The Illusion of the Saviors:
A Comparative Analysis of Barack Obama and Kamala Harris

Chris Spencer

The political astroturf of the United States has been fractured by figures described as "saviors." The political careers of Barack Obama and Kamala Harris epitomize that trend in clay-feet "gods" and "goddesses." Both have cultivated public personas hinged upon metaphors of "hope and change" through their respective legal and political backgrounds. Their actions and decisions often conflict with their rhetorically stated ideologies. This analysis concludes that neither was a savior but rather a manipulator of identity and race politics within a framework that substantiates state overreach and erosion of civil liberties.

The Spiritual Lens: Obama as a Savior

Before the 2008 election, Barack Obama positioned himself as a transformational leader. His eloquence and charisma attracted a diverse electorate, leading many to see him as a messiah who would rescue them from the socio-political perils of the Bush era. His campaign emphasized hope, solidified when he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, symbolizing worldwide expectations for his leadership.

However, Obama’s presidency was rife with contradictions. His administration often undermined the promise of progressive idealism, as seen in the violent suppression of the Occupy Wall Street movement—a stark contrast to his advocacy for social justice. The 'Disposition Matrix' for drone strikes raised ethical concerns regarding due process.

Despite rhetoric around hope and change, Obama’s presidency escalated statism. Increased NSA surveillance and military interventions contradicted his proclaimed ideals, leading to a normalization of processes that infringed upon civil liberties, particularly targeting Muslim communities.

Kamala Harris: A Similar Trajectory?

Kamala Harris's rise shares similarities with Obama's. Both are lawyers and served as District Attorneys and Attorneys General. Harris's firm stance on law and order raises uncomfortable questions about its implications for marginalized communities. Her vice presidency was framed through an identity politics narrative—her identity as the first woman Vice President of South Asian and African American heritage was touted as a milestone, resonating with those seeking representation.

Yet, like Obama, Harris's past prompts skepticism regarding her alignment with progressive ideals. Her tenure as Attorney General faced criticism for decisions related to mass incarceration and criminal justice reform, raising questions about her commitment to genuine change.

Playing with Identity and Race Politics

Both Obama and Harris have adeptly utilized identity politics to craft their savior narratives, masking the disconnection between their actions and moralistic rhetoric. Obama's presidency fostered neoliberal economic policies that disproportionately benefited the ruling class, while his military actions, including drone strikes, starkly contradicted his image as a peace advocate.

Similarly, Harris's embrace of identity politics fails to address systemic injustices. Critics argue her policies perpetuate oppression and erode civil liberties, particularly in her reluctance to confront police misconduct and her support for harsh sentencing.

A Troubling Continuum

Harris's trajectory suggests she may perpetuate the trends established during the Obama administration. The Disposition Matrix highlights a governance approach emphasizing efficiency over ethics. As Harris ascends in power, accountability and transparency remain pressing concerns amid increasing state security measures that jeopardize civil liberties.

As Vice President, Harris has likely inherited policies reinforcing state security at the expense of civil liberties. This trajectory normalizes militarized domestic policing and drone strikes abroad, obscuring the implications of such policies for marginalized communities.

The careers of Obama and Harris reflect a troubling pattern in American politics. Framed as saviors, their actions underscore issues of identity and race politics, often overshadowing the real impact of their governance. While Obama’s presidency inspired hope, it ultimately revealed disquieting contradictions. Harris’s public persona raises critical questions about her progressive ideals.

The narratives of salvation mask the realities of governance, where power consolidation and meaningful reform are essential. Citizens must scrutinize the actions of their leaders to hold them accountable for justice and transparency in governance.

National Security Agencies Involvement

Barack Obama and Kamala Harris have had complex relationships with national security agencies, impacting civil liberties.

During Obama’s presidency (2009-2017), he navigated a complicated security landscape post-9/11. He sought to balance national security with civil liberties, promoting the USA Freedom Act to limit NSA overreach. However, these measures often felt inadequate.

Harris, in her roles, has emphasized collaboration between intelligence and law enforcement while advocating for civil rights, reflecting the dual nature of her position within a framework of state authority.

Together, Obama and Harris embody a continuum of U.S. national security policy that prioritizes security while neglecting civil liberties, further eroding public trust in governance. There is a pressing need to critically assess the effectiveness of their governance in achieving true reform rather than relying on their public personas, genders and colors..

Male Suicide Statistics and Systemic Causes

Recent statistics reveal a troubling trend in male suicides in the U.S., with men accounting for approximately 75% of all suicide deaths, translating to over 36,000 annually. From 2020 to 2024, these rates have continued to rise, particularly among middle-aged men (ages 45-64), who face the highest risks. The most common methods include firearms, suffocation, and poisoning, highlighting a severe and ongoing crisis.

Several systemic factors contribute to this alarming situation. Mental health stigma often prevents men from expressing vulnerability or seeking help, leaving many untreated for significant mental health issues. Economic stress, job loss, and other socioeconomic challenges can exacerbate feelings of hopelessness. Additionally, social isolation is prevalent, especially among older men, who may struggle to find support. Traditional notions of masculinity further inhibit open discussions about emotions, compounding the issue.

While the women's liberation movement has advanced gender equality, the mental health crisis among men requires urgent attention and collective action. It’s crucial to focus on creating a society that prioritizes mental health awareness and provides robust support systems for everyone.

Now is the time to call on our leaders, communities, and support networks to unite in addressing this crisis. Together, we can foster an environment where all individuals feel empowered to seek help, share their struggles, and find hope in the face of despair.

Sources:

Ball, J. (2013). The USA Freedom Act: A New Approach to Government Surveillance. Harvard Law Review.

Blum, A. (2015). The Obama Doctrine: American Power in a Post-American World. Foreign Affairs.

Gartner, R. (2013). The Ethics of Drone Warfare: A Framework for Analysis. Ethics & International Affairs.

Pérez, A. (2020). Kamala Harris: A Political Biography. The Political Quarterly.

Shakur, A. (2020). The Politics of Race and Identity in the Age of Harris. Race and Justice.