Of course, Obama is a result of some of the changes undergone by the American public, but it was more likely the realization that continuing along the lines set by George W. Bush would be extremely wrong that defined the election of Obama. And thus, while the US public might -- as a rule of thumb -- understand and approve of the basic mentality driving the new US president, it is not actually all that clear what sort of world Obama will really want.Turning to look at Europe, the situation is even worse because in European Union countries, the real problem, more than simply a lack of information, is the emergence of masses of people who have embraced an authoritarian mentality and who are closed off to the external world. Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel are, like Obama, each a result of changes. But the recent Dutch elections show us that the true dimensions of ideological conservatism really run much deeper. We are in the midst of an era when Europeans, facing a future they are unable to control, are once again winking their eyes at fascist inclinations. The real problem lies not with the percentage of factions that are actually racist, but with those Europeans who call themselves “liberal” and “freedom supporting,” while also longing for the kind of order promised by racism.
It might have been possible to see this trend in the world of the past century as simply a temporary glitch. But the societal trend we are talking about today really indicates that in fact Europe will be, at most, a “secondary” power for the foreseeable future because what Obama has been able to see is something no European leader has been able to see yet and there is no European society that has yet been able put anyone like Obama into politics.
But what is really “new” about the US president? First of all, there is the fact that he views the world not through the perspective of American norms, but through universal principles.
Traditional US policy has been to label all the real “values” in the arena of rights and freedoms “American values” and to then invite others to embrace these values. Of course, this viewpoint brought alongside it the unspoken but understood provision that neither the US nor its norms were to be criticized. It also meant that in order to possess the correct values, it was necessary to resemble America and American citizens. To put it another way, US policy prior to Obama was reflective of an extremely positivist and authoritarian mentality. It was a perspective that, because it was busy defending democracy itself, ignored and overlooked its own deflective style, as well as the undemocratic signals it was giving off. These days, Europe is still a representative of this kind of viewpoint on the world. The criteria required by way of EU membership have brought about an imbalance in the mental states of Europeans. True membership in the EU of course mandates harmony with EU norms. But Europeans seem to interpret these EU norms as being European-ness itself when in fact, if you examine the general mentality of Europeans today, it is quite doubtful that they are in harmony with these EU norms -- which is where the newness of Obama comes in. In his speech in Cairo, he delivered a message with the words “America does not presume to know what is best for everyone,” placing universal norms that need to be followed above US ideals, meaning that finally, in light of those universal norms, it becomes possible to criticize and change America. This is a stance from which Europe is still quite far removed.
The second new dimension that is introduced along with Obama is the understanding that change applies to everyone and that everyone is an addressee in this conversation to the extent that they approach these universal norms. This is a US president who is about to say, “Hamas has responsibilities,” and who can assert that he will speak with Hamas provided they stop committing violent acts. To put it another way, this is a US president who has declared his willingness to allow everyone to transcend their past performances, and who has said he is ready to create a new relationship with those who do transcend the past. To wit, in the same Cairo speech, Obama said this in regards to another ancient “adversary” of the US: “The question, now, is not what Iran is against, but rather what future it wants to build.” Obama, who has recognized Iran's rights to possess nuclear power for peaceful purposes, appears aware that he will not be able to build the future on his own and is therefore aware of just how critical acting “in unity” is and that his own personal style will be defined during the coming period. And so, yet another point that Europe has to understand is the hopelessness of Europe's own immigrant policies and that its desires to see assimilation occur underscore the fact that it has not been able to bring about “unity” even within itself.
In the end, we must recognize that the new stance brought in with the Obama presidency is actually the necessity of realism. The global world we inhabit does not allow for any one nation or society to solve problems on its own. What's more, those who believe they can tackle these problems on their own appear poised to sign off on even larger problems. Obama is aware of all this, but there are no leaders in Europe who appear to possess the same level of understanding. Or perhaps European leaders who do possess this level of understanding just don't get the opportunity to be effective within the political arena.
While Obama's Cairo speech appeared to be addressing Muslims, it seems that in fact its real target was not only the factions in the Western world who still have not grasped the needs of the world, but in particular, Europe. In this sense, Obama's statement that he rejects “the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal” was a natural result of his viewpoint. On the other hand, Obama created a balance to the first statement by also saying, “I do believe that a woman who is denied an education is denied equality.” But in Turkey -- where, as we already know, the real demand for education in the conservative community comes from headscarved women -- Obama's words on this front were not seen as a balancing act, but rather an even more strengthened call for freedoms. As for Europe, it remains still at the very beginnings of the thought process on this whole topic. It still appears unclear that it will only approach the embrace of universal norms and values to the extent that it is able to express itself with a democratic mentality. Europe needs to change, and for this to occur, it needs to return to its older tradition of self-criticism. Maybe what Obama really needs to do is go deliver a speech somewhere in Europe.
