By Richard D. Erlich

I was and remain a "senior for Obama," a 65-year-old who volunteered for Barack Obama's campaign in the California Democratic primary and in the general election. Still, I'll say this much for my fellow "seniors" who opposed Obama: my central reason for supporting Obama is a reason other old people might rationally oppose him.

Barack Obama offers America a chance to get beyond not race or bigotry but at least beyond racism and "the Southern strategy" as influential ideologies and political maneuvers. On the other hand, the election of Hillary Clinton or Sarah Palin would have an equivalent effect on sexism, as an explicit ideology of male superiority.

So let's call that a wash and acknowledge that one could oppose Obama without being a racist. But let us include in that acknowledgement the possibility that a few -- repeat: a few -- old whites could believe that the races are equal and that justice demands racial equality but still desire to maintain, for unjust self-interest, white privilege.

If that idea disturbs you, and I hope it does, keep it in mind while I move from race, which wasn't a crucial issue in the election, to age and generation.

A central political issue is always Cui bono? which I'll translate, "Who gains? Who loses?"

Change in the abstract -- and the word was pretty abstract in the 2008 election -- favors young people over old people. Oldsters usually have any established system down pat; changing things undermines that advantage and favors the young.

Getting more concrete, in the period since the "Tax Revolt" and "The Reagan Revolution," America has operated on a system of running up debt and transferring money from younger and often poorer people to older people; for far longer, the human species has run on a system of using up resources and degrading the environment.

"Posterity don't vote," and ordinarily one can add, "neither do young people." Our rule has been, we profit now; posterity and the current youngsters pay later.

Obama is capable of mobilizing masses of people, emphatically including the young. He has built up the political energy for some major change, and that change will have to include cutting back on spreading the wealth to fairly well-to-do old people.

Now, I recently joined the American Association of Retired Persons to help ensure that we current old folks continue to get ours and maybe a bit more; but there are degrees of privilege, and we in America need to slow down the money flow to old folks and redirect more of it back to the young.

We need to help young people by restoring a maimed environment, restoring America's infrastructure and schools -- and achieving a sustainable economy. We need to distribute health-care more equitably, perhaps by opening up Medicare to the young.

So don't think too harshly of the old who voted against Barack Obama; but do remind them that they lost the election, and that that loss should have consequences. The times they have a-changed, and we have a president not beholden to old folks for his election. And he's eloquent enough to move Americans to make some sacrifices. Among those who must agree to some sacrifice are old people like me.

Richard D. Erlich is a retired professor, living on a decent pension in California In advancing age, he prefers to think of himself as an old-fart curmudgeon and prides himself in having gone from angry young man to curmudgeon with few missed steps.

Posted by Mark at 10:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The Get a Mac commercials are more than just cute, and they're more than just stereotypes of Mac users and PC users. These commericals present substantive critiques of PCs and with Windows specifically, including:

• the degree to which PCs come pre-loaded with trial software
• the prevalence of viruses on PCs
• the ease with which Mac users can create and publish Web content
• Windows Vista's security concerns

These are all critiques that are "arguable" in that they present an argument. Apple argues that the implementation of Windows Vista's User Account Control presents security problems. It is now Microsoft's responsibility to respond.

Or, at least, that's how it should be.

Microsoft has, through its "I'm a PC" commercials, decided not to address the arguable parts of Apple's Get a Mac ads at all. Instead, Microsoft will address the non-arguable part of the ads; namely, the stereotypes of the PC users.

Yes, certainly we understand that the Get a Mac commercial, with its young and hip Mac constantly trying to understand the old and stodgy PC, dabbles in stereotypes. Microsoft wishes to fire back, suggesting that not all PC users are stodgy; indeed, many of them are just as hip -- if not more so -- than Mac users.

But that's not the point. Will this really convince potential Apple customers not to switch to a Mac? No one buys a Mac because he or she thinks it will make him or her "hip." People switch to Macs for all the reasons outlined above: Macs are perceived as easier to use and more secure. Regardless of whether or not this is the case (and that's a discussion for another day), this is the perception of Macs in the general public. If Microsoft really wants to tear customers away from Apple, it will need to address the arguable issues, not the inarguable ones. And it is these arguable issues that matter to consumers; indeed, it's the point behind advertising. Does Diet Dr. Pepper really have the same taste as regular Dr. Pepper? That is at issue, and the advertising tries to persuade the consumer that, yes, they taste the same. This will induce the consumer to buy Diet Dr. Pepper.

In the same way, Microsoft would be better served hiring an ad agency whose campaign addresses the arguable issues. Does Windows Vista have security problems? Is a Mac really easier to use than a PC? The recent election showed us that unarguable issues don't really matter to voters: to call Barack Obama a "socialist" means nothing. To suggest that he'll raise your taxes? Now that's arguable!

The public perception of Microsoft has nothing to do with its hipness and everything to do with Windows' own problems: viruses, stability, security, compatibility. Microsoft could, for example, counter Apple's campaigns by pointing out that there are far more applications (and games!) designed for Windows than there are designed for Macs. Microsoft either doesn't recognize that this is its problem, or it doesn't want to recognize that this is its problem. It appears that Microsoft would rather deflect the substantive issues altogether and change the subject. Unfortunately, consumers who are thinking about whether to buy a Mac or a PC have the substantive issues very much in their minds, and those issues won't be lured away by a funny commercial about how everyone can be a PC.

Posted by Mark at 3:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)