Is Obama a Fauxgressive – a Fake Progressive, or Simply a Non-Progressive?

Obama is no progressive. Not even close.

A progressive wouldn’t load up his front office with corporatists like Larry Summers and Rahm Emanuel; he wouldn’t look the other way when Chief of Staff Emanuel calls progressives “retards”; he wouldn’t spend years prior to his Presidency being mentored by, of all people, Joe Lieberman – every corporatist Republican’s favourite “Independent” “Democrat”; he wouldn’t give up the public healthcare insurance option (which had massive majority support of Americans across the political spectrum, which by the way, he rarely or never mentioned) without a fight; he wouldn’t support corporatist/Republican efforts to cut Social Security, MediCare and Medicaid, three of the most popular social programs in American history; he wouldn’t continually accept Republican framing of issues and perpetually treat Republicans and “Conservative Democrats” (read: corporatist Democrats) as honest actors whom sincerely want to do what is best for America; he wouldn’t hire on the people who broke the banks to run the banks; he wouldn’t waffle and wain over Don’t Ask Don’t Tell; he wouldn’t pretend to close international CIA black sites and then turn a blind eye to those in Somalia; he wouldn’t continue and escalate Patriot Act policies; he wouldn’t pass Financial Reform that fails to put a stop to many of the most risky and system-threatening financial practices (e.g., bank over-leveraging, intermixing of depository and investment banking, continued poor regulation of derivatives trading); he wouldn’t outspend Bush on defense; he wouldn’t extend the unpopular “temporary” Bush tax cuts to the rich; he wouldn’t further lower corporate taxes; he wouldn’t continue funding Faith-Based Initiatives; he wouldn’t derisively refer to progressives like Bernie Sanders as “you progressives”; he wouldn’t escalate the fight in Afghanistan at a time when there were no more than 100 Al Qaeda operatives remaining there; he wouldn’t largely ignore and completely excuse the egregious economic mismanagement, international law debasing and civil liberties destroying practices of the previous administration and then continue the very same practices himself; he wouldn’t pretend that the Dems and Republicans are equally at fault when policy discussions come to stalemates when only the Republicans are being obstinate.

It’s  not his lack of success in advancing progressive causes that make him not a progressive. It’s his perpetual lack of effort and capitulation. There is nobility in trying and failing. There is no nobility in playing the role of the jobber in professional wrestler: the pre-determined loser of every match.

Some may say that it is unfair to call Obama a fake progressive, or a fauxgressive, because he so clearly distances himself from progressives and progressivism. But throughout his campaign he clearly accepted and embraced his broad progressive appeal, though often working to have it both ways – as being viewed as both a progressive and a centrist. One may also reasonably argue that more than being a progressive, he has billed himself as The Great Compromiser. But where is the compromise? What on earth has he gotten in the way of compromise from the Republicans, Corporatist Democrats and powerful lobby groups (e.g., Wall Street, the Chamber of Commerce, Department of Defense and the Pentagon) in the interest of not only progressives, but the American people as a whole.

America is Historically and Presently a Progressive Nation; Just Not in Name.

The US Constitution was the most progressive inscription of an overall national governing system of its day. Over the past couple of years, many reputed polls have consistently shown that progressive policy positions such as a government-run health insurance option, protection of Social Security, Medicare, or MedicAid, withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, legalization of marijuana, increased taxation of the ultra-rich, legal and accessible abortion, gay marriage equality, military equality for gays, and reduced defense spending have majority popularity among the general US populace; in many cases the majorities are overwhelming. By contrast, when you ask Americans “are you liberal” or “are you progressive”, the country looks much less liberal and progressive. Why? Because liberalism as a social/political concept has been getting dragged through the mud by conservative media and political figures for years.

Many Americans, when it comes right down to it, are self-hating progressives; they just don’t know it.

