Posted by
reasonmclucus on Tuesday, June 17, 2008 2:59:35 PM
Sen. Barack Obama's campaign slogan "Change We Can Believe In" is a
nonsense phrase. It has no real meaning.
Am I the only one who thinks that it doesn't make any sense to believe
in "change"? I can see believing in religion or love or maybe
even music, but believing in "change" makes no sense. It might
make sense to believe in
Sen.
John McCain's ability to handle the presidency, but believing in
some vaguely defined change is ridiculous.
Bill Clinton suggested "It's time to change America" when he ran in
1992. I don't recall him changing much of anything, although two
years later voters changed Congress by replacing many Democrats with Republicans.
The slogan "Change We Can Believe In" sounds like something a child
might consider impressive, but it has no real meaing. Not
surprisingly, Obama has more appeal to inexperienced young voters
than to wiser older voters who have seen a lot of fast talking phony
politicians.
Obama a few months ago commented about the psychological state of small town people who
believed in religion, etc. What is the
psychological state of people who believe in some vaguely
defined "change"?
Obama's supporters must have very empty lives to believe that
some vague "change" is going to make their lives better. Do
they expect the president to provide them some type of
psychological satisfaction?
The term sounds like it might be some type of code word that Obama and
his supporters understand, but whose meaning is supposed to be unknown
to others.
As an historian I am inherently suspicious of politicians who rely on
oratorical ability to reach people on an emotional level.
Southern populists like Huey Long and George Wallace used such
emotional oratory to succeed. Adolph Hitler was a master of the
technique.
I am also suspicious of politicians who use vague code words.
Politicians sometimes use code words and phrases to cover up what they
are doing. For example, white southern politicians used the
phrase "states' rights" to convince people outside the south that
southern whites should be allowed to mistreat black American
citizens. Southerns whites argued they were attempting to
"preserve their way of life" without mentioning that their way of life
involved rape and murder of black residents.
How can we be sure the that Barack Obama is not talking about a
"change" designed to reduce the level of democracy in the United
States? What guarantee do his supporters have that "change" is just a
con to get them to vote for a candidates who doesn't have the necessary
management experience to run one of Donald Trump's small companies?