Jan 21, 2010
Looking back at President Obama's first year in office, The Nation
asked members of its community to give their assesment of his performance. You can share your take on Obama's highest and lowest moments in the
form provided here. Here is historian Howard Zinn's response:
I've been searching hard for a highlight. The only thing that comes
close is some of Obama's rhetoric; I don't see any kind of a highlight
in his actions and policies.
As far as disappointments, I wasn't terribly disappointed because I
didn't expect that much. I expected him to be a traditional Democratic
president. On foreign policy, that's hardly any different from a
Republican--as nationalist, expansionist, imperial and warlike. So in
that sense, there's no expectation and no disappointment. On domestic
policy, traditionally Democratic presidents are more reformist, closer
to the labor movement, more willing to pass legislation on behalf of
ordinary people--and that's been true of Obama. But Democratic reforms
have also been limited, cautious. Obama's no exception. On healthcare,
for example, he starts out with a compromise, and when you start out
with a compromise, you end with a compromise of a compromise, which is
where we are now.
I thought that in the area of constitutional rights he would be better
than he has been. That's the greatest disappointment, because Obama went
to Harvard Law School and is presumably dedicated to constitutional
rights. But he becomes president, and he's not making any significant
step away from Bush policies. Sure, he keeps talking about closing
Guantanamo, but he still treats the prisoners there as "suspected
terrorists." They have not been tried and have not been found guilty. So
when Obama proposes taking people out of Guantanamo and putting
them into other prisons, he's not advancing the cause of constitutional
rights very far. And then he's gone into court arguing for preventive
detention, and he's continued the policy of sending suspects to
countries where they very well may be tortured.
I think people are dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to
begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre
president--which means, in our time, a dangerous president--unless there
is some national movement to push him in a better direction.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
© 2023 The Nation
Howard Zinn
Howard Zinn (August 24, 1922 - January 27, 2010) was a historian, playwright, and activist. Howard authored many books, including "A People's History of the United States," "Voices of a People's History" (with Anthony Arnove), "A Power Governments Cannot Suppress," and "You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train: A Personal History."
Looking back at President Obama's first year in office, The Nation
asked members of its community to give their assesment of his performance. You can share your take on Obama's highest and lowest moments in the
form provided here. Here is historian Howard Zinn's response:
I've been searching hard for a highlight. The only thing that comes
close is some of Obama's rhetoric; I don't see any kind of a highlight
in his actions and policies.
As far as disappointments, I wasn't terribly disappointed because I
didn't expect that much. I expected him to be a traditional Democratic
president. On foreign policy, that's hardly any different from a
Republican--as nationalist, expansionist, imperial and warlike. So in
that sense, there's no expectation and no disappointment. On domestic
policy, traditionally Democratic presidents are more reformist, closer
to the labor movement, more willing to pass legislation on behalf of
ordinary people--and that's been true of Obama. But Democratic reforms
have also been limited, cautious. Obama's no exception. On healthcare,
for example, he starts out with a compromise, and when you start out
with a compromise, you end with a compromise of a compromise, which is
where we are now.
I thought that in the area of constitutional rights he would be better
than he has been. That's the greatest disappointment, because Obama went
to Harvard Law School and is presumably dedicated to constitutional
rights. But he becomes president, and he's not making any significant
step away from Bush policies. Sure, he keeps talking about closing
Guantanamo, but he still treats the prisoners there as "suspected
terrorists." They have not been tried and have not been found guilty. So
when Obama proposes taking people out of Guantanamo and putting
them into other prisons, he's not advancing the cause of constitutional
rights very far. And then he's gone into court arguing for preventive
detention, and he's continued the policy of sending suspects to
countries where they very well may be tortured.
I think people are dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to
begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre
president--which means, in our time, a dangerous president--unless there
is some national movement to push him in a better direction.
Howard Zinn
Howard Zinn (August 24, 1922 - January 27, 2010) was a historian, playwright, and activist. Howard authored many books, including "A People's History of the United States," "Voices of a People's History" (with Anthony Arnove), "A Power Governments Cannot Suppress," and "You Can't Be Neutral on a Moving Train: A Personal History."
Looking back at President Obama's first year in office, The Nation
asked members of its community to give their assesment of his performance. You can share your take on Obama's highest and lowest moments in the
form provided here. Here is historian Howard Zinn's response:
I've been searching hard for a highlight. The only thing that comes
close is some of Obama's rhetoric; I don't see any kind of a highlight
in his actions and policies.
As far as disappointments, I wasn't terribly disappointed because I
didn't expect that much. I expected him to be a traditional Democratic
president. On foreign policy, that's hardly any different from a
Republican--as nationalist, expansionist, imperial and warlike. So in
that sense, there's no expectation and no disappointment. On domestic
policy, traditionally Democratic presidents are more reformist, closer
to the labor movement, more willing to pass legislation on behalf of
ordinary people--and that's been true of Obama. But Democratic reforms
have also been limited, cautious. Obama's no exception. On healthcare,
for example, he starts out with a compromise, and when you start out
with a compromise, you end with a compromise of a compromise, which is
where we are now.
I thought that in the area of constitutional rights he would be better
than he has been. That's the greatest disappointment, because Obama went
to Harvard Law School and is presumably dedicated to constitutional
rights. But he becomes president, and he's not making any significant
step away from Bush policies. Sure, he keeps talking about closing
Guantanamo, but he still treats the prisoners there as "suspected
terrorists." They have not been tried and have not been found guilty. So
when Obama proposes taking people out of Guantanamo and putting
them into other prisons, he's not advancing the cause of constitutional
rights very far. And then he's gone into court arguing for preventive
detention, and he's continued the policy of sending suspects to
countries where they very well may be tortured.
I think people are dazzled by Obama's rhetoric, and that people ought to
begin to understand that Obama is going to be a mediocre
president--which means, in our time, a dangerous president--unless there
is some national movement to push him in a better direction.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.