Follow-up analysis to David Bromwich: A Line in the Sand is Occasionally Useful
I just came across a short article at HuffPo about how Obama has publicly corrected statements made by Biden and Emmanuel regarding Israel and a public health care option, respectively. Bromwich should be praised for catching these easily-overlooked events, but I feel he takes the wrong message from each of these. I infer the following: either (1) Obama is using an internal system of advisement similar to that used by other leaders - particularly Elizabeth I and Louis XIV, whereby his silence and ambiguity on suggested ideas is a valuable tactic, or (2) the Administration is using Biden, Emmanuel, and others to float trial policies, to be reversed or modified based on the response.
Video et taceo - I see, and say nothing
Successful leaders must maintain their relative power over subordinates who are successful and powerful in their own right. In somewhat more open and collaborative environments, a leader must also encourage his or her advisors to offer ideas without either excessive fear or confidence. It's possible to do this by listening, but not committing. This has the added advantage of letting others provide feedback/criticism/suggestions, saving the leader's time and energy for other projects. By the time it does get the leader's ear and attention, the resulting policy or plan will be much more developed and refined than it was when it was first mentioned.
Two historical examples: Louis XIV was famous for saying "We shall see" to any policy suggestion made by an advisor. Queen Elizabeth I had the motto "Video et taceo", or "I see, and say nothing."
By doing so, both were able to remain in power for an extended period of time - quite unusual compared to their contemporaries - by having power centers struggle FOR them, not against them.
Presumably, none of Obama's advisors (with the possible exception of Larry Summers) is trying to undermine the Administration as a whole, or Obama in particular, either to advance their own position and power or because of an overdeveloped ego. Assuming everyone is more or less on the same side, then I would infer that Obama's public corrections are a function of asymmetric degrees of communication - a more nuanced version of "video et taceo".
The Cat's Paw
Another alternative is that Biden, Emmanuel, and others are used to float trial balloon policies in the public. I believe some call this the "cat's paw" approach, named after the La Fontaine fable "The Monkey and the Cat", where a monkey covinces the cat to retrieve chestnuts from a hot oven. The monkey ends up eating all the chestnuts, while the cat is left only with a burned paw.
I'd call this a modified cat's paw tactic, since it's quite possible that the officials used to float policies know they are being used in such a way to preserve Obama's credibility and political capital.
Observers of the policies proposed, re-proposed, and re-re-proposed to combat the recession have noted a preference for floating a rumor or a statement about a policy, gauging the subsequent reaction, then either changing course or pursuing the proposed policy. This might be seen as wishy-washy by some, or even feeble-minded. I'm inclined to think that it's a tactic, and an effective one.
Maybe giving credit where none is due
Of course, it could be due to a simple miscommunication, poorly coordinated policy, or actual disagreements over the proper path. But given that this Administration, appears, so far, to be a bit less chaotic and more organized than, say, the Clinton Administration, I'm inclined to attribute tactical prowess to their actions. At any rate, it's fun to consider how high-level politics might operate.
No comments:
Post a Comment