Rhetoric can clash against iconography. Whenever a political leader talks about empowering the people (or at least his own supporters), he undermines his message if he uses imagery usually reserved for saints, messiahs, and deities. As always, iconography wins over rhetoric. So, whenever the rhetoric and the iconography disagree, the iconography should be seen as the accurate depiction of the real political message.

One cannot build a social movement upon the exaltation of a political leader. When one worships a political leader who prances around on a white horse or walks around as if he were an avatar of the rising sun, it hardly matters to his adherents what he actually says and it hardly matters what the fine print says because the real message he adherents hear is that this man is so wonderful that he will make sure everything is okay.

The basis of Barack Obama’s appeal is intensely patriarchal. He appeals to a feeling that his magic touch would heal everything. He inspires an intense loyalty from supporters who expect him to accomplish miracles.

The irony here is that if I truly believed in patriarchy, I might actually have supported him. It is precisely my loyalty to the principles of democratic republicanism and my aversion to hero worship that lead me into opposition. My awareness of the example of Shabbatai Zevi leads me to be deeply skeptical of any notion that would suggest that my support of any particular man, religion, or political movement would bring about universal redemption or a “healing of the world”.