Home arrow Commentary arrow Editorial arrow In politics, 'change' is always an eye-catcher
Jan 07 2008
In politics, 'change' is always an eye-catcher | Print |  E-mail
Editorial
By Ben Tanosborn   

Translation

Image

Entering 2008 in complete economic and political denialImage

After the Iowa caucuses, surviving candidates, Republicans as well as Democrats, are all claiming to be for change. Am I being a cynic when, reflexively, I've concluded that probably not one of them is really advocating meaningful change?

Remember those prophets in the Old Testament who singularly, in blunt and conclusive language, spelled out the repercussions to come for the then existing ungodly behavior?  Well, modern replicas of such wise men are unwelcome in today's America and any and all criticism of our political and economic systems is deemed as heresy, an unforgivable schism; and these neo-prophets are immediately tagged as unpatriotic bastards at best. 

Poor John Edwards!  He has been accused by the press and parasite TV-punditry for delivering his Iowa speech, post-caucuses, in anger.  That just isn't tolerable in our milquetoast, self-professed moderate America, where politicians must always talk in hopeful, flattering ways of a resurgent God-blessed America just waiting to gloriously reemerge if only we could correct our navigation by one, maybe two degrees. 

Just as Uncle Ronald Reagan suggested (pre- and during senility): the only way to talk to Americans is in a firm and convincing tone of unflagging optimism, reality be damned.  Never should the American populace be allowed to receive messages of self-criticism that may contradict the nation's infallible ways; messages should be of hope that can come about by a tiny correction in course.  Politicians, unlike preachers or motivational speakers, are only allowed to show anger when referring to foreign enemies – real or imaginary – and not when the enemy is really found to be us. 

By now, it should be obvious to any student of American society and its econo-political folklore that Americans don't have a palate for any form of criticism, much less self-criticism, of our capitalist democracy, particularly if it's sacrilegiously expressed… and  with anger.

Once again, our paladin-politicians are all clamoring to be candidates for change; yet, not one of the "electable" candidates to the presidency has dared tell us how they will effect such change in the areas where change is needed; and, to date, the best they have been able to come up with are "slight corrections" in direction to the war in Iraq, an improvement in health care (instead of commitment to the right of universal healthcare) and other small changes that hardly represent the revolutionary changes needed for a nation almost 180 degrees off-course from the destination our citizens deserve; also those in the world who, rightly or wrongly, view the US with great suspicion and fear.

"If there is one issue, a fundamental principal issue that defines us as a people among all other peoples in the world, one that not one electable candidate has dared to touch, it's America's foreign policy and how we view and treat other peoples throughout the world; and the complete overhaul we need to make in this regard."

At least John Edwards dared to take head on an oppressive and predatory Corporate America, which in and of itself not only caused him an irreparable rift with Wall Street, but also indelibly wrote his obituary as a presidential candidate, leaving Democrats with a final match pitting Oprah's protégé and the lady "experienced" in everything that is wrong in America, things many of us feel she will not likely confront, much less change.

If there is one issue, a fundamental principal issue that defines us as a people among all other peoples in the world, one that not one electable candidate has dared to touch, it's America's foreign policy and how we view and treat other peoples throughout the world; and the complete overhaul we need to make in this regard.  An overhaul, not a tune-up! America's long term viability, not just as a superpower but as a trustworthy nation, rests not on its nuclear stockpiles but in how the nation changes, how decent and good neighbors Americans become.

Not one electable candidate has dared to seriously commit his efforts, if elected president, to seek harmony and reconciliation in Palestine… and the rest of the Middle East and South Asia; not as an ally and guarantor for Israel, but as a true proponent and advocate of a just peace which long term will be the only thing that will guarantee the continuing existence of that state.  Nor has a single electable candidate committed to reassure America of the fact that Muslims, secular or fundamentalist, are neither terrorists nor Islamofascists just because some misguided people tag them so, stating clearly that the first thing we must do is to put a stop to all anti-Islam trash talk.  Our ideas about the world may be different, even clash, but that is no reason to stop seeking common ground in a world where civilizations will have to eventually find enlightenment and melt into one, unless humanity is bent on an early exit from this planet.

And that search for harmony should not be restricted to the Middle East but to Latin America as well, and those nations where our century-old meddling has unjustly aided oppressive governments and abusive elite classes.  Have any of these candidates that invoke change expressed any goodwill towards those nations in South America that are trying to find a better path of social justice for their people, even if such path deviates politically from ours?  Not one!  And as for Cuba, and the billions of dollars in economic damages that the US has inflicted on its economy, its people, for half-century… there is no outcry by candidates for change, for reestablishing ties that will erase all ill-will.  Nor has there been any call for foreign policy change to provide help for Africa; nor for our treatment of Russia; nor for the unyielding threats to the sovereignty of Iran.

"...Nor has a single electable candidate committed to reassure America of the fact that Muslims, secular or fundamentalist, are neither terrorists nor Islamofascists just because some misguided people tag them so, stating clearly that the first thing we must do is to put a stop to all anti-Islam trash talk. "

But change in foreign policy is not the change that candidates are talking about; theirs is not so lofty and primordial change.  Change for them is simply a palavering way of promoting their candidacies, getting votes… and little else.     

