I don't blame Obama. He is a product of the people who elected him. And the people who elected him are the product of mass media and government corruption and propaganda. And the huge government and media entities that mislead people are the products of human nature allowed to go amok in the ways that human nature often go amok. That goes back to greed, need for safety at any cost, being willing to bury one's head in the sand and buy into an alluring illusion provided by big government, etc, etc.
Have some of you read The Naked Ape? It is an old book, by Desmond Morris. I read it a LONG time ago. But as I remember, it talks about the basic human psyche evolving as a tribal animal, with loyalties to the immediate family and tribe (which probably included mostly related individuals, going into the "selfish gene" theory, which makes a lot of sense to me, too). Once people started living in cities and even larger "groups" of countries, we had to stretch our sense of "family" to include ever larger and more diverse members of our extended "family".
It is my belief that the thinking part of our brain has tried to fit this new concept of family into our more primitive, emotional brain that wants to adhere more to the selfish gene theory of loyalty to those who share our genes most closely. And the bigger and more diverse the country's population gets, the more difficult it is for people to resolve the subconscious discord between the two beliefs. I think that huge population, huge corporations, and huge government are, in a way, beyond our more primitive, deep emotional ability to fully comprehend and relate to. So we cope the best we can with the the rational part of our brains. But I believe that means that the darker aspects of human nature, such as greed, can more easily gain the upper hand. For example, people in one state will elect a representative who can bring home the "pork projects". And the voters will rationalize it because the money comes from "somewhere else" - people to whom they have little loyalty, even though they are also Americans. And it goes to their own state or community, to whom they owe more loyalty. And I believe that is why "pork spending" is guaranteed with the system we have now.
I remember reading about the system they had in Switzerland many years ago (I don't know if it has changed now). The article talked about how they governed themselves through a lot of local venues, with a lot of "town hall" type meetings. Because the country was small, without a lot of immigration (at the time), fairly homogeneous and with long standing shared traditions, they had a shared community spirit and loyalty to each other that would probably be impossible to duplicate in modern, large, mobile populations such as found now in the US (and many other countries).
That is why I believe we are where we are. But what is the solution? Good question! Maybe a return of MOST of the power to the states, as the Constitution stipulated? A state is closer to the local communities that people actually live in and care about. If most of the power, money, and important decisions rested with each state, it would be easier for groups of like minded people to influence those decisions. And if a particular state had a large population of conservative, or liberal, or libertarian leaning folks, then that state would become a magnet for more of the same, and the residents there could have more of a shared, tribal loyalty with those of like minds. The Federal government is just too big, and too powerful, no matter WHO is Prez, and no matter WHO is sitting in the Rep and Senate seats. The Feds were never intended to rule over the states and make decisions for them. The Feds were supposed to pretty much just deal with foreign matters and matters BETWEEN the states, and little else. But it is not likely to go back to the basics as decreed by our Constitution. WHO is going to vote for giving up power and money, if they are in the position to do so? Maybe a Vulcan, but not many humans!
