Smiley Face

In a discussion the other night it was noted that much disagreement centers on differing views of human nature, often the old Hobbes vs Rousseau debate. I just ran across this essay by James Quinney over at New Left Project:

"In essence, the Hobbesian position has proved popular not because of it's scientific rigour- which as we have examined is at the very least highly contested- but precisely because it rationalizes and perpetuates an inequality in social power that is integral to capitalist societies."

Quinney, an anthropologist,cites much research on cooperative indigenous societies and makes a good case. Meanwhile ,Chantel Mouffe, in her book Return of the Political, is willing to "acknowledge that the 'state of nature' in it's Hobbesian dimension can never be completely eradicated but only controlled..." She sees antagonism as a good thing, to be channeled into political struggle lest it devolve into ethnic, nationalist or religious conflict where ones adversary to contend with becomes ones enemy to destroy.

"Far from being the necessary result of a moral evolution of humankind, democracy is something uncertain and improbable..It is an always fragile conquest that needs to be defended as well as deepened. There is no threshold of democracy that once reached will guarantee its continued existence. Democracy is in peril not only when there is insufficient consensus and allegiance to the values it embodies, but also when it's agonistic dynamic is hindered by an APPARENT EXCESS of consensus..."

So when Obama goes to the Chamber of Commerce and says he wants everyone to just get along, labor, capital, government,all one big happy family, he is proposing just this very EXCESS of consensus. It is false and debilitating and continues hollowing out the last vestige of democracy. Obama knows full well the inherent antagonism and he knows exactly which side he is on.