Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Barack Obama on the New Deal, conclusion.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
silverweb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 01:29 AM
Original message
Barack Obama on the New Deal, conclusion.
This thread is the final documentation of Obama's references to the New Deal in his book. There are nine references in Obama's book to the New Deal.

Because I'm not sure if the four-paragraph rule applies solely to articles or if it also applies to books, just to be on the safe side I posted the first of the nine New Deal references in the original thread (see post #18) _here_, references 2-5 _here_, and the last four in this new thread.

Barack Obama on the New Deal: References from The Audacity of Hope (hard cover edition).

(6) p.153: But it was during the stock market crash of 1929 and the subsequent Depression that the government's vital role in regulating the marketplace became fully apparent. With investor confidence shattered, bank runs threatening the collapse of the financial system, and a downward spiral in consumer demand and business investment, FDR engineered a series of government interventions that arrested further economic contraction. For the next eight years, the New Deal administration experimented with policies to restart the economy, and although not all of these interventions produced their intended results, they did leave behind a regulatory structure that helps limit the risk of economic crisis: a Securities and Exahnge Commission to ensure transparency in the fnancial markets and protect smaller investors from fraud and insider manipulation; FDIC insurance to provide confidence to bank depositors; and countercyclical fiscal and monetary policies, whether in the form of tax cuts, increased liquidity, or direct government spending, to stimulate demand when business and consumers have pulled back from the market.

(7) p.158: Without any clear governing philosophy, the Bush Administration and its congressional allies have responded by pushing the conservative revolution to its logical conclusion -- even lower taxes, even fewer regulations, and an even smaller safety net. But in taking this approach, Republicans are fighting the last war, the war they waged and won in the eighties, while Democrats are forced to fight a rearguard action, defending the New Deal programs of the thirties.

(8) p.177: Certainly the impuse behind the New Deal compact involved a sense of social solidarity: the idea that employers should do right by their workers, and that if fate or miscalculation caused any one of us to stumble, the larger American community would be there to lift us up.

(9) p.178: Rather than use the government to lessen the impact of these trends, the Bush Administration's response has been to encourage them. That's the basic idea behind the Ownership Society: If we free employers of any obligations to their workers and dismantle what's left of the New Deal, government-run social insurance programs, then the magic of the marketplace will take care of the rest. If the guiding philosophy behind the traditional system of social insurance could be described as "We're all in it together," the philosophy behind the Ownership Society seems to be "You're on your own."



Carry on, Team Obama!


GObama! _YES, WE CAN!_

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Unsane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
1. Gobama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
silverweb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. You betcha!
The more undistorted truth from and about Obama that gets out, the more likely he is to win with room to spare!

:patriot:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
3. Why don't you post one about his references to the "excesses" of the 1960's and 1970's?
No one said anything about the New Deal, but it is a good bait and switch. Even Reagan supported the New Deal.

I'll help you.

Pages 156-157

"The conservative revolution Reagan helped usher in gained traction because Reagan's central insight--that the liberal welfare state had grown complacent and overly bureaucratic, with Democratic policy makers more obsessed with slicing the economic pie than with growing he pie--contained a good deal of truth."

He makes the argument the DLC made about the size, role of government. When people talk of expanding the pie rather than slicing it they are using smokescreens for talking about cutting back on social programs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RuleOfNah Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. I brought it up.
Well, I brought it up after someone else brought it up. Now I am going to go try and help counter any misinformation/agitation caused by the Reagan fallout.

BTW, I'm not a fan of the DLC. I'm not going to get involved there, it feels to much like playing Rove's frame. I'm also not going to argue against the use of the word complacent, even though I too could interpret 'liberal welfare state' as an insult right out of a Rovian phrasebook. I'm just trying to clarify Obama's stance on the New Deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RuleOfNah Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 04:56 AM
Response to Original message
4. Perhaps it was the quote from page 158?
BTW, I started this, because I saw a quote in passing that seemed to be disparaging towards the New Deal (and silverweb has been kind enough to help me try and track it down). First issue is was it a real quote, then was it out of context, then maybe issues of nuance.

the government's vital role in regulating the marketplace became fully apparent

That one does not sound like that wacky Hayek/Friedman stuff, which is a very good thing!

But in taking this approach, Republicans are fighting the last war, the war they waged and won in the eighties, while Democrats are forced to fight a rearguard action, defending the New Deal programs of the thirties.

Maybe what I saw was that quote. Without the preceding sentence it could be misconstrued (pro 'war' vs 'the thirties'). Was the theme of that section that the Hayek/Friedman school are fools?

The Certainly on page 177, is that a midstream nod while saying something fatherly yet nasty before or afterwards? Like a 'well intentioned, but this is how things really work' pitch, if you know what I mean. I assume not, just being thorough.

That's the basic idea behind the Ownership Society: If we free employers of any obligations to their workers and dismantle what's left of the New Deal, government-run social insurance programs, then the magic of the marketplace will take care of the rest. If the guiding philosophy behind the traditional system of social insurance could be described as "We're all in it together," the philosophy behind the Ownership Society seems to be "You're on your own."

That sounds great, even heading in the general direction of Klein's Shock Doctrine revelations. I assume Obama is on the "we are all in this together" side. Is that correct?

While I wait I'll go try and help clean up some of the friction from the Reagan fallout. BTW, while I think Reagan was horrible, I can understand the abstract comparison Obama used (and the possible attempt at reaching out to those foolish Reagan Democrats).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
silverweb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-18-08 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. I don't know what quote you saw, obviously.
I'm betting that it was either deliberately falsified, honestly misquoted, or seriously taken out of context.

Read in context, every single thing Obama says about the New Deal is in describing the sociopolitical environment of the particular time he is writing about. The first part of the book is descriptive -- an overview of the political dynamics of our history -- showing how the mood and events of the times shaped our course.

Obama is most certainly and consistently on the "we are all in this together" side.

Here's the quote from p.177 with the before and after paragraphs (still not adequate context, but better):

The last time we faced an economic transformation as disruptive as the one we face today, FDR led the nation to a new social compact -- a bargain between government, business, and workers that resulted in widespread prosperity and economic security for more than fifty years. For the average American worker, that security rested on three pillars: the ability to find a job that paid enough to support a family and save for emergencies; a package of health and retirement benefits from his employer; and a government safety net -- Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, unemployment insurance, and to a lesser extent federal bankruptcy and pension protections -- that could cushion the fall of those who suffered setbacks in their lives.

Certainly the impuse behind the New Deal compact involved a sense of social solidarity: the idea that employers should do right by their workers, and that if fate or miscalculation caused any one of us to stumble, the larger American community would be there to lift us up.

But this compact also rested on an understanding that a system of sharing risks and rewards can actually improve the workings of the market. FDR understood that decent wages and benefits for workers could create the middle-class base of consumers that would stabilize the U.S. economy and drive its expansion. And FDR recognized that we would all be more likely to take risks in our lives -- to change jobs or start new businesses or welcome competition from other countries -- if we knew that we would have some measure of protection should we fail.


There's much more, of course, and he goes on to describe the beneficial societal impact of FDR's policies, how they began to crumble under corporate assault, and how American families (and small businesses) are suffering now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC