My book club is finally meeting in real life again since February 2020. The book this month was Michelle Obama’s autobiography Becoming. I feel I can offer some critique based on a political understanding. This is after all a book about politics.
Photo - penguinandrandomhouse
I’m going to propose that Michelle Obama’s autobiography (as well as being a money making venture) is yet another mythological accounting. The purpose being to hoodwink the voters yet again. I’m sure (Manchurian style), Michelle is possibly being held waiting in the wings, despite protestations that she wants nothing to do with politics in the future. Truth or political posturing?
It has been said that politics is show business for ugly people. Well Michelle O certainly breaks the mold, following more in the footsteps of Jackie O for looks and style. Is her autobiography a tale of style over substance too? My book club felt that it was packed to brimming with substance.
A brief historical note.
Michelle was born in 1964. The 1960s were a tumultuous decade in US history. Society was divided over civil rights and the anti-Vietnam movement. These mass movements, that radicalised millions of people, presented a threat to the stability of American capitalism. The US ruling class resorted to a carrot and stick to solution to deal with these threats. Firstly, there was the assassination of several prominent leaders (Malcolm X, Martin Luther King etc) and concessions such as the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Nixon’s gradual withdrawal of US ground troops from Vietnam. However, in the longer outlook, affirmative action programmes were passed into law that aimed to develop a black middle class in the States.
Once society had accomplished that, the next question was then posed. How to translate that into political power. In short, how could a black, middle class, high-earning professional, be accepted as representing all?
From zero to shero
The book goes into extensive detail about Michelle’s early life emphasising the South side of Chicago. Comments were made about how detailed it was. It seems she has made herself out to be quite naive. Politically disinterested, despite her dad’s involvement with the Democrats at a local level.
Michelle's childhood home. Photo - dailymail.co.uk
Available on goodreads there is a lengthy review posted by a non-white man (Arya) citing the many references Michelle makes of her interactions with white people. These are pronounced as she gives her account of a sheltered upbringing.
At the book club scepticism was raised by a few in respect that she went to Princeton unaware that it would be filled with rich white kids. Hmm.
Princeton University - nymag.com
I am also dubious that Michelle got into such a bastion of white privilege without the help of affirmative action. That is why it was passed into law. I can see the political merit of not wanting to admit that you had assistance. It’s an important part of mythologising – the individual heroically overcoming the odds.
Michelle may fear that knowledge of this would undermine her achievements. I can understand that.
Her graduate thesis, which was temporarily withdrawn by the University library during the 2008 election period, concerned itself with her experiences of “Blackness” at Princeton. In it she explored how isolating it can be to be in an all white environment. She wrote that “I based my definition on the premise that there is a distinctive black culture very different from white culture”.
Such blatant discussion of race went in contrary to the political choice to appear as above and beyond race. Republican’s could accuse her interest in blackness and black rights as a sort of reverse racism. Such opinions spilled out on the 2008 election trail when Michelle made the famous remark that she was proud of her country for the first time in her adult life.
It’s not about the money
Part of the myth has been that Obama turned away from making money towards political office (somehow equated to public service). Michelle, burdened at the time with student debt certainly did not turn away from money. Working first for a prestigious law firm and then moving into politics after she became engaged to Barack.
The Obama’s have always appeared as a team to me and one of the surprising talking points that came up in our discussion was the concept that Michelle wasn’t keen on a political career for them. Yet, Michelle introduced her fiancee to political fixer Valerie Jarrett, before she then moved to become assistant to Chicago’s mayor Richard Daley.
Whilst there are legitimate political campaigns they have been involved in, others look as shady as Chicago’s history. Some of the friends that the Obama’s made were questionable. For example, Tony Rezko who was known for regeneration projects (slum clearances and gentrification by other names).
Image - slideshare.net
Following marriage to a youthful Barack, Michelle’s prospects improved as her husband’s political star rose. Over time she sat on the Boards of numerous institutions.
This included the Chicago City University Hospital which was accused of buying political influence. Michelle’s project was to keep poor, predominantly black people, from coming into the ER. She was also on the Board of Tree House (a Walmart Supplier), and who hate unions nearly as much as Walmart.
