Kamala Harris, the former Vice President, shocked Stephen Colbert, the host of The Late Show, last Thursday by revealing her frank reason for her absence from public service at the current moment. Although she had just announced that she had retracted her intention to run for governor of California, she reflected on her extended tenure in public service, uttering that ‘Right now, I have no interest in reverting to the system. It appears to be dysfunctional.’
A nominee for the 2024 Democratic presidential race, Harris grudgingly recognized the ‘multitude of virtuous individuals’ within the public sector. She admitted holding a long-standing belief that ‘as delicate as our democracy may be, our institutions should be robust enough to champion and defend our most fundamental values.’ However, witnessing the second term of President Donald Trump, she commented, ‘I am convinced that they are currently insufficiently robust.’ She reinforced her point by adding, ‘At this moment, I don’t wish to return to the system. My aspiration is to roam the nation. I yearn to engage with the people in meaningful conversation and have it be more than just transactional, where I’m begging for their vote.’
Colbert expressed his dismay, ‘Hearing you describe it as dysfunctional, asserting that our systems aren’t adequate, is distressing.’ Harris retorted with a question, ‘But it’s easy to see the reality, isn’t it?’. She went on to dispel any hints of resignation on her part, clarifying that although the system’s state is disappointing, ‘that doesn’t mean we abandon hope.’
She emphasized, ‘Absolutely not. I will always continue in being a part of the struggle, there’s no question about that changing.’ Despite her negative tonality, Harris made an attempt to appear as a steadfast force, determined to fight against the system she vehemently critiqued.
During a later segment of the show, Colbert highlighted the warnings Harris issued regarding possible future actions of Trump, should he win. ‘Although you’re not here to say ‘I told you so’, would you wish to?’ He asked Harris. Responding to this provocation, she reluctantly admitted she had posited accurate predictions of his actions but conceded she never expected the current level of ‘capitulation,’ implying she underestimated the scenario in her ‘ignorance.’
At another point in the conversation, Harris revealed that only months after retiring from her office did she tune into the news because she compared the act of watching herself in the news to ‘self-mutilation’. It underlined her status prioritizing self-preservation and ego over the critical analysis and continuous learning typically esteemed in public leadership positions.
During a lighter moment in the show, Harris also made a jesting remark regarding her husband, former second gentleman Doug Emhoff, who she said ‘dropped the ball’ when celebrating her sixtieth birthday last October. It was only a few weeks before the election, but it seems that even in the smallest personal matters, committed error is not beyond Harris’s sphere of influence.
Overall, Harris provides a disparate view of politics where she stands as an outsider critiquing a system she formerly and notably participated in, a position which raises more questions about her than it provides answers. Her sudden shift to a detached observer who refuses to impact change from within the system, siding instead with the notion of sparking revolution through conversation with the citizens, doesn’t come across as being wholly genuine.
Furthermore, her bleak picture of the democratic systems, especially during Trump’s second term, seems more of a political commentary rather than a valid critique stemming from inside knowledge. It appears driven by personal bias and potential disdain towards the administration in power.
There’s also an ineffable sense of sheer irony and insincerity with Harris declaring her intention of ‘being part of the struggle’ while simultaneously distancing herself from the flawed system. It’s reminiscent of an individual who, while on a sinking ship, declares their dedication to the passengers’ safety but offers no tangible assistance to repair the leaks.
Her self-admitted realization for not anticipating the level of ‘capitulation’ to President Trump suggests an inability to accurately evaluate scenarios and predict outcomes, a vital trait for political leaders. It insinuates a certain naivety on her part, undermining her qualifications for genuine leadership.
Furthermore, Harris’s description of taking months off from watching news as self-mutilation is indicative of her discomfort in addressing critiques. Drawing back to her presumably accomplished career in the harsh world of politics, her inability to tolerate criticism is surprising and raises questions about her resilience and fortitude.
Thus, Harris’s sudden distancing from politics and self-imposed disassociation from the broken system she once was a significant part of, appears more like maneuvers of political convenience, rather than genuine attempts to reform. It’s a concerning thought that despite being a key player within the system, she has now simply chosen to step back and denounce it from afar.
Interestingly, her commitment to ‘learning from the people’ and not wanting their relation to be ‘transactional’ strikes as a strategy to create an image rather than a sincere desire. The true essence of public service is to contribute to structural and systemic changes in governance, not to disengage and limit interaction to superficial dialogues.
Moreover, her attempt at light-hearted humor regarding her husband’s shortcomings casts certain aspersions on her relationships and the role they play in her personal life. It seems a diversion tactic to draw attention away from her political shortcomings and redirects the narrative to minor domestic mishaps– another illustration of her deflection strategies and expertise in fielding tricky political predicaments.
The end result is a portrayal of Kamala Harris as a former vice president who is deeply pessimistic about the state of the nation and its future. However, instead of using her considerable experience and influence to scrutinize the system from within and drive necessary changes, she has chosen a path of criticism and detached observation. This strategy does little to boost public confidence in her leadership abilities and potential role in future public service.
The post Harris Opts for Armchair Critique Over Active Participation appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
