DENVER–Moving a political convention of 20,000 to a different venue on day four was the easy part. Lifting the weight of that charged day of August 28 was the more difficult task. The lines in front of the Denver Broncos’ stadium, where Barack Obama would accept the Democratic Party nomination, were six miles long; Broncos legendary quarterback John Elway could not have generated such enthusiasm. Who would wait four hours to see an NFL game, as two women in section 517 admitted that they and many others did in a historical moment at the feet of the Rocky Mountains?

As if this set-up was not challenging enough, his Obama’s team scheduled the acceptance speech exactly at the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s legendary address at the feet of another giant–Washington’s Lincoln Memorial. Barack Obama redefined the audacity of ambition by speaking in front of more than 70,000 supporters, at the same time vigorously positioning himself and his campaign within this trajectory of Martin Luther King. Emancipation, gospel, and progressive politics were evoked by timing his larger-than-life venue to be a continuation of the most American of all struggles.

The orchestration of the convention’s last day was close to perfection. Everyone stuck to the script, the surprises were planned, and the emotions calculated. Here the differences with regard to the historical model in 1963 became obvious. Martin Luther King did not stick to his manuscript; instead of referring to the prepared formulation of an”Association for the Advancement of creative dissatisfaction” as written in the manuscript, he started improvising, reportedly at the urging of Mahalia Jackson who had performed immediately before.”Tell them about the dream, Martin,” she is said to have insisted. He responded with his legendary, iconic, and Jazz-like rifts that became part of American political heritage:”I had a dream,”"seen the mountaintop,”"free at last”.

Forty-five years later, everything is scripted to the very end. The aversion toward improvisation and the controlled audacity possibly found its most telling expression in decreed abstinence–not even Colorado-brewed Coors Light was sold in the stadium, a form of responsible redeployment of fun.

There were many historical analogies and comparisons being made to transform Barack Obama into a transcendental figure. It was mentioned that, if he were to be elected, he would be the third U.S. President from Illinois after Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses S. Grant. Al Gore was even more explicit and described the candidate as someone capable of reaching past political divides and thus reaching a”common humanity.” Such idealization can be a trap. Fittingly, the new stadium of the Denver Broncos was inaugurated by The   Eagles, the famed California rock band, which in one of their most popular songs described the dilemma that Barack Obama might find himself in when trying to dim the ecstasy that surrounds his person:”You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.”

On the other hand, things have changed so rapidly, that looking back half a decade to the time of Martin Luther King sometimes seems like a journey to a different world. After his 1963 speech above the Reflecting Pool, the Washington Post did not even mention him in the write-up the next day. Later, it was seen as a crucial success that whites and Jews (two different groups back then) had become important supporters of the Civil Rights movement, condoned the inclusion of blacks, and documented the success of the movement.

Today this relationship is inverted: Whites, especially in rural areas are struggling not to be left behind as America moves forward faster and faster. Old modes of thinking are rapidly aging out. On Thursday evening, the historical dynamism and transformative power of the Obama campaign was embodied by scores of Latino teamsters, unionists, and diehard Clinton supporters that rallied to Obama’s support in a deafening way. Barack Obama is forging a new coalition that resembles a 21st century version of Lyndon B. Johnson’s Great Society. But the task is infinitely more complicated today because of the heterogeneity of U.S. society–which is a challenge and a chance at the same time. At that memorable night in August, the crowd in the stadium was so diverse, they could only be addressed as Americans.

(Note: The views expressed above are the author’s alone.)

Share/Bookmark

DENVER–Although the nomination of Joe Biden as the Democats’ vice presidential candidate will dominate the headlines, yesterday was an evening of enlightened internationalism in Denver. A picture was painted of how America would reintroduce itself to the world if Barack Obama is elected in November. And the organizers made sure to leave no doubt that the Armed Forces were the center of attention. Three-star Army General Claudia Kennedy spoke, and so did Iraq war veteran Tammy Duckworth, a helicopter pilot turned activist after she lost both legs in Iraq. Evan Bayh and Jack Reed–two important members of the Senate Armed Services Committee–were also part of the foreign policy battalion.

