ends (“American global leadership” a.k.a. “hegemony” or just plain “imperialism” depending on your point of view). However much they may have in common with regards to their opposition to the current administration, the prospect of a Democratic president was bound to re-open those divisions.

If this speech is any indication, Barack Obama is siding with the interventionists. In fact, arch-interventionist Robert Kagan, frequent collaborater with uber-neoconservative Bill Kristol, pronounces himself very pleased. Granted a candidate’s speeches aren’t necessarily reliable guides to what he’ll do in office (remember candidate George W. Bush’s “more humble foreign policy”?), but non-interventionists have to now be eyeing Obama with a great deal of suspicion.

,

3 responses to “Obama’s interventionism”

  1. Dan

    There was a very interesting piece about Obama in the NY Times the other day written by David Brooks. Brooks asked Obama if he had read Niebuhr. Obama responded in the affirmative, and was then asked what he took away from it.

    ‘“I take away,” Obama answered in a rush of words, “the compelling idea that there’s serious evil in the world, and hardship and pain. And we should be humble and modest in our belief we can eliminate those things. But we shouldn’t use that as an excuse for cynicism and inaction. I take away … the sense we have to make these efforts knowing they are hard, and not swinging from naïve idealism to bitter realism.”’

    He is definitely trying to walk the line between Interventionism and Non-Interventionism, or at least trying not to alienate anyone from either side. Typical of campaign mode. But you gotta like the Niebuhr knowledge.

    Reply
  2. gaius sempronius gracchus

    He’s just another liberal globalist.

    As for that “more humble” policy thing, they say there’s no zealot like a convert.

    Did he become a convert to raghead hating, full bore neoconism on 9/11?

    Or had he already handed power to the neocons? Did the media not notice? Did we not notice?

    If he did, was that just carelessness? Or was he already a neocon devot himself?

    Reply
  3. gaius sempronius gracchus

    The first “he” was Obama. The second was GW. Sorry.

    Reply

Leave a comment