Reconsidering "Our" Interests

I've got a friend who's very gung-ho for Obama. We had a good
talk yesterday about empire. It was very edifying for us both, because for me
besides the lack of transparency in the voting process (Bush won neither
election see http://velvetrevolution.us), I consider the matter of empire the center point of the election.

I won't get into the boring details. I have voiced my displeasure with Condi
and Powell (the latter being one whom I believe would be a MUCH better VP
candidate than the dude from Delaware) and do so every chance I get. This is because I would like to see better from black officials... but hey they're human too. So they've actually been really helpful in allowing me to rid myself of any projections that are more a product of me than of them and their personal career aspirations and
obligations.

The thing is that I am not a fan of American empire, and I actually have
mistakenly believed that black Americans should axiomatically understand the
reasons why. But this isn't realistic. As my friend stated, "every second of
every day, someone is trying to get what we've [read: Americans] got." and "it
ain't easy being a superpower, but somebody has to be it" and "if others were
in our position, they'd do the same."

I conceded that he probably had a good point, though I largely disagree with
each of these statements, particularly "their wanting what we have," believing
rather that "we" want what they have and use whatever means to acquire it.
However, if his reasoning is correct (not by moral or spiritual measures but by
virtue of most people thinking similarly), then I see no reason why a non-colored (identified) person would consider the Democratic nominee. After all, a significant aspect of what "is had" is concentrated in the hands of very few, largely white individuals. If my friend's viewpoint is correct, that is the "we" interests are construed in national terms, it is quite plausible that many whites construe this we/nation concept in racial terms. The national angst around immigration most certainly reflects some of this thinking.

I would contend that the notion of "we" needs to be reconsidered, nationally
and globally, identifying interests much in the way Jesus instructed us. Thus,
more war for Afghanistan isn't so Jesusly, and I don't think that Jeremiah
(Wright or Biblical) would disagree. "We" haven't any interest in war and a
budget that off-the-bat allocates .56 on the dollar for war is planting seeds
of a most unsavory fruit. No significant presidential candidate has raised the
empire issue since Jesse Jackson in '87, no doubt because "we" have been convinced that our interests rest in empire. Both candidates endorse empire, only differing in the means by which to administer it. As I told my friend whether you get the pig (the Republican) or the pig wearing lipstick (the Democrat), they're both pigs-- just not kosher.

Here's an article entitled Biden, Iraq and Obama's Betrayal from the think tank organized by the Institute for Policy Studies that shares a similar perspective. Individuals who support the choice of Biden are in most cases ignorant of his record or engaged in the type of doublethink that would make George Orwell proud.

Again, as my last post articulated, the mechanisms that drive political behavior are non-rational, emanating from a place in the brain where primate territoriality reigns. Most who vote will have already decided on which territory to defend irrespective of policy. It doesn't have to be this way, but the overall political process seeks to appeal to this easily activated behavior. Obama is drinking the Kool Aid by believing that he can both appeal to higher order thinking to vote for a non-entirely white candidate, while simultaneously appealing to mean instincts, proposing that he can carry forth the fraudulent war on terror better than McCain. If I were one who truly believed in the American empire and its war on terror, my "instincts" would tell me that McCain is a better candidate. Holding that neither empire nor the so-called war on terror are globally sustainable postures, I alternatively hold that Obama is no candidate at all.