This is such an important election. Every vote counts, which is why I am urging you to accept the responsibility of casting your vote on Tuesday. We need to know how the majority really feels. Do we want to go backwards or do we want to go forward? Do we want to return to a time when women's rights were more restricted? Do we want to continue promoting wars abroad at the expense of the men and women who fight them? Do we want our health care system to be run like a business instead of like a social service where millions of people are excluded from coverage? Do we want to reward the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us when so many people are struggling just to get by? For those who are Christian, do you want to be Christian in name only and not in actions?
Barack Obama is not a demi-god; he is a human being. And as a human being he has done a pretty good job, considering the economic upheavals within the US and the world these past three years. To lay blame on him for our poor economy, ignoring those who acted irresponsibly in the previous administration, and ignoring the ensuing economic meltdown which has been compared to the Great Depression of the 1930s, is to ignore too many facts. Mitt Romney is running his campaign on the pledge to create more jobs, to somehow boost our economy by protecting the wealthy while cutting much needed social services. My good friend Richard, who I know is voting for Romney, said something the other day about how starting another war would be good for our economy. I don't understand the logic of this. Men and women are getting killed and maimed and psychologically scarred, but if it's good for the economy, it okay? When did the state of our economy become more important than the value we put on human life?
I love Richard. I know he is a good man by his actions. He is hard working and loyal and generally very decent to everyone he encounters, but his views on the Christian religion (he is Born Again) and his views on politics leave me disturbed and deeply puzzled. And I know many people in this country believe at least some of what he believes and will vote for Mitt Romney. Why? I think really because Romney is a very rich man and for too many financial success is a measure of self-worth and value to one's family and community. Rich men are smarter than the rest of us. They are obviously blessed by God. The irony is that Jesus did not hang with the wealthy so much, but with the poor, disabled, sick, mentally ill, with the people who desperately needed help.
So there is this growing divide in this country. Most people are already decided. Whoever wins tomorrow, there will be many, many disappointed people. How do we heal the US? It's not just about money and who can generate jobs; it's about social issues and foreign policy. This is why the divide is so great. Obviously, I'm a Democrat, but I live in a mostly Republican area, and I know that the people who live here are good people; they are mostly white, poor to middle class and Christian. We all live amidst the wide open countryside relying on cars to get us around. There are not a lot of available jobs and some of the younger people join the military because they just don't have the choices that their wealthier counterparts do have. So many people around here, in support of members of their community who are putting their lives on the line, also support the military. They are invested in the nationalistic idea that the US must use its armed forces to defend against its enemies in order to secure freedom at home. And so, war has become a necessary evil and the sacrifices being made are, in their eyes, for a noble reason. In terms of foreign policy, I would have to say that the people here believe in preserving a large and strong military machine, believe in being tough and punishing towards any threat to the interests of the US. This means they are committed to starting wars abroad.
To me, being a pacifist, this is a strange and terrible cycle and yet I can understand the logic behind it. There is also logic in Christians believing that abortion is morally wrong, and yet the desire to legislate making the choice for others is also morally wrong. What I find in much of the Christian Republican perspective is fear. Fear of "enemies" be they terrorists in foreign lands or socialists at home or moral degenerates who believe that gay couples should have the legal right to marry. All this fear, all this not turning the other cheek, all this not loving your enemy, all this scorn towards the peacemakers is so very unChristian. I can't help but look around me and think that too many Americans are hypocrites. They talk the talk, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty, they don't walk the walk. But, of course, this is not how they see themselves. I believe in their minds they see themselves as righteous. Which leads me to the uncomfortable thought that I'm not the only one who falls into delusional thinking. The difference for me is that I remain vigilant; I look to spot the flaws in my thinking and feeling.
So here I am encouraging you to do the same. Delusional thinking can be seductive, can pull you into a world view that seems so real, but is not. And mass delusional thinking, as I believe we are seeing here in the US, can lead to, in a worst case scenario, a holocaust. I don't use that word lightly. I truly believe that much of Christian Republican world view is a symptom of mental illness and that those who are seriously ill should not be in positions of power. Right wing Republicans try to paint Obama as a flaming liberal, but he is not, as can be seen by the criticism that lefties have laid on the President. Obama moves towards the middle, whereas Romney moves towards the extremists. I believe this country needs to stay in the middle, which means most definitely caring for the welfare of the middle class and the impoverished, the disabled and the addicted amongst others. Dismantling the Affordable Care Act, setting women's rights back decades, increasing the military but neglecting veterans, slashing social services and other very important issues are not the way to heal the troubles in the US.
