--- On Tue, 9/2/08, Dwayne Monroe <dwayne.monroe at gmail.com> wrote:
> There is absolutely nothing in Reed's piece which could
> rationally be
> interpreted as a call for 'charismatic',
> 'populist' action. And, at
> no point does he suggest or explicitly state that Sen.
> Obama is a
> 'sellout' or a 'traitor'. He calls him a
[WS:] Here is a quote from Reed's piece:
"Obama goes a step further in deviating from Alinskyism to the right, by rejecting its `confrontationalism,' which severs its rhetoric of `empowerment' from political action and contestation entirely and merges the notion into the pop-psychological, big box Protestant, Oprah Winfrey, Reaganite discourse of self-improvement/personal responsibility."
Such an argument can only be made for someone who believes in charismatic model of social activisism that I mentioned. Only against that standard Obama can be characterized as "moving to the right" (translation: not being Al Sharpton or a self-styled leader of Black identity politics.) Compared to what passed for "mainstream" in the US today, he stands on the left. Given the strong right wing bias of this country, he must scale his rhetoric to have a chance in November. Criticising him for that suggests oblivion of the political realities on this country.
Wojtek