What is for sure is that by the time Barack had become a US Senator they were living a millionaire lifestyle and living in a millionaire’s mansion.
Michelle is just an ordinary girl.
Michelle’s 2008 campaign speeches rankle - while she was preaching “We have to compromise and sacrifice for one another” and critical of “this is how we are living”. She was living in a millionaires mansion with six beds, four car garage, 1,000 bottle wine cellar, solarium, four fireplaces, library, granite flooring, Honduran bookcases and so on.
Photo - tripsavvy.com
No practical solutions are offered in the speeches. Instead problems in the US are presented at root cause as people being “too cynical”. Michelle, who wears simple outfits on the trail presents herself as just an ordinary working mum shopping at Cloud 9. Michelle O don’t forget with her wardrobe of designer dresses, diamond jewelry and Jimmy Choo shoes.
Michelle O, who in her guise of ordinariness, bemoans the cost of violin and piano lessons for the kids (total $37,000ish). Michelle O who has at the very least a full time housekeeper. It must be nice to have a personal trainer four times a week as well. Michelle O who fly's on private jets with Oprah Winfrey to attend rooftop parties.
Photo - thewire.com
There is much made of the US population being “sick and tired”. In her speeches, there is a strong implication that the process of fixing the so-called “broken souls” of the US people is a painful process which will require sacrifice. “...change is HARD”. Who exactly is being asked to sacrifice here?
The language turns the political campaign into one of an evangelical revival. The mood is of a crusade to fix the country.
Obama is our saviour
Michelle is a practicing Christian. She has had a long relationship with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright. He officiated at their wedding. Barack’s book The Audacity of Hope was inspired by his teachings. However, with his espousal of black liberation theory he became a liability.
Due to public pronouncements like; referring to “the white man”, terrorists as chickens come home to roost, and stating that all politicians lie. Even Oprah Winfrey, another attendee of his church, eventually pulled out and distanced herself from him.
In 2008 David Axelrod is brought on board as the Obama’s spin doctor. He developed the messianic platitudes and empty Utopian soundings with which Barack was presented in 2008 as a saviour. Relying on hope to accomplish through political means what is essentially traditionally framed as religious/spiritual issues; i.e. the “broken souls”.
The press helped build up this Obama mania
Image - thepiratescove.us
with their hugely positive, practically fawning coverage. Michelle urged voters to feel not think.
Our hands are tied
The excuse for Barack Obama’s failure to deliver the change that was promised is due to political hampering from the Republicans.
When considered closely though the Obama presidency was purely symbolic. The Obama’s made great figureheads. Although when you are cognisant that he is lying to the public you can see it in his often pained expression.
Fairly unusually for politicians Michelle and her husband are both good looking and personable. That the US and allies felt positively towards them allowed them the greatest of left covers. Overseeing a further reduction in the standard of living of the majority of the population and a vast increase of wealth for the elite.
For those who have just read a book about Michelle Obama, the book club seemed to be in almost total blankness at mention of her husband's warmongering and drone strikes. I guess the chapter about her husband as the man who authorized hundreds of drone strikes that killed thousands of innocent people didn’t make the final edit.
Photo - theguardian.com
It is now reported that as of 2021 the Obama’s are worth $70 million (probably a lot more).
Some people just can’t seem to get enough of the Obama's. Not only has Michelle written this book she signed a deal with Netflix to cover the book tour. More money in the pot, serving up their version of Hopium.
Addendum
This presentation of Barack as saviour is encapsulated in his being awarded the Nobel Peace prize within months of taking office. Not that he ended any wars. Quite the opposite. He authorized huge troop surges in both Iraq and Afghanistan and the air strikes that turned Libya into a failed state where open air slave markets abound. Obama also embraced the US drone programme, ordering more strikes in his first year than Bush did in his entire presidency. This included illegal drone strikes on Pakistan. Obama’s warmongering includes Syria where the US have been fighting a dirty war that armed jihad head choppers such as Al Qaueda. Not to forget the hidden European war that is being fought in the Donbass region of Ukraine. Plus we shouldn’t forget how Obama gave Saudi Arabia the green light to launch its invasion of Yemen in 2015 which has left millions on the verge of starvation. One of the directors who awarded him the prize has now openly expressed regret.