I'm giving a shout out to women, to so-called minorities, to veterans, to the gay community, to the middle class and to the impoverished, to the mentally ill, to the sick, to the old, to Christians who still believe in lovingkindness, inclusiveness and generosity. Please vote in the election tomorrow. Stand up and be counted. Walk the walk. Let the country as a whole know and the whole world know that we believe in recovery, not just for some, but for everyone.
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Foreign Policy. Show all posts
Monday, November 5, 2012
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Unity
I picked this stock photo because it's a symbol of unity and unity is the direction I hope this country is going in. The economy is in real trouble at home and abroad and this is a major factor in why Obama has been elected to be the 44th president. And we need universal healthcare and to put an end to the war in Iraq. In fact, we need so many changes. The Democrats will now have much more power, but in order to really create the change we need when we need it, Republicans must join in too. We can't afford to waste time. It's the younger generation that is really put on the spot and they know it; in a lot of ways it's up to them to change the way things are done in Washington. Partisan politics won't work.
Another reason why I think Barack Obama won is because he reached out to Independent voters and Republican voters who were dismayed by Bush and his administration. Republicans are supposed to be fiscal conservatives, but Bush was not. Instead he has borrowed and spent enormous amounts of money. That the economy is in trouble is no accident. Obama made the point several times in his book The Audacity Of Hope that he wanted to work WITH Republicans whenever possible. Of course, there will still be conflicts of interest and the country may be moving in a more liberal direction, but then we've moved from conservative politics (slavery, sexism for example) to more liberal politics consistently over time. All in all this may not be such a bad thing, though some people might take some time getting adjusted to it.
Again I think of young people and the kind of world they are growing up in. The advent of the personal computer has drastically changed the social/political landscape for young people. We now live in a global community. Gone are the days when the U.S. can remain an isolationist country. Now we affect the world and the world affects us. And what are young people looking at these days? Sexually transmitted diseases, two wars abroad, a failing economy, a lack of resources, global warming, etc, etc... We are all up against it, but they are the ones who will inherit the messes we've all made beforehand. Again the only way out of our troubles is to acknowledge that these are global problems and require an even greater unity than Democrats joining with Republicans. These problems require that the whole world work in unison.
What does that mean, a world working in unison? It means, above all things, world peace. War is not the answer to anything, it just perpetuates the cycle of horror and abuse. I hope young people figure this one out because without peace we can't address the fact that we may be killing our world and raping its resources. If we continue to attack one another we just perpetuate our problems and miss our chance to reverse all these destructive trends. If we continue to attack one another we doom our species to self-destruct.
People are so freaked out by terrorists and understandably so, but the truth is terrorists are human too, sick, obsessed humans but humans none the less. And terrorism cannot be eliminated through violence. Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers". In fact Jesus said a whole lot about the extraordinary power of love and forgiveness. Why do people forget this?In Buddhism life is considered so precious that you shouldn't even step on an ant if you can help it. People forget that too. But there is this great resistance to the concept striving for world peace. People have called me an idealist, but I am not. I am a pragmatist. We are blinded by our own bias' to the point where we rob others of the most precious thing there is: Life. What right do any of us have to be violent, to maim and murder? The power of hate is glorified in wars and the power of love is mocked. Jesus was mocked and murdered for promoting a most revolutionary concept: Turn the other cheek, love your enemies, forgive others so that you can be forgiven. He said anyone could love friends and family, but it is the extraordinary person who can love an enemy. How many people have the courage to do what Jesus did and not succumb to revenge and punishment? Not many and so here we are, in a world full of war and injustice. It's been over 2,000 years since Jesus was murdered. Unity IS the answer and peace and love should be the goal, but this requires that people be extraordinary and turn the other cheek. Is anyone willing to try?
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Democrats In The Running
A couple of weeks ago there was a debate between the Democrats running for president. Today my brother gave me a DVD of it since I missed it. First of all, it wasn't really a debate but more of a question and short answer set-up, a kind of introduction to the candidates. So far there are eight candidates. The front runners are Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. The rest are Joe Biden, Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd, Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel. I thought they all came across fairly strongly and there was no fighting amongst them, but then, for the most part they agree on the major issues: withdrawal from Iraq, Universal healthcare, pro-choice for women, gun control (except Richardson). That's all I remember right now. Oh yeah, civil unions (as opposed to marriage) for gay couples. I agree with these positions too (though I think gay people should have the right to get married if they so choose).