In a speech that made many in the party nervous before it was delivered, Bill Clinton drew an interesting connection between the historic nomination of a black candidate and the leadership gap in the world. He argued that rebuilding the American Dream also means providing global direction. It is a dream that has no national boundaries, and tests new frontiers by definition.  This reflects the new global realities: U.S. foreign policy is no longer foreign and neither can it be neatly distinguished from domestic issues. (Interestingly, in the American 20th century, after putting a man on the moon, the U.S. ran out of frontiers and had to look for a different galaxy when in need for a”last frontier”–one that was successfully explored by a skilled diplomat and hobby archeologist, Jean-Luc Picard and the crew of Federation flagship Enterprise-D).

But the notion of overcoming frontiers within and without is especially interesting with regard to Obama’s diverse personal background. In the 1920s, when the expansion toward the American West had ended and racial and ethnic tensions were on the rise, the American philosopher Horace Kallen made a fascinating observation: America”was a world all frontier,” he wrote. When external frontiers fade, they can be rebuilt in the interior of a society–the colors of competing national flags are replaced by the color of skin.

So, the presentation of Joe Biden as Mr. Foreign Policy was indeed a home run for the Obama campaign and it served to increase the national security credentials of his presidential ticket. Bill Clinton reaffirmed the point in unexpected clearness:”Barack Obama is ready to lead,” he is”on the right side of history,” his personal achievements”are proof of our continuing progress toward the more perfect union of our founders’ dreams.”

On the other hand, Clinton told of how well the U.S. would work with international institutions and lead the fight against global warming, producing more partners and less adversaries. That’s all good but sounds like a path back to the 1990s. An election campaign might not be the place to undertake the comprehensive revision of American foreign policy in the 21st century, but Clinton–not to mention Madeleine Albright, who had opened the evening–is still thinking in terms of American being the”indispensable nation” it was in the 20th century. That perspective might turn out to be misleading. The world is not about what we like it to be, but the frightening convergence of the global crisis of American (and Western) legitimacy and the impact of the weakness of the American dollar and its reduced relevance for the global economy requires a more thorough reassessment than the promise to get back into multilateral mode. There are good reasons for enlightened internationalists to think about the rapid demise of American power after the end of the Cold War that was supposed to constitute an age of unipolarity but which turned out to be a historical millisecond and a neoconservative illusion.

A new frontier is developing in unforeseen ways. America might have a time window of only one or two decades until other regions of the world gain much greater autonomy and establish their own institutions and rules–a world without the West.

At a book party that same afternoon, former Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta suggested that it might be worthwhile for Democrats to look back to the time when America was”all frontier,” the age of Progressivism, and the presidencies of Theodor Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. If Barack Obama wins and takes on the task that Bill Clinton designated for him to”not allow the world’s problems to obscure its opportunities,” he won’t be able to do so by looking back at the 20th century, because there is no reset button for American leadership. Bill Clinton’s sentence about the”people the world over [that] have always been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power” is a good point of departure for any new administration. But to make this happen, the American president will need to come up with a better idea than to return to more of the same 20th century multilateral strategies.

(Note: The views expressed above are the author’s alone.)

Share/Bookmark

DENVER — When Hillary Clinton wholeheartedly tried to endorse Barack Obama, she did her job, told a compelling story about Harriet Tubman, and still, perhaps instinctively, laid the groundwork for praising herself. Tubman, legendary African-American abolitionist and Union spy during the Civil War, served as apostle for Clinton’s motto”Don’t ever stop. Keep going.” There is a difference though, of being chased by vicious slave owners and being driven by ambition and purpose. What was meant to bridge the gap between the struggle of women and the equality of Blacks could be read, in between the lines, as expression of self-indulgence.

Of course, Hillary Clinton had a point. During the campaign it proved to be easier for Barack Obama not to be seen as”black” than for her not to be seen as”woman.” She had to prove her equality by being tougher than tough and meet higher standards. Ironically, in this sense Hillary Clinton fought the old fight of emancipation, the black struggle. That did not resonate with what she later termed as hard-working white Americans. This tension between black and white within Hillary Clinton might be one explanation for her shift toward openly populist positions during the last part of her campaign. If nominated, she might have won the majority of white, working-class votes for the first time since Lyndon B. Johnson and Franklin D. Roosevelt. Not even Bill Clinton could do that. But winning the majority of the white, working-class vote is not an indication of future-oriented politics. Also, the Democratic party has moved on in the meantime.

