Saturday, November 22, 2008
Is Obama connected to the state with a thosuand threads?
Lenin and I would argue that, with the election of Barack Obama as president, we are not really changing the system because the capitalist state is linked to the bourgeois class by a “thousand threads,” and it is difficult to destroy this connection.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Lenin would argue that, with the election of Barack Obama as president, we are not really changing the system because the capitalist state is linked to the bourgeois class by a “thousand threads” (Lenin 330), and it is difficult to destroy this connection. I agree with Lenin that people are not fundamentally changing the system when they elect Obama as president. All of the presidents of the United States (except for Lyndon B. Johnson) came from the elite or bourgeois class and had ties to corporations. Therefore, they would not make changes to capitalism and would rather maintain the system of capitalism. The American election process gives the people a “false notion of universal suffrage” (319). Democracy makes the working class falsely believe that when they vote, they are actually controlling and changing the system, when in fact, they are not. The right to vote deludes people that they have the power to change the system. Therefore, when we elected Barack Obama to the presidency, a man who promises change to the United States, the question becomes inevitable: with Obama as president, are we actually changing the system? Lenin believes that the resolution to these class antagonisms and irreconcilability is not only revolution but also transition to socialism through dictatorship of the proletariat. However, Lenin would argue that Obama’s election to the presidency is not the perfect time for the transition to socialism, although Obama could help alleviate the problems of capitalism. Simultaneously, Lenin is not wholly cynical, but rather, a little hopeful and optimistic that Obama will bring some change. Obama might make marginal changes but not sufficiently radical or fundamental changes for revolution. Nevertheless, one of the first steps toward making change is to obliterate the muck of ages by destroying the capitalistic state. One of the elements of the capitalist state is “direct corruption of officials” (319). In addition, many of the officials in high government are inextricably connected to corporations by a “thousands threads” (330). For example, Vice President Dick Cheney has ties to Halliburton. Because the capitalistic state is connected to the capitalistic (bourgeois) class by a thousand threads, the state must be destroyed. Moreover, I believe that in the end, all presidents are more or less the same because they will work and make decisions in the best interest for capitalism. Thus, Lenin and I would argue that Obama’s victory is not significant in the sense that Obama, like any other president of the United States, is connected to the capitalist class and will unlikely make fundamental changes for the best interest of the working class.
Hey Carol,
I concur with your argument about Obama not bring much change because of the "1000 threads". Obama is going to be more worried about his campaign and try to win the votes of people; basically I feel that he is all talk to gain approval every where. I feel that the purpose of a two party system, democrats and republicans, is to create an illusion for American. By having them consenting to this political system, it doesn't give Americans the idea to amend how the system is.
I don't think Obama will bring change, per say, he will only provide concessions. For real change to occur, I agree with Lenin that we need a Dictatorship of the Proletariats. Get response!
Justin,
I feel like all presidents have to be able to "gain approval everywhere," and that Obama is not thinking he is doing something different. The campaign that Obama ran was organized in such a way that should persuade the American public that Obama illustrates a form of transition in this usually stereotypical role. No president ever got his whole platform accomplished or else they would have repealed the 22nd amendments by now. You and Carol are both right, Lenin would still attack our president-elect Obama because he is still a portrayal of capitalist mentality in order to maintain "1000 connections" with their mutually benefactor, the capitalists themselves. However, Obama's steps and well drawn out literature available at "change.gov," shows that his reforms are not just being shelved, but he is making changes for all walks of life and not just those whom work within the "system." Therefore, like I said in my description, Lenin needs to give Obama some time to turn his ideals in realities without falsity. Until Obama falls into the pattern of the past presidents acting in ways that reflect their artificial promises and ties to those with financial clout, he is still a revolutionary in his own sense.
Post a Comment