I come from a family of dedicated Democrats (my brother would say he's also a bit of a libertarian) but it's only recently that I've become interested in politics. I always voted Democratic and I was pleased when Clinton won but I didn't engage in discussions about it. But as I get older and after experiencing the younger Bush as president I find myself more interested in the world at large, especially because of the horror of the Iraq war. Not only am I a democrat but I'm a pacifist. This is a recent realization. It's as if I'm finally starting to define myself in my middle years. I know full well that a true pacifist would never be elected in this country, not yet anyhow and not when there is all this concern over terrorists attacking us. And if a Democrat is to be elected he (or she) must be tough. For me right now, that's the most important thing, that a Democrat be elected president, preferably for the next two terms, to try to undo all the trouble that Bush and his administration has caused with their hard-line/rich folk, quasi-religious politics. Also, this will mean that the troops can finally come home (though hopefully before the elections) and we can return to fortifying our own defenses instead of wasting our resources (and lives and limbs!) in a country that doesn't even want us to be there in the first place.
I was listening to Madeleine Albright (former Secretary of State under Bill Clinton) read from her book The Mighty and The Almighty. She said many Muslims in the Middle East went from having a positive view of Americans to a very negative view of Americans after the U.S. invaded Iraq. They worry that the Americans will want to kill Muslims and control their territories. This is not such a far fetched assumption on their part though I pray that our leaders will, after Bush leaves office, correct this horrible idea. Bush and his fundamentalist allies desire to distance the U.S. from the United Nations and in many ways they have succeeded in doing just that. Foolish! In order to fight the insidiousness of fundamentalist terrorists we need to all work together. Alienating ourselves from the wise counsel and support of other nations is a recipe for disaster. What is the sense in that? Not only is it pig headed, it is arrogant. We are not the center of the world. And I still don't understand why it's okay for us to stockpile nuclear weapons while we tell other countries that they can't without serious reprisals. We are a country with high crime rates, people living in poverty, no universal health care, high addiction rates, packed prisons and the gap between the have and the have nots is growing. To many Muslims we are immoral to boot. We are certainly not the worst country in the world but we're also not the best and yet some of us act as if we are, ignoring the myriad of problems we face each day. What's wrong with a healthy dose of modesty and a respect for other countries and cultures?
I'm not saying that Democrats are perfect (no one is perfect) but at least they stand for the common man over the wealthy man and at least they follow a practice of diplomacy when dealing with the rest of the world. These are two things sorely needed, one at home and the other abroad. If we are ever to steer muslims away from violent fundamentalism we have to set an example of intelligence mixed with tolerance and we have to stop pretending we are the be all and end all of things.
End of rant.
I come from a family of dedicated Democrats (my brother would say he's also a bit of a libertarian) but it's only recently that I've become interested in politics. I always voted Democratic and I was pleased when Clinton won but I didn't engage in discussions about it. But as I get older and after experiencing the younger Bush as president I find myself more interested in the world at large, especially because of the horror of the Iraq war. Not only am I a democrat but I'm a pacifist. This is a recent realization. It's as if I'm finally starting to define myself in my middle years. I know full well that a true pacifist would never be elected in this country, not yet anyhow and not when there is all this concern over terrorists attacking us. And if a Democrat is to be elected he (or she) must be tough. For me right now, that's the most important thing, that a Democrat be elected president, preferably for the next two terms, to try to undo all the trouble that Bush and his administration has caused with their hard-line/rich folk, quasi-religious politics. Also, this will mean that the troops can finally come home (though hopefully before the elections) and we can return to fortifying our own defenses instead of wasting our resources (and lives and limbs!) in a country that doesn't even want us to be there in the first place.
I was listening to Madeleine Albright (former Secretary of State under Bill Clinton) read from her book The Mighty and The Almighty. She said many Muslims in the Middle East went from having a positive view of Americans to a very negative view of Americans after the U.S. invaded Iraq. They worry that the Americans will want to kill Muslims and control their territories. This is not such a far fetched assumption on their part though I pray that our leaders will, after Bush leaves office, correct this horrible idea. Bush and his fundamentalist allies desire to distance the U.S. from the United Nations and in many ways they have succeeded in doing just that. Foolish! In order to fight the insidiousness of fundamentalist terrorists we need to all work together. Alienating ourselves from the wise counsel and support of other nations is a recipe for disaster. What is the sense in that? Not only is it pig headed, it is arrogant. We are not the center of the world. And I still don't understand why it's okay for us to stockpile nuclear weapons while we tell other countries that they can't without serious reprisals. We are a country with high crime rates, people living in poverty, no universal health care, high addiction rates, packed prisons and the gap between the have and the have nots is growing. To many Muslims we are immoral to boot. We are certainly not the worst country in the world but we're also not the best and yet some of us act as if we are, ignoring the myriad of problems we face each day. What's wrong with a healthy dose of modesty and a respect for other countries and cultures?