The never-ending campaign of 2007 and 2008 has shown very few policy differences between Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and even John Edwards. The reason: Many trench-warfare battles were fought in the 1990′s and have been settled. What might look like the lack of ideas and consistency in message at first glance mirrors a process of comprehensive consolidation within the Democratic Party that started during the Nixon era. The final realignment took place during the eight Clinton years and his politics of the Third Way. It served as door-opener to modernize a party that was still clinging to the politics of the New Deal era, the anti-war protest and the civil rights movement.

Hillary’s problem: The times of LBJ and FDR are over, irretrievably so. Today, electoral success is more often than not bound to an oratory that alerts the most basic feelings of hope or fear. It requires mind-numbing consistency and recurring expressions of disrespect for the”broken system” in Washington as important pillars. When Hillary Clinton started winning the last primaries it was not because she had”found her voice,” as was often said; rather, she had found their voice.

Interestingly, the most contentious and appealing discussion about these implicit conditions of political success took place at the Hispanic Institute, which hosted a debate on”Culture Wars”, discussing how race, gender, ethnicity, religion, and values are impacting the presidential campaign this fall. At last, a discussion with strong disagreements took place in Denver–and in public. Most Democrats on the podium argued that the way toward American unity lay in Barack Obama’s additive personality. The”multi-currents of ethnicity within him will overcome any resentment when people vote,” New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson said. His candidacy had moved the conversation forward, and Americans were”engaged in a progression that addresses racial tension” observed former White House Press Secretary DeeDee Myers.”We will age our way through some of these issues” because young people are different, she continued. The statistics seem to strengthen her case. In less than a year, surveys showed a 20% increase in the number of Americans who would be comfortable with a black President. The previous 20% increase in that number took decades to happen.

The only FDR-style universalist on the stage at the Colorado History Museum was conservative MSNBC commentator Tucker Carlson. He declared that the U.S. indeed is a”less a racist country than we imagine” and that Obama’s election”would be a watershed moment in American history.” For that reason, Carlson called upon Obama to end affirmative action as we know it, because it was based upon ethnic particularities and thus unfair. Carlson did not realize that he was addressing Barack Obama from the standpoint of one of these hard-working white Americans. The Senator from Illinois might not even defend affirmative action, but Hillary Clinton would, because her struggle of adding to the”18 million cracks in the glass ceiling” is closer to the Civil Rights movement than Obama’s rhetoric of change. The two former contenders operate in different political time zones. That’s why the convention has had such a hard time to get going.

(Note: The views expressed are the author’s alone.)

Share/Bookmark

(Note: The views below are the author’s alone.)

DENVER — When José Serrano’s thick Spanish accent of the South Bronx filled Denver’s Pepsi Center on Monday afternoon, his speech was the prelude for a polyglot conversation. Serrano spoke of patriotism, of the need for a”new direction of our great nation.” The original soundtrack sounded like this:”Necesitamos una nueva dirección para nuestra gran nación.” Taking ownership and responsibility for the American dream in a foreign language during a secular mass for the democratic nominee is a remarkable episode. It would be outside of the realm of imagination in any European country–imagine Chancellor Angela Merkel addressing German citizens in Turkish or President Nicolas Sarkozy referring to Frenchmen in Arabic. But in a U.S. presidential election, nothing is impossible and multilingual politics is the call of the day. Young delegates from New York proudly display”Hispanic Voter” stickers and give one press interview after the next. This is not only about diversity and the minority vote, the underlying argument goes far beyond old machine politics and voting blocs. It is about overcoming the fragmentation of political language.

CNN understood the mood of the time and fittingly features the seal of E pluribus unum next to its trademark nameplate. FOX News presented itself more traditionally as”America’s Election HQ.” Coming together is more than a slogan this time. The power of words is supposed to unite Americans, and it also put Barack Obama on track — from being a keynote speaker at the last convention to the candidate of the current assembly.

Jesse Jackson, Jr., Congressman from Obama’s home state of Illinois, laid the groundwork to connect the multilingual mood of the new minority with the most American accent of the oldest minority. It was right to gather this meeting in Denver, he said, because never before had Democrats been so close to the mountaintop that Martin Luther King, Jr., had made a cornerstone of one of his most important speeches. When he said in Memphis in 1968 that”we’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now, because I’ve been to the mountaintop,” he had placed himself at the core of American history. The same is true for Obama, argued Jackson Jr. America needed to be with him for its own sake. Unity and the establishment of a political language that is not fragmented are the tasks of the day, because”this is a country in which we rise and fall together.”

