Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

McCain vs. Obama = Extreme Individualism vs. Commons-Based Society

Posted by Jay Walljasper, OnTheCommons.org at 10:47 AM on October 28, 2008.


The commons helps explain the sharp difference between presidential candidates this year.
images3

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 


The commons is an unfamiliar concept to most Americans, and one not likely to become a campaign issue in the closing week of the election. But it's an underlying current of the presidential race that helps define the sharp differences between Republican and Democratic tickets this year.



John McCain is a devout believer in individualism, which is why he celebrates free market policies and go-it-alone foreign policy -- just like the Bush Administration before him. Barack Obama represents a swing back to community minded values, which fit into the broader framework of the commons.



This election, more than any in recent history, offers a no-turning-back choice for what Americans want our country to become.



John McCain speaks patriotically of Country First and has recently taken to railing about the need for reform in Wall Street and Washington, but the policies he proposes will elevate selfishness to levels not seen since the days of Robber Barons. His tax plans push beyond even the Bush Administration in relieving wealthy people and corporations of any obligation to the greater common good. McCain's assessment of our economic predicament assumes that government regulation is always the problem, and unfettered markets are always the solution. Never mind the Nightmare on Wall Street.


His views on military and foreign policy -- the bedrock of his candidacy -- isolates America as a solitary force battling terrorism, Russia and other perceived threats with little support or even discussion with anyone else in the world. He finds it laughable that Barack Obama would even consider sitting down to talk with those labeled as "enemies".



McCain's embrace of extreme individualism is best witnessed by his selection of Sarah Palin as a running mate--there could be no better symbol for this philosophy than the outspoken governor of our most outspokenly individualistic state (even though Alaska leads the country in receiving federal tax money per capita).



Barack Obama, while certainly no leftist, offers a quite different vision of how America can succeed in the 21st Century. His years as a community organizer on the streets of Chicago instilled him with an understanding about the dynamics of social engagement that McCain, during his many years of service in the chain-of-command culture of the military, never had the chance to learn.



Through instinct and experience, Obama has an appreciation for the importance of the commons even if he hasn't consciously studied the concept. In a nutshell, the commons refers to things belonging to all us that--when used wisely and fairly--will benefit everyone, not just a few.



Obama has endorsed Cap-and-Dividend, the commons-based approach to reversing global warming. And you can hear elements of a common-based society when he talks about offering health care for all, about revising tax policy for the benefit of middle-and low-income families, about finding a way for qualified students to attend college.



If elected Obama and many of his Democratic ticket mates in the 50 states could begin shifting America back in the direction of the common good--as opposed to individualism running amok, which has characterized our political and business culture since at least 1980.



Social change is a slow and meandering process, and we can't be sure how much Obama and the Democrats would embrace a commons philosophy and how far they are willing to go in challenging entrenched corporate power. But a rousing Obama/Democratic victory next week at least signals decisive political change in the country and opens the door to new social visions like the commons getting more attention in Washington and everywhere else. A McCain/Palin win ensures even more extreme individualism.


AlterNet is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by its writers are their own.

Digg!

