Someone named Abraham Katsman has made a good start to decoding the Obama phenomenon in this Jerusalem Post essay.Obama has tapped into is the first generation educated in schools focused on "self-esteem." Now, the products of self-esteem education have come of political age in substantial numbers, perhaps with profound implications for this and future elections.Hat tip for picking up the scent: but this is not an Obama thing nor a generational matter.
The Democratic Party is the Party of Self-Esteem. The Republican Party, on a good day, is the Party of Self-Assertion. Katsman missed that although he notes, "One gets the distinct impression that these Obama supporters really couldn't care less what policies he advocates." Hardly worth stating! Lift up your gaze, my friend, and observe the entire herd.
In one of its jeremiads against the Great Society, the National Review in the late 1960s asked why none of the proposed social programs was subject to a trial run before full funding.
We are so far beyond that.
The purpose of "policies" in the Party of Self Esteem is to offer tokens of self-respect the voter can latch onto. They don't need a lot of depth or detail, just something to connect with emotionally. In elections past, that might have been "the homeless" or "AIDS" or stopping "the war." These issues function as self-help aids in the public drama of whom-I-am-inside; as redeemable chits in the-mess-I-made-of-my-life balancing act; as a come-uppance to all those people who see me as a generally unpleasant screw-up; or as cheap nobility to revise my social status.
If those estimable "policies" eventually become bad "programs" none of their real effectiveness is compromised. None. They were designed to deliver self-esteem, so spare us the details.
Yesterday, Candidate Obama had a rough time with the press. The press corps's collective self-esteem had been menaced by national mockery on Saturday Nigh Live; beating up the candidate was a step toward regaining (personal) credibility and (self) worth. So the media taught us a lesson. Nothing must get between a (media or otherwise employed) Democrat and self-esteem, not even an Obama.
Obama should have anticipated this. One of the dynamics of his campaign has been to shame Hillary supporters, to make them uncool. It hasn't worked well, however, because of the blue-collar "won't back down" psychology of her core constituency and because of their already low self-esteem. Hence the dissimulation that makes counting Hillary supporters so dicey.
Clinton voters, the proverbial night shift, the family from the wrong side of the tracks, do not get to flaunt their affiliation on the Metro, as this morning's intake of GWU students did; they don't get the rush of in-your-face feelgood advocacy for a historic cause. No, they wait in ambush and will take their pleasure secretly in the voting booth when they pretend to decide at the last minute that Hillary is the safer, more responsible choice. In other words, when they make a private gesture of affiliation with the candidate most like themselves. Their self-esteem will lie in having done the country the greater favor and in promoting one of their own.
And whomever wins, all those great "policies" will still be there for any Democrat wishing to make a more public display of consicence.