I'm not saying that Democrats are perfect (no one is perfect) but at least they stand for the common man over the wealthy man and at least they follow a practice of diplomacy when dealing with the rest of the world. These are two things sorely needed, one at home and the other abroad. If we are ever to steer muslims away from violent fundamentalism we have to set an example of intelligence mixed with tolerance and we have to stop pretending we are the be all and end all of things.
End of rant.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
On Blogging and Foreign Policy
Not sure what to write today, just know that it's important that I get something down. The discipline of writing each day has lifted a lot of my depression but I worry that I'm forming opinions about issues too quickly. And that's why any comment is most welcome, especially one that disagrees with whatever position I take in my blog. I still might not agree but the exchange stimulates me to reflect more deeply and slows me down. I do reserve the right to change my view on anything I write in this blog. I think our spirits evolve as we gather more information and experience. Right now, my experience with the world is limited and I am quite ignorant. The more I study, the more I know this. It's a process to learn which initially requires having some kind of opinion about whatever daily topic presents itself. Taking a position involves the risk of being wrong but it's a risk I know I have to take in order to keep seeking the truth, as far as I'm able to distinguish truth. And I say as far as I am able to distinguish the truth because the Truth with a capital T can be elusive and often a subjective perception. Hence my truth will not be someone else's truth.
In this blog I am free to express opinions in a way that I don't do with others. My family in particular are so articulate and knowledgeable that I will second guess my thoughts because of my ignorance and wind up saying very little. This was particularly hard when I was most psychotic and I was not able to converse almost at all with them. These past couple of years I've felt well enough to engage in conversations, saying a little here or there, but most importantly, able to follow the conversation. The voices no longer forcibly intrude themselves on my thoughts and distract me. This is a great relief. Also a great relief is to not be controlled by delusions. Finally, I can think without being lost in the twilight zone of false beliefs. When I was delusional most things related to my primary delusion and I had little room to move. Now I feel the freedom of free thought and free speech in a way I haven't for a while and I feel grateful.
Apart from medicine, therapy, the support of family and friends, a practice of gratitude is what directed me towards this new freedom. To me, the daily practice of gratitude is a form of prayer. I'm grateful to be alive, grateful for the food I eat, grateful for the people I know. When a car passes my house I'm grateful for whoever is in the car and send out a prayer that they be well. I've come to even be grateful to the voices for their ideas and companionship. I detach from them but I don't reject them and I wish them well also. All this gratitude grounds me and keeps my perspective more positive than negative. And it places me in the larger context of the world, it helps me to connect with others if only indirectly. It strengthens my belief in a higher power that witnesses and listens and guides all of us. So I believe even for those like my family who don't believe. But still I think they do, they just call it by its other names: goodness, justice, tolerance, intelligence,etc...
Just today I started listening to an audiobook by Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state under Clinton, called The Mighty & The Almighty: Reflections on America, God, and World Affairs. I've only listened to part of the first cd so I'm not yet able to comment on the book, but I will comment on what was said on the back cover of the jacket: "She offers a balanced but, when necessary, devastating analysis of U.S. strategy, and condemns those of all faiths who exploit religious fervor to create divisions or enhance their own power. In this illuminating account, Albright argues that, to be effective, U.S. policy makers must understand the power and place of religion in motivating others and in coloring how American actions are perceived. Defying the conventional wisdom, she suggests not only that religion and politics are inseparable, but that their partnership, when properly harnessed, can be a force for justice and peace."
Separation of church (or rather religion) and state is the position the United States has taken in its own government which finds its roots in the First Amendment to the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Hence there is no state religion enforced, instead people are free to believe (or not believe) and worship as they choose. It seems to me, that this position has served us well over the years. The problem that Madeleine Albright addresses is the rise of the Christian right through George W. Bush and the blurring of lines between church and state, especially with matters of foreign policy, specifically the Iraqi war. President Bush's initial goal was to bring "freedom and democracy" to Iraq while searching out and destroying any terrorist threat to the U.S. in the region. But his greater goal seems a belief that the U.S. has the God given right to bring its idea of "freedom and democracy" to the entire world, the Middle East for the time being. All this without fully understanding the cultures they wish to revamp.
