[The Independent, London]

Liberation, France

Obama in the White

House? ... Analyzing

the American Mind

"Americans - subconsciously, of course - won't like having a president named Barack Hussein. That is indeed his name, and they know, even if they also know that they shouldn't mention it, that his origins shouldn't matter. It's in bad taste blaming someone for their origins. But  'Hussein' isn't going away."

By Daniel Sibony, writer and psychoanalyst*

Translated By Kate Davis

February 5, 2008

France - Liberation - Original Article (English)

Can we say that in France, there is a kind of consensus for Obama? Undoubtedly … Just as there was for Al Gore (and for others choices that the United States has not made).  Drat, why don't they listen to “us”?

In discussions here, the choice is unanimous: it's Obama who wins; he's clearly the one who's needed. First of all, he's Black, which is already very good, both for the Yankees he will lead from the White House and for the Whites here who choose him, thereby proving that all involved have an open mind: and more than open: bold and innovative. And then he has promised to raise wages, open universities to the poor, withdraw troops from Iraq, perhaps spending billions - not to revive the economy like the awful Bush wants to do - but to create jobs (yes, funding for job creation: this method works so well here that they need to borrow the money from them). In short, this is a debate with the kind of consensus we'd like to build here and denounce in passing before giving in to it because it's “realistic.”

In fact, Obama has a chance. He's “nice” and he speaks well; his clear and decisive sentences give the public the impression (or the illusion?) of accessibility, a little like Sarkozy but more reserved; accessibility to someone with some punch, who will tackle reality head-on and change it, yes: he's so close, eager to take action, impatient to get going, trim out the soft or worn out parts, the flabby tissue; in his hands it will be pruned, rejuvenated, just like Obama, who has youth to spare. And if there is resistance, he will lay down his more sophisticated tools, and will go at it with his "bared teeth."

Then there are the effects of the subconscious, which could disrupt this conception. There is one such meandering idea which, unfortunately, could stop it: that is that Americans - subconsciously, of course - won't like having a president named Barack Hussein. That is indeed his name, and they know, even if they also know that they shouldn't mention it, that his origins shouldn't matter. It's in bad taste, blaming someone for their origins. But "Hussein" isn't going away.

Certainly, he's not Saddam Hussein, but this is a “recurring” factor, especially when combined with the idea (which is also repressed, but present and active even in its repression) that, as a child, he received a dose of Islamic education. At an age when there is no critical thinking, when things leave a mark on the memory without any “reduction.” This is an established fact, but it's also repressed. However, a bit of reflection will reveal that this is rather a good thing: that if one has a fundamentalist background as an infant which is then buried beneath a layer of “Christian kindness” because he converted, it's possible to have more flexibility with this fundamentalism, a more rounded approach that's less cowboy and more cooperative, more fraternal.

[Editor's Note: According to Barack Obama's biography, while living in Indonesia as a child [1967-1971] he attended Catholic school for three years, and for a year was in an Indonesian public school - not a "madrassa." There in the Indonesian public school, he did in fact learn things about Islam. ]

But the subconscious doesn't think. It sends alarms, it points out risk; its pressure is by definition irrational; and it casts a negative light on the most beautiful of movements. For example the campaign of fraternity on which Obama insists: we are all brothers, for goodness sake … Furthermore, during one of the [French presidential] debates, someone asked ingenuously: when will we have a presidential candidate here who is a minority and who will cause or impose real change? Yes, when? One can guess which minority that is. Let us admire in passing how Sarkozy “satisfied” this wish by putting on his team a superb trio (Rachida, Fadela and Rama- cabinet members). This didn't cost anything, we don't know if this will solve any problems, but it's a nice gesture for dealing with that minority. But getting from there to France having an electable candidate within this minority, it may be necessary to wait.

And so the "American" subconscious will undoubtedly not accept the idea of an Islamic kindergarten education. The catch is that Obama can't point out the advantages of this training in his public discourse, which is supposed to appeal to peoples' awareness and reason. He therefore risks suffering from an irrational caution. Especially if Hillary shows more deftness when she makes allusions, not to this aspect, but to the Black electorate …

So preconscious ideas come to the surface: many will tell themselves that a woman President is, after all, already very innovative. Female presidents, whose numbers are on the rise, will one day be the majority of leaders on the planet. That can't hurt. Of course, our debaters here find Hillary a bit “traditional.” That's because they are very modern, postmodern, contemporary, and harboring a bit of a hard-wired fantasy: the American blonde wrestling deliciously, her legs spread in the air like scissors - in the embrace of a beautiful black man … But is it possible that the rape fantasy in politics, which has largely played out in Europe, is still active over there? And then, all of this is nothing but a vain rumination if the thief, the Republican, takes the prize; if the idea of a Republican is not limited to Bush, and so on. But here we're dwelling on the conscious, even in the superconscious, and that isn't always what dominates politics.

*Daniel Sibony's Latest books: The Challenge of Existence, an analysis of therapies, [l'Enjeu d'exister. Analyse des therapies], Seuil, 2007, and The Psy People [le Peuple «psy»], Points-Essais, 2007.

CLICK HERE FOR FRENCH VERSION

[WORLDMEETS.US Posted Feb. 6 2:35pm]