Futures Real and Symbolic

[randy_byers]

The neighbor and I went to a community meeting last night concerning the city's proposals for regulating parking in Fremont. This would include putting 2-hour meters in the business district, 10-hour meters on some residential streets, and turning other residential streets, including the one I live on, into Restricted Parking Zones with permits for residents and guests. I'm sorry to see it get to this point, but it certainly would make life easier for us during High Festival days like the Solstice Parade and Fourth of July, when we don't dare drive away from the house because we'd never find parking when we got back. I'm not sure I completely understand the 10-hour metered parking concept, although it seems to have to do with people who work in the neighborhood but don't live there. There was quite a bit of talk about how to manage the people driving into Fremont to drink in the evenings. I had to laugh at the woman who was concerned that this would force them to ride the bus, and she knew she wouldn't want to be on a bus with drunk people.

Afterwards, I caught Michelle Obama's speech at the Democratic convention, starting somewhere in the middle. I got the chills again from the sense of history in the making. As impatient as I get with people who sniff about "the cult of Obama," it's undeniable that there's a symbolic value to the prospect of putting the Obamas in the White House that functions on a pretty deep, non-rational level. That symbolic value isn't simple and is potentially explosive in any number of directions, some of which will no doubt be ugly.

On that symbolic level, I thought Michelle Obama did a great job of just standing in the national spotlight and projecting intelligence, confidence, and charm. It was a little disorienting afterwards to hear a couple of white talking heads on CNN gabbling about how the Obamas have to deal with the fact that they look different from us, and therefore have to convince us that they share our values. Could they have been any more blatantly racist? I mean, yes, of course they could. But the assumptions behind that usage of "we" were pretty mind-blowing. Apparently "we" are all white, and "we" are all scared of people who look different. What must it be like for Donna Brazile to sit there with these people, playing "them" to their "we"? It's one of the reasons that TV news is pretty much worthless to me. Too many puffed up bloviating idiots who do not represent me or *my* values. Bah.

Comments

[randy-byers.livejournal.com]

I just get irritated at the "cult of Obama" frame, but you certainly aren't the only one who uses it! It's everywhere in the blogosphere comment sections too. What the hell, that's politics. I just need to express my irritation occasionally.

This is actually the first time I've ever gotten swept up in the symbolism of a presidential race, so that in itself is pretty disorienting. But this is the first time in my lifetime where it seems possible that a presidential coalition can be put together that doesn't depend on white racists. That's pretty exciting.

[e-compass-rosa.livejournal.com]

My cult of Obama take is directed more at those Obama supporters who are so fervent that they do not tolerate any form of critical analysis of the man or his policies. Critical support is necessary, and without it the progressive movement is likely to collapse into complacency once he is elected (which I do hope happens!). It's the blind adoration that bugs me.

[randy-byers.livejournal.com]

I agree that people let themselves get swept away, but in some ways it's just an expression of how powerless many people feel. Not everybody can be an activist focused on the nitty-gritty of political work. But I don't see much evidence that progressive activists are being subsumed by the Obama campaign. To the contrary, I see a lot of criticism of him from the left and lots of organizing around other goals, including around congressional races like the Darcy Burner campaign up here in Washington.