There’s an interesting column in Foreign Policy I commend to anyone trying to make sense out of the realignment going on in the Democratic and Republican parties. With former president George W. Bush firmly entrenched in the public’s mind as a neoconservative nation-builder, President Barack Obama did what most political opponents do – adopt the opposite strategy.
Thus, we’ve got a Commander-in-Chief who looks and sounds a lot like former president George H. W. Bush, the highest ranking member of the foreign policy “realist” school. To my lights, foreign policy realism is shorthand for “The world is a really dangerous place run by a lot of bad people. Since there’s nothing we can do to change it we might as well make nice with some of the friendlier dictators.”
Perhaps that notion is correct; at least in general. Such a view of the world helps explain why President Obama can’t seem to summon his emotions when pro-democracy marchers are killed in the streets of Tehran. Bad people do bad things, but hey; it could be worse.
But while Jacob Heilbrunn’s Foreign Policy article does a nice job of recounting the ebb and flow of Realism’s popularity with Republicans, he seems to miss a more obvious point about the kind of politician who would be attracted to the philosophy. Consider the presidents Heilbrunn identifies as fans: Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, George H. W. Bush, and now Barack Obama. Their commonality? Each president is motivated by pessimism about the world around him.
Eisenhower’s most memorable speech was his farewell address warning about a military-industrial complex. Nixon had enemies’ lists. Bush didn’t see the value of “the vision thing” and preferred to talk shop with elites instead of connecting with everyday citizens. And then there’s Obama. He might be the most negatively-oriented president we’ve had since Nixon. The reason America needs “Hope” and “Change” is because everything is currently broken. Besides, who are Americans to lecture the world on morals when it’s so obvious to Progressive faculty members that the United States is probably at fault for their problems?
Foreign policy realism may be a necessary corrective to neoconservative empire-building, but realism’s lack of popularity doesn’t mean it is right; just that if offers an unsatisfying view of the world.
CFIF on Twitter
CFIF on YouTube