One of the final reasons that apartheid fell in South Africa was because their ruling class came to the conclusion that it was no longer tenable or defensible. It was no longer working and was doing nothing but lose them friends and allies worldwide. Sound familiar? Maybe like the US now after eight years of Bush?
So, Obama is their choice for change. No, not revolutionary change. But a serious step back from the precipice and time to get rational adults in the White House again. The neocons have been a disaster for the economy, business, and the influence and power of the US. Thus large parts of the ruling class know change is needed now, and Obama is their choice to do it.
Why should anyone want a return of American “power”? It has been a power that has undermind every social revolution in the world for nearly a century. From the continent of South America to Asia and across Africa, as soon as a socialist inclined government appeared the US went in and screwed it up, covertly and overtly. They side with the despotic Suadi regime because it co-operates on the oil front but will demonise Chavez because they don’t like the way he deals with the oil and they are all geared up to have a go at Iran, not because of its civil liberties policies, but because it is sitting on one of the biggest deposits of oil and gas. The American ruling class still need all those cheap resorces from across the world and they will do what they can to get them Obama or no Obama.
John, you answered your own question: the ruling class wants American “power” restored because our nation’s entire wealth (of which they hold 90%) is based on cheap oil.
America has power and that is dangerous, what it doesn’t have is respect and that too is dangerous. What it needs to have is respect and share its power not monopolise that power. But that won’t happen, the corporate world is in control not the ballot box and the corporate world has no patriotism.
Yep. We’ve lost our respect, we’ve lost our economic hegemony (productive advantage). The only thing left is military might, with which we are quickly bankrupting ourselves by throwing our weight around like a petulant child.
Meanwhile, our “enemies” are basically tribesmen. The parallels with Rome are striking: a former economic & military giant bankrupted and brought to its knees by some nobodies from the frontier.
“Authority will be respected when authority is respectable.” – Alan Watts
“Meanwhile, our â€œenemiesâ€ are basically tribesmen.” Not entirely true, though it is an illusion held by many. Iraq was a developed country with an advanced educational system and a modern health service. It has now been returned to a third world country thanks to the coalition of the willing lead by America. Iran likewise is not a backward tribal country, it has its industries and the accusations being flung at it is that it is developing nuclear weapons, hardly tribesmen. The American ruling class has managed to create a number of enemies around the world that can’t be described as “basically tribesmen”, Russia for example and though there are lots of countries where the ruling state sides with America the people resent Amarica’s influence on their internal affairs. The American ruling class is not short of enimies from developed countries as well as third world and developing countries.
I was referring to those enemies that have attacked us effectively: Al Queda. Like the Vandals and the Huns, a seemingly ineffective force did to the Great Empire what other nations never could.
As for Iraq and Iran, they’re made-up enemies for a government that needs enemies to survive.
I think Bush’s response to 9/11 wounded the US far more than the attack itself.
Our own personal Nero (who, BTW, was the original Antichrist to the early Christians– the number 666 is a numerologocal play on Nero’s name).