This entry is the long overdue "part II" of my notes from reading The Audacity of Hope by Barack Obama. As mentioned previously, I write these comments more or less from the perspective of a layperson trying to make sense of the book despite an acknowledged deficiency in political knowledge.
Chapter 3: The Constitution
Obama talks about the Constitution in Chapter 3, and he is a good person to speak on it, having taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. He presents the contrasting views of strict constructionists--who believe in a word-for-word interpretation--with those of relativists, who believe that the tenets of the document must be interpreted in the context of current realities. After first acknowledging the validity of both sides of the issue (something Obama seems to be very good at), he sides with relativism, preferring a relativist view in particular as it relates to the institution of slavery.
As we know, slaves were considered to be chattel and therefore were not accorded the same rights under the Constitution as other men and women. Nor were Native Americans, for that matter. Considered in this light, the founding documents of our country--and those Founding Fathers who created them--can surely be interpreted as hypocritical and unworthy; it is a view upon which many people agree.
After paying due homage to the formative role that the Founding Fathers played in the birth of the nation, however, Obama suggests another lens through which one might view slavery. He offers the interpretation that perhaps some, if not many, of the Founding Fathers believed in abolishing slavery--but that they delayed acting on the issue in the hopes of first striking a compromise on the Constitution with the south. In other words, perhaps the Founding Fathers saw slavery as a necessary evil for that time and place, and delayed its abolition for that reason.
This relativist interpretation--that historical context may be used to explain or to avoid condemnation of our nation's founders for the sin of slavery--is very generous and very forgiving, and perhaps it is the only way to unify such a diverse people despite the divisiveness of the issue. One way or another, I think it's very big of him, and it rings true with a point Obama makes repeatedly throughout the book--that we need to attempt to see the world through each other's eyes in order to be able to come together to work towards common goals. Not that slavery can be forgiven, but that it was the Constitution, the framework of our democracy set forth in good faith by our nation's founders, that provided the vehicle through which it could eventually be abolished. And that is what Obama conceptualizes the Constitution to be--a framework through which groups with dissenting viewpoints can continue to work through their differences, compromising here or there, as a function of a continually evolving democracy.
Chapter 4: Politics
Chapter 4 is "Politics"--my least favorite subject. Obama has my number at the start of this chapter when he discusses how the average American is inclined to blame politicians for the the problems with politics, but then he gives us a window into some of the pressures politicians face. First, there is the pressure not to lose an election--for in politics it is always a hugely public loss. Second, there is the pressure of money--how important it is to have a well-funded campaign and yet how difficult it is to raise funds time and time again. Obama expresses sympathy for those politicians who, by the time they are on their second or third go at it, might just find it easier after all to accept money from the big corporate PACs rather than deal with the hard work of fundraising among the rank-and-file whose pockets are less deep. He acknowledges the result of this--and of serving at the national or state level--that politicians ends up spending most of their time in different circles than those of the rank-and-file Americans they represent. On the pressures from interest groups, Obama first makes a clear distinction between self-serving deep-pockets corporate special interests and groups of people who rally together around a common cause, but he relates the pressure that nonetheless comes with making decisions about what is best for the state when there are conflicting interests. Again, this leads him to conclude how much easier it probably is for politicians to simplify matters and vote in favor of all the issues endorsed by their supporters.
To exemplify the conflicting interest issue, Obama asks, "Should I vote against a change in the Clean Air Act that will weaken regulations in some areas but strengthen regulations in others, and create a more predictable system for corporate compliance? What if the bill increases pollution but funds clean coal technology that may bring jobs to an impoverished part of Illinois?" I can see how those would be difficult decisions to make.
He also talks about the pressure from the media--one with which, as a former PR writer, I am all too familiar. Obama explains the fear of bad press as a cause for politicians' reliance on preplanned, "packaged" messages to the public instead of trusting their own intuition and speaking spontaneously--which renders them "politicians" in the bad sense of the word. He talks about the evolution of journalism from clearly partisan opinion-style journalism to the more objective reporting following WWII and back to the increasingly partisan journalism of today. Even when a story is supposedly objective--for example, one that starts with a statement from the White House and then follows with quotes from opposing camps--it still ends up casting Republicans and Democrats as always bickering and never agreeing on an issue. This is because conflict sells. Generally, the press won't run a quote in which one opponent says, for example, "I can understand where the other side is coming from." So there is the pressure of dealing with how the media will depict a politician or political argument.
The final challenge discussed in Chapter 4 is the "murky brew" of legislation, "the product of one hundred compromises large and small," an example of which is the quote two paragraphs above. Politicians must wade through and make decisions about proposed legislation that often packages unlikely things together.
Obama on Immigration
Consistency be damned from this point forward, because I stopped taking chapter-by-chapter notes and just read the book to the end. You would think that having been an educator and a PR writer in that field I would have wanted to engage in Obama's conversation about education, but I think I don't have enough information yet and honestly I will have to go back and reread that section and perhaps some supplementary materials before drawing any conclusions. Instead, it was Obams's section on immigration that caught my attention.
Illegal immigration is a tough issue for me. My gut feeling has been to support those immigrants who risk life and limb to come to the United States to make better lives for themselves. I know these people personally; I have witnessed their struggles; and I have long harbored resentment for those who would prejudice against them. At the same time, however, I am painfully aware that my opinion on the matter is one-sided. I am not there, in the daily grind where these cultures intersect, seeing, feeling, and understanding the dynamics of opportunities lost and gained. Obama makes the point that as a result of illegal immigration, those who are already here do not get their fair chance--particularly the poor and disenfranchised who see their jobs taken away by illegal workers who are paid a fraction of the cost.
In the immigration bill a few years back, then, Obama voted for stricter rules that make it more difficult for companies to hire illegal workers. These rules directly affect my friends in Michigan. My friends have been in the United States for many years. One has children by a U.S. citizen but has not succeeded in gaining legal status. Others have children who are U.S. citizens but they themselves are not. Now, they must now drop one job for the next--jumping from factory to factory--at the slightest hint that Immigration is on its way. What happens if they get caught? They go home to a country that is no longer their home, away from their kids.
Obama states his case and I see where he's coming from, even though it is difficult for me to share his stance based on my personal experience, and even though I don't have a solution for the issue myself. After explaining his position, he gets a little sentimental, as he is wont to do. He shares a story about a Latino family--without stating their legal status--and concludes that they deserve every right and every opportunity that we all have in this country. Of course I agree with that, although it feels to me that Obama confuses and skirts the issue at this point. I assume the family in his story must have their papers...because I don't think after his earlier point he would go on to state that an illegal resident should have every opportunity; it just doesn't follow. Unless, of course, I misunderstood.
In Conclusion
All in all, The Audacity of Hope was a difficult book for me, for reasons cited earlier, but an important read nonetheless. I very much appreciate Barack Obama for reaching out to people of opposing viewpoints, and for writing a book that explains the beliefs that make up the foundation of his political stances. I am definitely curious about the next book, should one come out, as I am certain the "pressures" on politicians should come across loud and clear in that one, and I would like to see his take on any of the compromises he is accused of making now that he is in the hot seat.
-------------------------------------------------------
Note: A day after reading The Audacity of Hope--which was not mine in the first place--I had to hand it over to the next reader. As such, it is no longer in my possession and I was not able to double check that my understanding of Obama's stories and statements is correct, particularly in the sections on slavery and immigration. Therefore, if a reader finds something erroneous in my synopsis, or would otherwise like to engage on an issue, please by all means comment. Thanks.
Leave a comment