At Taki’s Magazine Paul Gottfried and Daniel Larison consider the Leninist case for supporting Obama. Gottfried writes, “One can already recognize the mark of this younger generation in the call for punishing the Republicans by supporting Barack Obama in the presidential race. This identifiably Leninist tactic, summed up by the maxim ‘the worst is the better,’ may seem alien to most paleos; but it is the natural response of a younger, less inhibited generation of rightists to an intolerable political situation.”
To the extent that sympathy for Obama on the right represents a “post-paleo” acceptance of “the worse, the better,” I have some hope for the prospects of such a post-paleo movement, though the same argument might be made for a McCain victory that further reveals neocon delusions. If it is, on the other hand, a case of supporting Obama out of the mistaken belief that Obama is, in fact, meaningfully “better,” I think it will have revealed itself to be little more than a faddish pose with no enduring appeal.
I’m not so sure. I don’t believe that Obama will be worse than McCain and he would have to work awfully hard to be worse than Bush. If he gets us out of Iraq and doesn’t start a war with Iran he might turn out to be a halfway decent president. I don’t expect him to act on all of his world saving rhetoric because the military is drained. If he veers hard left or starts sounding like his nutty preacher, which I doubt, then he will destroy his presidency and accomplish very little. That wouldn’t be so bad either.
I’m not giving Obama my support, yet. I could see voting for Barr or Nader, or flying a kite on election day. I might write in Bill Kauffman or Wendell Berry; or even Daffy Duck for that matter.