The result: Bush and his administration has alienated the U.S. from other foreign powers, allowed for the death of thousands of Americans and put us in the midst of a civil war with no wish to finally pull out. He will not admit defeat.
So I'm a believer in God but I do not believe that my belief should be everyone's belief, in fact I love the diversity of religious beliefs in the world. I also appreciate atheists and agnostics. What I find hard to tolerate is the fundamentalist belief that one's own religion is the only real religion and the rest should be either eradicated or somehow held in submission. I do believe in the First Amendment right for everyone. The basic human right to worship or not worship as one sees fit. That's an idea of freedom I've acquired from the Constitution. On the other hand, I am woefully ignorant of Muslim culture, especially in the Middle East. I am partly an ugly American because I've ignored much of the world and I'm afraid many Americans still remain ignorant of Muslim culture (along with many other cultures). Why so ignorant? Why was the President so ignorant when he took us into war?! Do we think we're better than everyone else? Perhaps some of the most patriotic people do feel this but how can they when many of them have never even left the country? Well, President Bush has left the country many, many times and has been exposed to other cultures and yet he still comes across as the worst kind of patriot, the kind who think the U.S. is the best, so good in fact that it should have controlling interest in the rest of the world. The kind that won't admit to past mistakes and won't apologize.
Foreign policy should be about working well with other countries and cultures. There should be no agenda for various forms of world domination be they religiously motivated or economically motivated or both. The best way to avoid that attitude is to know and know well the nature of other religions and cultures, to get inside that culture's perspective and to take a good look at ourselves as well. This is the way to create an open dialogue. In the spirit of understanding and with the common sense approach of compromise, deep wounds can be healed and the nations of the world can truly be global and not fragmented. But this perspective doesn't take into account the many pockets of terrorists spread throughout the world. Nations can have dialogues but how do you reason with a terrorist who is perfectly willing to die for his fundamentalist beliefs and is willing to take as many people as possible with him? I guess I'd say what I said before--study the terrorist's religion and culture and try to see how he is looking at us, try to see ourselves through his eyes. Find the weaknesses in his arguments against us and the strengths. Learn to identify with him. Understand him more than you fear him. That's the way to find a bridge to communication and communication has to be the goal. If there continues to be no communication the conflict will just escalate.
Two thousand years ago Jesus said love your enemies and to this day Christians do not embrace it. It was a revolutionary idea back then and it still is today. I wish we had the guts to practice what we preach. What would Jesus do if he encountered a terrorist? What would he tell us to do? Love the terrorists, don't hate them. Understand them, find a bridge and cross it. Be peacemakers not warmongers. Share what you have. I'm not saying it's easy to love those that hate you but you have to begin somewhere. And what's the alternative? Hate for hate, war for war and terrorist attack for terrorist attack?
I don't think that's smart, I don't even think that's grown-up. If people stop believing in hatred I think there would be so much less of it in the world. Stop believing in the necessity of violence and war, act as if and you move towards making it so.
I think Jesus had it right.
In this blog I am free to express opinions in a way that I don't do with others. My family in particular are so articulate and knowledgeable that I will second guess my thoughts because of my ignorance and wind up saying very little. This was particularly hard when I was most psychotic and I was not able to converse almost at all with them. These past couple of years I've felt well enough to engage in conversations, saying a little here or there, but most importantly, able to follow the conversation. The voices no longer forcibly intrude themselves on my thoughts and distract me. This is a great relief. Also a great relief is to not be controlled by delusions. Finally, I can think without being lost in the twilight zone of false beliefs. When I was delusional most things related to my primary delusion and I had little room to move. Now I feel the freedom of free thought and free speech in a way I haven't for a while and I feel grateful.
Apart from medicine, therapy, the support of family and friends, a practice of gratitude is what directed me towards this new freedom. To me, the daily practice of gratitude is a form of prayer. I'm grateful to be alive, grateful for the food I eat, grateful for the people I know. When a car passes my house I'm grateful for whoever is in the car and send out a prayer that they be well. I've come to even be grateful to the voices for their ideas and companionship. I detach from them but I don't reject them and I wish them well also. All this gratitude grounds me and keeps my perspective more positive than negative. And it places me in the larger context of the world, it helps me to connect with others if only indirectly. It strengthens my belief in a higher power that witnesses and listens and guides all of us. So I believe even for those like my family who don't believe. But still I think they do, they just call it by its other names: goodness, justice, tolerance, intelligence,etc...