Of course, by the time the two surviving Tweedledee-Tweedledum candidates reach their campaigns' feverish pitch in late summer the recession will be in full bloom, in its third quarter, without end in sight.  That will provoke a "forced change" to the campaign.

For now, as we enter 2008, most Americans remain in complete political and economic denial just as all declared presidential candidates promulgate change, but not the most important change: foreign policy change.  For without that change, America will not engender a more humane, compassionate society, and a better life for its people – both material and spiritual – and that change will not occur until America divorces from that frightful hag: Pride, and takes on a youthful friendly bride: Humility.  But that's not about to happen… not for a while; certainly not this year.

(c) 2008 Ben Tanosborn

Ben Tanosborn an editor of MWC News, after completing graduate studies at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), set out for a career in international business that would take him to five continents, expose him to several cultures and make him realize the importance for any and all Americans to become goodwill ambassadors for the United States.
Other articles by this author
http://mwcnews.net/Ben-Tanosborn

This_Category
Category:: Editorial

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1012

Comments (2)
RSS comments
1. 07-01-2008 22:03
How to save the world NOW
Excellent article Ben - \"telling it like it is\".  
 
Here is a scientist\'s view of what SHOULD be done but WILL NOT happen. 
 
According to Dr John Holdren, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the world (including America) faces 3 acute threats, specifically (a) nuclear, (b) greenhouse and (c) poverty threats. 
 
These threats could, respectively, see the demise of (a) 6.5 billion humans (anytime if general nuclear war happens), (b) 6 billion people this century if global warming is not abated immediately - according to top world expert in the area Professor James Lovelock FRS and (c) 16 million avoidable deaths annually (current rate) and hence 1.6 billion in the coming century if things remain the same (they are actually getting much worse, RAPIDLY). 
 
The scientific approach to risk is through rational Risk Management (RRM) that successively incvolves (a) getting accurate data, (b) scientifc analysis and (c) scientifc analysis-informed systemic change to minimize risk.  
 
Unfortunately politicians - like the awful gaggle of current US Presidential hopefuls - pervert this process by (a) lies, obfuscation, censorship, (b) anti-science spin and (c) politically-rewarding but risk-enhancing \"blame and shame\" with WAR as the worst such outcome. 
 
I think I will compose an \"if I were President\" essay for MWC News describing how I would IMMEDIATELY, URGENTLY respond to the 3 acute risks identified by the expert US AAAS, in short: (a) immediate commitment to all anti-nuclear international agreements NOW with rapid progress to complete world nuclear disarmament; (b) rapid, urgent implementation of renewable energy sources NOW and rapid implemenyation of essentially \"keeping fossil fuels and uranium in the ground\"; (c) global avoidable mortality can be rapidly \"made history\" NOW by a mere highly-focussed few hundred billion dollars annually (perhaps $1.5 trillion less well focussed annually) coupled with peace, high female literacy, good primary health care and good governance (see Chapter 9 of my book \"Body Count. Global avoidable mortality since 1950\": copies in some major libraries; for details see top of LINK provided). 
 
Of course if I were a Republican or Democrat Presidential candidate I would IMMEDIATELY do what ordinary Germans did in 1945 in relation to huge war crimes (the 21st century Bush Wars have SO FAR been associated with 8 million excess deaths; see \"What we could do to save the Planet. New Year\'s Resolutions\" on MWc News via the LINK below) - what the Germans did is summarized by the acronym C4A (CAAAA), specifically Cessation of the killing, Acknowledgment of the crimes, Amends for the crimes and Assertion \"Never again\". 
 
That, in short, is what I would do with great URGENCY but which this dreadful gaggle of war criminal or prospective war criminal politician \"front persons\" will NOT do in ANY respect - they won\'t do ANY of this urgently needed, RRM-based program. 
 
The only thing that can save the world now is zero tolerance for lying, spin, war-mongering, war, racism, violence and deadly incompetence - backed up by comprehensive inter-national and intra-national Boycotts and Sanctions against the guilty and complicit who are acutely threatening the welfare and lives not just of our children and grandchildren but of US.
2. 09-01-2008 05:16
REAL CHANGE ?
It needs to be said more and louder. REAL CHANGE! How can the youth and public allow to be led like cattle to the slaughter again. The primaries are showing every indication. I refusee to vote this time, unless Kuchinic or Ron Paul get it. The phrase bring our troops home is not clarified except by the 3 canidates who specify more than that short vague platitude. Being told no right to complain should I not vote. I will not give my, possibly last bit of freedom in my vote, to these double talkers. Nor will I be silenced because I will not vote for some one who dose not vow to stop the genocide for oil, close the over 700 U.S. military bases down, no more foriegn aid to Isreal and dictators. I can't believe the american public rushing to those who have the most financial backing, and this is the equivalent of back bone. There is much more work to be done. Thanks for your continued efforts gentlemen, and I do mean gentlmen in every sence of the word. I sign off to go lick my wounds. But then there is still time and hope for a real surge of another kind.

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Ben Tanosborn John Edwards Democrats Republicans Old Testament Ronald Reagan Corporate America
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: