The Doctrine of Insufficient Adulation
There is a group of Obama supporters who take their passion for his candidacy to such an absurd level that it makes me a bit uncomfortable.
Now, I'm not referring to the supporters who are in awe of Obama. Its a cliche by now that some folks hold Obama in such a high esteem that they view him as the second coming. I can appreciate the excitement and hopeful enthusiasm of those supporter.
The types of people who make me cringe are the ones who refuse to acknowledge any of Obama's mistakes or shortcomings. These supporters jump on any news story or blog entry that attempts to be objective by addressing Obama's strengths and weaknesses. The authors are accused of showing a partiality or being an unabashed Hillary supporter.
In Farhad Manjoo's book True Enough he describes the type of enthusiasm these Obama supporters display this way... "They care little for honest opinion. They want to pick up the paper and
see in it a reflection of their own nearly religious zeal for the thing
they love. They don't want a review. They want a hagiography."
The problem with having such an absolute devotion to all things Obama is that it strikes people who respect Obama, in spite of his liabilities, as creepy and irrational. He stands a great chance of winning the election in November and he will do so in spite of the fact that he is imperfect. Going after anybody who acknowledges those imperfections will not guarantee Obama victory, it will just undermine the credibility of his supporters.
www.greenpieceblog.com
Not to detract from Manjoo (the book is pretty good, "True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society" is the full title) but this type of enthusiasm is not exactly a previously ignored topic starting from, well, religious hagiography. Countless treatises have been written, whether viewing it as a psychological or sociological issue. For several hundred years now. There is the corollary, too, of those who have similar zeal but in hatred of a person.
Anyway, these types of supporters appear in all circles. They are found in all campaigns and all causes. For you to latch on only Obama supporters as displaying this unfortunate trait is the rather more interesting psychological case study here.
Perhaps your next book could be Freud or Peter Gay. If you desire fare a bit rarer, try Ludwig Feuerbach.
March 18, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
As the blogger was speaking from the POV of an Obama supporter, perhaps you missed their point.
In fact, you may want to review your reading as what you managed to accomplish was verifying the bloggers point rather loudly.
Amusing, actually.
March 18, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I must have missed the point too, then. Sounded to me like roo_P was absolutely on target.
Actually, I also missed the part about the blogger speaking from the POV of an Obama supporter. Where in the post is that? Where not in the post, for that matter?
Anyway, if I'm reading roo_P correctly the point is similar to this:
Don't you suspect that a certain percentage of all supporters (of anyone who has a sufficiently large following) are just 'supporters,' some 'followers,' and a smaller percentage, cheerleaders or, over-enthusiasts? Isn't that human nature? I don't know that it has anything to do with Obama.
In this case, I've heard all about the scary Obama supporters before, haven't seen any, haven't seen any scary Hillary supporters either. Yes, I've seen a fair amount of both.
I was at the Texas primary and caucus votes (volunteering for hours), no real problems (other than frustration with the wait). The Obama supporters were awesome, and very positive. The Hillary folks were fine, too. Most people were a little nervous, but we got over it -- we split the roles between camps, we got along, and there we no problems.
In any case, this is just argument by exaggeration by rumor: It is “a cliche by now that some folks hold Obama in such a high esteem that they view him as the second coming.” Is there any reason to take this, or Manjoo, seriously?
March 18, 2008 11:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me explain in just a little more detail what I was thinking when I wrote the post.
When I made the comment about Obama's supporters seeing him as the second coming, it was meant to be a tongue-in-cheek jab at some of those who make this silly observation. I just wanted to make sure that anybody reading the post who really likes Obama but knows he has faults, just like anyone, knows I don't take issue with their support.
Although I agree that there are always supporters of any cause who are blind to the liabilities of that cause, I wanted to take the opportunity to tell Obama supporters who have absolute blindness to his imperfections that having such a view is not helpful to Obama's cause.
Preaching the idea that Obama is perfect and without fault sets a standard for his candidacy that is unattainable. When he, understandably, makes a mistake, it will only disappoint and disenchant anyone who was expecting perfection.
Propelling Obama to the White House on this notion that he is right about everything, that he makes no mistakes, or that he has perfect judgment, will be propelling him under false pretenses. I want the real Obama to be President, not a fictionalized version of him.
Finally, there is a risk in spreading the idea that Obama is without fail. It places upon him a piousness or self-righteousness that is neither accurate nor helpful.
So I just wanted to clarify. To SectarianSofa, I think I may have mislead you in the way I wrote the post. Manjoo, when he made those comments, wasn't referring to Obama supporters. Funny enough, he was referring to Apple Computer fans. I just thought it was appropo.
March 19, 2008 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink