February 23, 2012
Keeping Up with the Republican Primaries
Justin E. H. Smith in his own blog:
I got all teary-eyed around November, 2008, just like every other non-australopithecine American. But unlike most of my co-evolved concitoyens I was not a sucker. I was delighted that we would now have a rational and evidently morally decent person, rather than a cretinous one, volunteering to take on a role that is for structural reasons morally compromising. But I did not think for a second that this was the dawning of some sort of new era. That would be to misunderstand what a president is.
We have what in places like Turkey is lucidly described as a 'deep state' (though in Turkey it's principally the army that is had in mind, while for us it's a more composite beast). The deep state limits drastically what elected officals can do. It is the permanent structure that endures behind the constant electoral spectacle, and it ought to be the only thing of interest to political analysts. Do I blame Obama for the continuation of the Iraq War, the non-closure of Guantánamo, etc.? Just a little bit more than I blame his tailor. For Obama is, as they say, a suit, and many, many people conspire to maintain him as the presentable image of American power. I am incapable of conjuring any commiseration with the conventional liberals who believe disappointment in Obama the person is an appropriate reaction to his record as president.
However little Obama interests me, the current clamoring of the Republican candidates is of an altogether different order of uninterestingness.
More here.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 09:47 AM | Permalink






















Comments
Another version of the "deep state" idea can be found in Jonathan Rauch's Government's End: Why Government Stopped Working (1999). He argues that entrenched interest group support for nearly every government program makes it very hard to eliminate or change any of them very substantially. Among other things, he has an intriguing discussion of how the destruction of Germany's government in WWII paved the way for its future economic successes by wiping the slate clean of interest groups.
Posted by: John N | Feb 23, 2012 10:55:20 AM
Ron Paul congealed in swamps. Very astute observation.
Posted by: Louise Gordon | Feb 23, 2012 11:45:52 AM
Narcissism.
Posted by: mrgoodbar | Feb 23, 2012 12:20:43 PM
"I will not vote for any of them, not Obama, not the others. This is, I insist, itself a legitimate use of my right to vote: it is a refusal to get sucked into the spectacle.
Alright, next post: back to Rilke, and to things that are beautiful and that matter."
Spoken with the faux-aristocratic air of the contemporary literati. Bravo, good sir. You win at not caring. What could be more po-mo than that?
Posted by: ajay | Feb 23, 2012 1:19:44 PM
The post seems like a lot of condescension and cloistered apathy, but, perhaps despite himself, perhaps not, I think this academic's stance is defensible. There may be others better suited to addressing the problem of American politics today, specifically this deep state issue, which seems valid. But dedicated scholars might be doing something good by simply holding themselves to high standards of research. It's only their job.
Posted by: uncontrarian | Feb 23, 2012 3:06:30 PM
I lot of folks say Citizens United v F.E.C. is dangerous to this election.
But one expert says it is not as dangerous as gerrymandering.
Posted by: Dredd | Feb 23, 2012 5:20:34 PM
Post a comment