When a majority of Americans support progressive policies, what does that mean in terms of the political spectrum? It means that these progressive political positions are not left-wing. They are centrist. That they are considered left wing in the mainstream news media and houses of government show how skewed to the right and toward corporate interests that these vital democratic institutions are.

Back to Barack Obama

If Barack Obama was truly a progressive, he would not be where he is today. Many people who defend Obama say that he is doing the best he can within the system he’s in, which they accurately recognize as being fundamentally corrupted by the role of lobbies in financing elections, in participating in Washington-Wall Street revolving doorism, and so on. But this corruption is precisely why we should not believe that he is a progressive. If he was a progressive, he would not have gotten within 50 miles of the White House. He would have been vetted out.

It’s also clear that Obama is not a progressive is somehow managed to sneak past the goalies of the Washington/Wall Street Establishment. If he was, he wouldn’t be what Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks calls the world’s worst negotiator.

Despite having less national popularity, far fewer party members in the Senate and Congress, far lower public support for particular policies, and consistently having the relevant evidence against them, Bush, Cheney & Co. managed to wage an immensely costly and national security compromising war on Iraq, to shred civil liberty and privacy laws enshrined in the Constitution, to cut tax on the rich, block government funding of stem cell research, …. Meanwhile, Obama can’t nudge through policies that he was elected to champion?

Game over. He is not a progressive. The only question is he simply not a progressive, or is he a fauxgressive?

As election time draws near, expect him to jack up the fauxgressivism.

RELATED POSTS:

Help Make “Fauxgressive” A Recognized Word – And Obama Its Poster Child

Apparently the Obama Cult Still Has Some Members

Why Obama and Democrats Are Less Trustworthy Than Bush and Republicans

10 thoughts on “Is Obama a Fauxgressive – a Fake Progressive, or Simply a Non-Progressive?

  1. You have done a good job of establishing obamas lack of liberalism, but the real problem isn’t so much a label but the actor. The real problem is that democracy is broken and lies have become truth. We no longer live in a world that cares to be changed, the status quo is the new avant-garde, a copy of a copy is the new new.

    What we really need is change that sweeps past politics and the talking heads on tv, we need real change not the kind that can be bought though twisted language and lies. We need to liberate ourselves from mental slavery by seeing the world for what it really is and then figure out a means to change.

    Obama is not the problem, he is a symptom.

  2. I agree with a number of those points. It’s 100% true that he’s not the problem, but a symptom. It’s definitely true that the system is broken – this includes news media, campaign finance, revolving door processes between government and private industry, etc etc etc.

    I don’t think, however, that we need to move past politics. I think we have to change politics. I don’t think the world doesn’t care to be changed; many people in the world very much want change. Yes, it’s true that there’s a lack of motivation on the part of very many. But bigger problems, I think, are mass ignorance and confusion cultivated by disingenuous news and political figures, and more importantly, a broad sense of learned helplessness.

  3. Pingback: Article: “Is Obama a Fauxgressive – a Fake Progressive, or Simply a Non-Progressive?” | Always Question Authority

  4. Pingback: Why Obama and Democrats are Less Trustworthy than Bush and Republicans « Death By Trolley

  5. If mass ignorance is the norm, the system is broken and the media doesn’t care, how will politics ever get better? The problem is politics and it seems pretty clear that that wont change anytime soon.

    I guess what I’m saying is: how can we expect this system which has been broken and caused the problems to suddenly change and make things better? The media has shown time and time again that it is in bed with big industry and big industry is not going away.

    Its ignorant to think that the political system that has been progressively getting worse will get better. That is why I suggest we move past politics, to what I am not sure.

  6. Pingback: Posts from the current blog: Death By Trolley « The Frame Problem

  7. Pingback: Government Corruption | Boomer's Nest

  8. Pingback: Help make “fauxgressive” a recognized word – and Obama its poster child « Death By Trolley

  9. Pingback: The Obama Cult Apparently Still Has Some Members… « Death By Trolley

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s