Just today I started listening to an audiobook by Madeleine Albright, the former secretary of state under Clinton, called The Mighty & The Almighty: Reflections on America, God, and World Affairs. I've only listened to part of the first cd so I'm not yet able to comment on the book, but I will comment on what was said on the back cover of the jacket: "She offers a balanced but, when necessary, devastating analysis of U.S. strategy, and condemns those of all faiths who exploit religious fervor to create divisions or enhance their own power. In this illuminating account, Albright argues that, to be effective, U.S. policy makers must understand the power and place of religion in motivating others and in coloring how American actions are perceived. Defying the conventional wisdom, she suggests not only that religion and politics are inseparable, but that their partnership, when properly harnessed, can be a force for justice and peace."
Separation of church (or rather religion) and state is the position the United States has taken in its own government which finds its roots in the First Amendment to the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Hence there is no state religion enforced, instead people are free to believe (or not believe) and worship as they choose. It seems to me, that this position has served us well over the years. The problem that Madeleine Albright addresses is the rise of the Christian right through George W. Bush and the blurring of lines between church and state, especially with matters of foreign policy, specifically the Iraqi war. President Bush's initial goal was to bring "freedom and democracy" to Iraq while searching out and destroying any terrorist threat to the U.S. in the region. But his greater goal seems a belief that the U.S. has the God given right to bring its idea of "freedom and democracy" to the entire world, the Middle East for the time being. All this without fully understanding the cultures they wish to revamp.
The result: Bush and his administration has alienated the U.S. from other foreign powers, allowed for the death of thousands of Americans and put us in the midst of a civil war with no wish to finally pull out. He will not admit defeat.
So I'm a believer in God but I do not believe that my belief should be everyone's belief, in fact I love the diversity of religious beliefs in the world. I also appreciate atheists and agnostics. What I find hard to tolerate is the fundamentalist belief that one's own religion is the only real religion and the rest should be either eradicated or somehow held in submission. I do believe in the First Amendment right for everyone. The basic human right to worship or not worship as one sees fit. That's an idea of freedom I've acquired from the Constitution. On the other hand, I am woefully ignorant of Muslim culture, especially in the Middle East. I am partly an ugly American because I've ignored much of the world and I'm afraid many Americans still remain ignorant of Muslim culture (along with many other cultures). Why so ignorant? Why was the President so ignorant when he took us into war?! Do we think we're better than everyone else? Perhaps some of the most patriotic people do feel this but how can they when many of them have never even left the country? Well, President Bush has left the country many, many times and has been exposed to other cultures and yet he still comes across as the worst kind of patriot, the kind who think the U.S. is the best, so good in fact that it should have controlling interest in the rest of the world. The kind that won't admit to past mistakes and won't apologize.
Foreign policy should be about working well with other countries and cultures. There should be no agenda for various forms of world domination be they religiously motivated or economically motivated or both. The best way to avoid that attitude is to know and know well the nature of other religions and cultures, to get inside that culture's perspective and to take a good look at ourselves as well. This is the way to create an open dialogue. In the spirit of understanding and with the common sense approach of compromise, deep wounds can be healed and the nations of the world can truly be global and not fragmented. But this perspective doesn't take into account the many pockets of terrorists spread throughout the world. Nations can have dialogues but how do you reason with a terrorist who is perfectly willing to die for his fundamentalist beliefs and is willing to take as many people as possible with him? I guess I'd say what I said before--study the terrorist's religion and culture and try to see how he is looking at us, try to see ourselves through his eyes. Find the weaknesses in his arguments against us and the strengths. Learn to identify with him. Understand him more than you fear him. That's the way to find a bridge to communication and communication has to be the goal. If there continues to be no communication the conflict will just escalate.
Two thousand years ago Jesus said love your enemies and to this day Christians do not embrace it. It was a revolutionary idea back then and it still is today. I wish we had the guts to practice what we preach. What would Jesus do if he encountered a terrorist? What would he tell us to do? Love the terrorists, don't hate them. Understand them, find a bridge and cross it. Be peacemakers not warmongers. Share what you have. I'm not saying it's easy to love those that hate you but you have to begin somewhere. And what's the alternative? Hate for hate, war for war and terrorist attack for terrorist attack?
I don't think that's smart, I don't even think that's grown-up. If people stop believing in hatred I think there would be so much less of it in the world. Stop believing in the necessity of violence and war, act as if and you move towards making it so.
I think Jesus had it right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)