Tagged as: election, democrats, republicans, obama, mccain, commons


Murdoch and Murdoch Flak Confused About Racism, Truth
What must it be like to do spin for News Corps?
Post by Tana Ganeva. November 11, 2009.
Right-Wing Pundits Now Lecturing the Military: Bases Need More Guns
Logically more guns would mean less shootings, right? Wait ...
Post by Eric Boehlert. November 11, 2009.
Public Option Back on the Chopping Block
Adding to the problem of scared Dems is the Dems who insist upon being catered to. Lieberman has now been joined by Ben Nelson.
Post by mcjoan. November 11, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
It's been THEIR way for decades..They failed,Repeatedly
Posted by: Purple Girl on Oct 28, 2008 11:17 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Trickle Dwon was a scam for the first moment it was coined. It's a new name on an Old Basic principle. Those who are granted (and most are by birth) an upper class status are far more capable of knowing what is good for the masses, then even the masses.
They will 'Hold' the wealth above and release what is needed in necessary increments. Sounds Feudalistic to this Scotch irish descendant.
Free market was devoured by capitolsim in the beginning of the 19th Century. By the '50's Corporations began to devour Capitolists- buy their smaller co's and include or scrape their product - dependent on if it was something new or merely a pesky competitor.When Reagan got in, the party started. It's been an orgy since '94.
How many real recessions have we had since the '70's. Not the ones they never admit, but the ones We have all felt regardless- 3?. MI never pulled really out of the '70's nose dive.
considering just how many people are hurting right now, Mac should consider trashing the rebukes of 'Spreading the wealth'...To those of US down here, below someone like Cindy, it sounds like What EXACTLY needs to happen.
Release the Dam! Bottoms UP!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What do Obama and McCain have to do with Individualism and the Commons?
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Oct 28, 2008 12:19 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have admittedly never been to the site onthecommons.org but this article is way off the mark in my opinion. The commons are the land around us, the water, oil and other natural resources, the air, the electromagnetic spectrum (used for radio, boradcast TV, cell phones, etc).

The commons has nothing to do with education for all or healthcare for all or taxes or redistribution of wealth in the traditional sense.


There are certain things that were here long before humankind existed, those things are the commons.


Trying to twist arguments for the commons into support for universal health care, education and any other 'take from everyone to benefit a few' plan has nothing to do with the commons.

It is the same type of argument, the common good, many cultural conservatives use to justify keeping drugs, prostitution, assisted suicide, etc illegal.


What happened to freedom? Civil freedom and economic freedom? Or are those quaint relics from a bygone era now to be replaced with communism?


P.S. Alternet, do you really think anyone buys that you do not support Obama? If all the writers whose articles you publish and carry are pro-Obama, how are you not pro-Obama? That's like having multiple priests serving a church and the priests being pro-Obama, talking up Obama at Sunday services and yet the church releasing a press release saying they do not support any specific candidates in order to keep their 501c3 designation. Gimme a break.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Root word
Posted by: Axiom69 on Oct 28, 2008 12:48 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And you can hear elements of a common-based society when he talks about offering health care for all, about revising tax policy for the benefit of middle-and low-income families, about finding a way for qualified students to attend college."

There is another name for "a common-based society". Just because you put a different name on it doesn't mean it isn't the same product.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

trickle down economics do not produce jobs
Posted by: l_double_e on Oct 28, 2008 12:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The erroneous belief that giving huge tax breaks to the wealthy will result in an increase in employment is patently false. Most of the people in the top five percent work for established businesses or government. Those who do start businesses do not use their own money, they incorporate, or form limited liability corporations to protect their money incase the business fails. They secure financing from banks or venture capitalists and then prey on small or medium size towns, trying to get the best tax incentives or other financial perks. So this belief that providing more tax relief for the wealthy will result in increased employment or a larger pie is just wrong. Look at John McCain the third's take on Joe the plumber. McSame claims that under Obama's tax plan, Joe won't be able to buy the business and create more jobs. i thought joe was the single employee. if he buys the company, he'll hire his replacement. there is no plural there, one job (although if the original owner has his retirement invested in the market, it may be some time before he decides to sellout to poor ol'Joe). you want jobs, there are jobs in green energy, but that discussion is for other times.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reasons to Reject Republicans
Posted by: metamind on Nov 2, 2008 4:05 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NEVER vote Republican. The Republican party is a criminal conspiracy!

See http://stevemoyer.us/reason for many more reasons to reject Republicans

I created a "Reject Republicans" search engine at : http://tinyurl.com/rejectrepublicans

Let's get these evil people out of government once and for all. Make them go away.

NEVER vote Republican. Then we can do some good for the world.

Teach virtue and Reject Republicans because Republican have lost their virtue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]