Against this colorful backdrop the theme of (multilingual) unity acquires a new meaning and a new political rhythm. Its exact expression was Carlos Santana’s”Oye Como Va” that rocked the arena at a quarter past seven in the evening. Knowingly or not, the ill Ted Kennedy picked up that thread later that night during an emotional appearance. He could not stand the few minutes it took to deliver his speech, a chair was put behind the lectern. His vigorous endorsement was a concession speech of kinds, the older generation passing its legacy on to a new country. With Ted Kennedy, the old America approves the new, New England looks toward Hawaii for political inspiration. The country moves West and the convention meets in the middle: Denver.”Hope rises again and the dream lives on,” Kennedy proclaimed. He spoke not about his own, but rather his brother’s legacy. If in November Americans elect the first black and not the 44th white president, they will be writing history by breaking with it.

Share/Bookmark

(Note: The views below are the author’s alone.)

DENVER — The Democratic convention takes place in Denver but it begins all over the country. Chicago is one of the many places where people gather and travel to Colorado. As in recent days, the Obama crowd was flying out of Chicago O’Hare yesterday, and United flight 247 was populated by travelers that were a bit more mixed, and a bit more intense than regular air passengers on such routes. Everyone seemed to focus on the days ahead and even the blue and grey airline was announcing via video screen (and old-fashioned beamer) that it proudly supports the city of Denver during the convention that brings over 60,000 visitors to town. The plane had clearly seen more years than the Bush Administration. But its passengers were the people that want to change the country, the crowd on board was different. It was, from front to back of the plane, more female, more black, and younger–in a word, more American than the average business traveler.

Only a few passengers spent the two hours and a few minutes without reading the Washington Post or the New York Times.   The Times’ Sunday Magazine on”Obamanomics,” his economic plan, was particularly popular, closely followed by the Times’ listings of Senator Biden’s positions in”Where Biden stands” on page 23. The mood was sober but focused: This one is not to be lost. After two winnable elections in 2000 and 2004, the crowd on flight UA 247 was unified in winning back the White House.”We gotta be strong” a woman a couple of rows back could be overheard saying, no stumbling and wavering this time. It was as if the lost batons in the U.S. women’s and men’s four-by-100 meter Olympic relay teams were the metaphor of the day: Don’t let this one slip. This election has been a 16-month relay race, and it is closing in on its last leg.

There was also the feeling of being part of history being written. The Chicago Tribune ran a cover story on”What Biden brings,” but most of the metro section featured a sober reminder of that other Democratic convention in 1968. The promise of racial integration that was violently broken back is supposed to be fulfilled in Denver’s Pepsi Center 40 years later. Herein also lies Obama’s dilemma. The weight of fulfilling the American dream (or nightmare, depending upon your perspective) of overcoming the Color Line on his shoulders might break him. If expectations are sky-high, you can fall off a cliff. That’s why the mood has been subdued in recent weeks–people seem to be afraid of their own hopes.

At the airport, thousands arrived in Denver from all over the United States and beyond. The National Democratic Institute runs a major operation for international visitors. Five hundred politicians and observers from all over the world decided to be part of this American moment in Denver. Many more wanted to attend. During the opening reception yesterday evening, the importance of the international outreach was palpable among all the participants. The Democrats take their international visitors dead serious–Madeleine Albright welcomed them to her hometown of Denver, Congressman Russ Carnahan from Missouri talked about his experiences in Europe and the need of cooperation, Nancy Pelosi spoke about the Democratic ticket and Joe Biden’s impact, Howard Dean took his designated role and attacked Republican unilateralism.

The entire event in its cosmopolitan setup was reflecting something new, a change that occurred after the end of the Cold War. This American election has a global dimension, a global audience, and global participants from Senegal to Germany, Vietnam to Chile. As much as it may bother some, this is not only an American vote. There are people all over the world that are concerned about western Pennsylvania moving toward the GOP. And when Barack Obama introduced himself as a citizen of the world in front of a crowd of 200,000 in Berlin, he captured the essence of what has happened. The ending block confrontation and the intervention in Iraq have brought the world closer together and at the same time alienated America from many parts.

On flight 247, as with the convention delegates at large, many want to set this record straight. The attitude is similar to that of the U.S. men’s basketball team during the Olympics: Let’s finally stage a comeback. Denver will give an indication if a similar return for Democrats in the realm of national politics is possible.

Share/Bookmark