Monday, January 19, 2009

In Obama Remarks, Theme Of 'Responsibility' Emerges

Chris Bieber just sent this link out and I had to post it before I log off today.

For some reason now I feel like writing a letter to Dear Dr. Etzioni, and asking, "Please Sir. When are Americans going to be told what Obama means by "responsibilty?" Does it mean this:

Who can/will/wants to explain explain to our citizens HOW is it possible that Obama's meaning is the same one "that belonged to outgoing President Bush, who in his 2000 campaign talked about ushering in a "responsibility era."?"

Are Americans asking what these boys mean by "more responsibility?" No? Bummer.

From this morning's Washington Post:
Obama will talk about restoring a sense of responsibility in the country, Gibbs said, conveying his belief that "we need more responsibility and accountability, certainly, in the way our government acts."

"We have to have it, certainly, within many of our financial institutions that sort of have gotten us to where we are in this economic crisis today," Gibbs said on "Fox News Sunday." "Obviously, the American people are going to have to give some."

Rahm Emanuel, the incoming chief of staff, said the "culture of responsibility" would be sought for American leaders as well as the population at large. "We need that culture of responsibility, not just to be asked of the American people, but its leaders must also lead by example," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press." In Obama Remarks, Theme Of 'Responsibility' Emerges Advisers Say Inaugural Address Will Also Stress Accountability, By Anne E. Kornblut Washington Post Staff Writer, Monday, January 19, 2009; Page A04

Whatever happened to the "Culture of Protected Individual Enterprise"? Did it ever exist? How obvious to you is it that we "have to give more?" More of what, exactly?

From the Harvard Educational Review of The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibilities, and the Communitarian Agenda, By Amitai Etzioni, New York: Crown, 1993. 323 pp. $22.00.
"Etzioni demonstrates the value of reframing policy discussions and moral discourse around the connection between rights and responsibilities."

"Although Etzioni's communitarian message is apparent, the normative choices embedded in his plan are not. Specifically, issues of social and cultural diversity, the need to protect the voices of a society's marginal thinkers, and the importance of reflective and critical dialogues are noted by Etzioni in The Spirit of Community, but the challenges they imply for his agenda are never fully explored. When one assesses his broad vision and his educational plan as outlined in chapter three, "The Communitarian School," his inattention to democratic goals becomes clear."

So where does Bush, Obama's and Emanuel's idea of a culture the requires national volunteer service come from? Near the close of the above review, Kahn explains:
"It frequently seems as though individuals believe it is their right to decide whether or not to be responsible, and Etzioni helps us understand the costs of this orientation. He proposes, for example, that all youth perform a year of national service after high school as an "antidote to the ego-centered mentality," as a means of providing meaningful social service, and as "a grand sociological mixer . . . for developing shared values and bonds among people from different racial, class, and regional backgrounds" (pp. 113–114)."

This is the same requirement of youths living in Etzioni's home, the state of Israel. Of course in Israel, mandatory public service has nothing to do with developing bonds with the Palestinian residents who "share" their homeland with the European Zionists.

And Constance Cumbey just sent this, wow, it appears a lot of us are paying attention to the developments in DC.. not to the celebrations but what they're really celebrating.
"A day away from becoming the nation's 44th president, Obama visited 14 injured vets from Iraq and Afghanistan at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Then he visited Sasha Bruce House, a shelter for homeless teens in the District of Columbia, chatting with volunteers who were helping to repaint rooms and then pitching in himself.

"We can't allow any idle hands. Everybody's got to be involved," Obama said. "I think the American people are ready to do that."


Ted said...

The question is not IF there will be an interdiction of Obama’s Presidency by the Supreme Court, the questions are WHEN and HOW that interdiction will transpire — that is, if the USA is to continue as the Constitutional Republic that now exists.

Anonymous said...

More responsibility means less freedom for us. It means that everyone is responsible for everyone else. It's everyone's responsibility to be in others business. It takes a village don't you know. It's everyone's responsibility to care for the "communities" children or catch the speeder or get the license plate of the one who ran the red light. It's everyone's responsibility to prevent terrorism so snoop and snitch on your neighbor's if they are not doing what they are supposed to do. The police are not required to manage the population and they are there to make sure you follow the herd mentality and do what your told. They are no longer serving the people but serving the state.

It is exactly what I described in my testimony about everyone taking on the responsibility of doing things themselves instead of the old system of centralized authority. It was no longer "my" responsibility to make sure things were done right with the computer system as the manager or organizational administration but it shifted to the individual giving them "empowerment' but it was actually less freedom because behavior is controlled in the communitarian system.

I was brought up to mind my own business and I will continue to do so. I reject this system. I will not be forced to "serve" my commune-ity. I will not answer any questions about my skills. I am a resistor.

My service to my fellow man is something that comes from my heart and it is my will and choice to do it when I want to not when the state tells me I must!!!