Intelligent, pragmatic thought often articulates a flexible ideal from which, working backwards, one attempts to shape practices and conditions so that the ideal might be achieved. Of course, various contingencies arise in experience and there are various conditions over which one has no control. So, the ideal may evolve as we move along, as well as our practices. This dynamic relationship between ideals and practices is a mutually informing one. John Dewey called such ideals "ends-in-view," and long argued that ideals may otherwise become static, harmful, and unachievable fantasies, the absolutes of our futures instantiated in fantastical presents. Practices that resist reconstruction through the articulation of new ideals can also become intransigent absolutes upon which intelligence cannot flourish when encountering contrary conditions in experience.
This little preamble notwithstanding, I have a question. Who is your ideal candidate for President of the US?
I mean ideal. I have nothing against Hillary Clinton, for example, but her actual political positions as well as her political gamesmanship puts me off. I also don't think she can win a general election. Obama is a good one, but he's also a bit conservative for my tastes and, practically speaking, he is not ready to be a full-fledged candidate.
Who do you think would be an ideal candidate? Fantasize. Let your idealization get the best of you. And then maybe we can work backwards from there to look at questions of feasibility and potential.
11 comments:
I'd want Superman with She-Hulk as vice-president (she's a woman of color). That or Gore & Newsome.
The scary thing is how hard I have to ponder to even come up with a possibility. I think my wife ,Char Jones, would probably be the ideal.No popular candidate does a thing for me.
Is that Newsom the San Francisco mayor?
I know, Troutsky. That's the problem that got me going on this. I mean, all I could come up with was myself. I wouldn't want to do it, but this conclusion prompted me to wonder whether politics is simply about going for the person you think is most like you. Self-governance and all that done vicariously through a kind of narcissistic, masturbatory politics. Yikes.
I like Gore too, really. He's the best guy of the bunch. The smartest, most far-thinking, most real in his robotic kind of way, and a huge improvement over all the other camera-huggers, not to mention the war- and terror-mongers.
But if I fantasize, it comes down to me me me. This is probably really unhealthy. Sick even.
So glad that I clicked to these comments. My sentiments have been pretty well covered here already except, that I am kind of forced to disqualify the best possible candidate, yours truly, because of the stupid citizenship laws of yours. It is shocking, though, that nothing jumps out and thus I also have to go with Gore.
Yeah, Newsom, not "Newsome."
Or maybe Bill Newsome. Makes sense to have a neuroscientist head the Executive.
It's time for the blogger party!
I'm sure we can find political bloggers in every congressional district to run for the House.
We can find blogger experts in every policy category to run the relevent departments.
I nominate Fafblog to be the press secretary.
Personally, though, I'd have to go with me, myself, or I, or maybe someone who really trusts my advice for the big job though.
I like Tony Blair. He is smart, knowledgable, articulate, and engaging. Blair is similar to Bill Clinton but with his libido under control. Now that he is on the way out in the UK he can come to the US become a citizen and run for prez once Arnold gets the constitution changed to accomodate his prezidential ambitions. In exchange we can send Bill to the UK.
I hope that Barack Obama leaves the senate to become governor of Illinois and go on to become a great president.
I think that Oprah could also be a good political leader if she had the calling.
He's not a US citizen, but... the last time I saw both Bush and Kofi Annan on a newscast, the thought that came to me was why can't Kofi Annan be our president?
Liberman-Lieberman 2008!
Joe and Hadassah Lieberman vs.. . .
Oh, never mind. As if there are going to be elections in 2008.
I'm curious about the neuroscientist idea. Tell me more. Like a brains in a vat society?
Kofi Annan? He's certainly a reasonable man. We could use some reason.
Post a Comment