Many (most?) folks on the left agree that Obama is the more sensible (or “less crazy”) candidate than McCain, but that Obama is clearly not a leftist candidate. Faced with the choice of Obama versus McCain, rational people will choose Obama, but what is the extent should that be taken? Should rational people campaign for the Democrat candidate (who will always be slightly less destructive than the Republican candidate) every election? Isn’t this at some point perpetuating and enabling a system of the “slightly lesser evil”, thus ensuring that evil continues? Are folks willing to defend themselves to an Aghani who has lost her family due to Obama’s proposed escalation of the occupation there, if he were to become president?
Posted under Politics
This post was written by Jeff Napolitano on October 16, 2008
Great question.
I think the answer is contained within the question “Who do you want to win?”. If its Obama, then helping with the effort, even just a little, is important.
I think the last two elections have shown what happens when the more conservative guy gets into office. A lot of damage is done, and any efforts to move forward are squashed by a made regressive rush into Republican territory. That’s precisely what we are trying to avoid.
With that in mind, if we actively campaign for Obama, it gets us out into a world of Democratic activists, like minded liberals, and people we are working to register/fire up. All of whom are great people to discuss issues and the problem of the lesser evil with. If you go out campaigning for Obama and are honest about where you have misgivings and why you’ve made your choice, you come across as authentic and practical.
So rather than supporting the system, if done correctly, it helps build our way towards changing the system.