Hide and seek: the “seek” part not working out so well for Obama
In the game of hide and seek he’s playing with the US, Snowden seems to hold the upper hand.
That’s not really because he’s so very clever, or because he has a lot of help from Wikileaks and others (although he does). It’s because, after four and a half years of the Obama presidency, the countries that usually dislike us anyway are every bit as numerous as they were under the nefarious Bush, and now they no longer fear us.
Machiavelli (no dummy, he) famously concluded that for a leader it is better to be feared than loved:
In addressing the question of whether it is better to be loved or feared, Machiavelli writes, “The answer is that one would like to be both the one and the other; but because it is difficult to combine them, it is far safer to be feared than loved if you cannot be both.” As Machiavelli asserts, commitments made in peace are not always kept in adversity; however, commitments made in fear are kept out of fear. Yet, a prince must ensure that he is not feared to the point of hatred, which is very possible.
This chapter is possibly the most well-known of the work, and it is important because of the reasoning behind Machiavelli’s famous idea that it is better to be feared than loved ”“ his justification is purely pragmatic; as he notes, “Men worry less about doing an injury to one who makes himself loved than to one who makes himself feared.” Fear is simply a means to an end, and that end is security for the prince. The fear instilled should never be excessive, for that could be dangerous to the prince.
Machiavelli was focusing more on a leader’s relationship with his own people rather than the international world at large, but the principal is the same.
At this point it’s questionable whether Obama is loved all that much any more, either, out in the big wide world. But no one seems to fear him—except, perhaps, the same reporters who swooned over him, and what they fear is his threatened withdrawal of access to him. The right also fears Obama, of course, for what he has already done and could do to this country.
But the nations of the world at large, fearing consequences from Obama for their actions? Why on earth would they?
Say what you will about Bush, agree or disagree with his foreign policy or his personality, both told other countries that they had something to fear from him and from the US if they stepped out of line. Except for eastern Europe, the world sure didn’t seem to love him, but his threats were not empty, unlike Obama’s—and the world knew it.
When Bush said “you are either with us or against us” he was communicating the concept of allies and enemies against America.
When Obama talks about that, he’s talking about using drones and NSA to control Americans and punish Americans. The world need not worry that his actions are directed against them, per say, unless the world happens to be up against Islamic rebels at least.
Indeed Ymarsakar, we have more reasons to fear BHO than the rest of the world including the jihadists. The contrast between Dubya & BHO is dramatic. I found much to disagree with during Dubya’s 2 terms, but I never doubted his sincere love for America and his deep respect for the office he was privileged to hold. BHO…. well you all know what lurks inside that heart of darkness.
parker,
“The contrast between Dubya & BHO is dramatic . . . .”
In most ways, I consider Obama the anti-Bush; that’s primarily whay he was elected in the first place in 2008.
As for Obama’s euphemistic “leading from behind.” Since that stupid phrase was first used I’ve said: “Leading from behind? We used to have a word for that — cowardice!” Think of Moe as he’s pushing Larry and Curly in front of him: “I’ll lead the way—you go ahead!” It’s pathetic that the basis for a president’s foreign policy should be inspired by the Three Stooges.
So why would any nation in the world fear a coward? Like a bully, Obama is forceful against those who pose no serious threat and those whom he can control (i.e., the American people); in other words, his attempt to exercise power is all domestic — think executive order here. To actual threats, he folds like a cheap suit; his executive orders don’t work so well in Kabul, Moscow or Beijing.
Even an amateur body language reader can pick up on the utter scorn Putin has for Obama. LOL. The other world leaders esp the tyrants are not going to be schooled by a community organizer. Sure they all had some scorn for GW Bush as a *cowboy*. But it was totally different, & thanks to the Western
a *cowboy* is an intriguing individual to the non USA world & not someone they have contempt for. Didn t Putin go to Bush’s
ranch? One on One Bush has good people skills, probably because he had a *classier* up bringing & more self esteem that the *bounced around* Obama.
I think it s great that Putin has Snowden’s back & a spit in the eye for the community organizer, too funny !
” . . . [G W Bush has] more self esteem that the *bounced around* Obama.”
[The armchair psychologist] Clear evidence that self-esteem and narcissisim are not only not the same thing, but in many ways, diametric opposites. Like driving a Porsche that one can not afford, narcissim is a shallow attempt to project a self-esteem which does not exist.