Awesome news. There is an article about my friend Brian Kelly in the New York Times. Check it out: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/nyregion/thecity/23sds.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=thecity
Also look at the list of media coverage of the sds 5th year anniversary events: http://studentsforademocraticsociety.org/march20/?q=node/26
It is so inspiring to see my fellow young adults being active and politically engaged. I am so proud of all my friends who got arrested in the past week. Ya'll are awesome.
This post is dedicated to all those who participated in those events! I love you all.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
The Importance of Organization
I have talked some on organization alittle before on this blog. But I want to reiterate how important being organized is.
Maybe I should define what I mean by being organized. To be organized is to do the following:
1. Keeping your word. When you say you will do something, do it. This will give you a good reputation and inherently further your goals.
2. Hard work. Cliche as it is, hard work will get things done. And in the world of activism where it feels like not much gets done, this is a crucial attribute.
3. Coordination. Stay in contact with people and coordinate your efforts. Avoid duplicate tasks and work out a system by which everyone can be working toward a goal, and know what they need to do to make sure the whole group gets it done.
4. Community. Help, protect, care for, and love each other. No other facet of being organized will motivate people more than being a part of a strong caring community. It will also provide an unparalleled sense of security that is very hard to find in life.
5. Courage. Acknowledge and accept your fears, but do not let them interfere with your activities. Change takes the courage to fight (ever non-violently) despite the seemingly insurmountable odds. Of course, courage must be partnered with understanding and vision to prevent brave but pointless acts.
6. Understanding. To be organized, we need to understand the cause and effect relationships or our actions, and how our actions will impact different audiences. Understanding other people, and how they think is also crucial. Also, a general understanding of the world is important. Overall, the more knowledge and problem solving skills you can fit into your brain, the better. It is much better to build a sturdy net to catch fish than to try to catch them with your hands.
7. Mass numbers. To truly be organized, you need lots of people working toward a common goal. They do not necessarily have to all be coordinated, but it helps.
8. Planning. Use all of your understanding to plan a campaign to actually reach the goal. Make contingency plans and make sure everyone knows what the plan is.
9. Love. By far the most important. This one encompasses everything we seek to change in the world. It can remake our entire world if we have the courage to embrace it. Love everyone, and only denounce actions. Forgive and give whenever there is the chance.
If we look at corporations, who have a massive amount of power in our society, we see that they are very very well organized. However, they concentrate on only: understanding, hard work, coordination, planning and keeping your word. Because they have mastered these 5 skills, the relatively few people under any given corporations employ have managed to affect the other 6.5 billion people and often not in a good way. However, their lack of concern about mass numbers, community, courage, and love leaves them vulnerable. An organization that embraced the vision of organization I have laid out here would easily out-power them and be able to wield the fiery-sword of influence to truly slay the injustice that wreaks havoc in the hearts of so many.
There is a strength to this outline that may not be obvious at first. It will bring people in by the droves. Having an effective and loving group actively seeking change, one that fulfills its members deep need to care for each other will be an earth-shaking movement that will fundamentally remake civilization. I have tried to outline my view on organizing, that couples the "professionalism" of corporate America with the love, courage and community that I have found to be amazingly effective at motivating and improving people.
I hope to see a movement that embraces all 9 factors, because, I believe, if I do see it, then we will be able to heal the world.
Maybe I should define what I mean by being organized. To be organized is to do the following:
1. Keeping your word. When you say you will do something, do it. This will give you a good reputation and inherently further your goals.
2. Hard work. Cliche as it is, hard work will get things done. And in the world of activism where it feels like not much gets done, this is a crucial attribute.
3. Coordination. Stay in contact with people and coordinate your efforts. Avoid duplicate tasks and work out a system by which everyone can be working toward a goal, and know what they need to do to make sure the whole group gets it done.
4. Community. Help, protect, care for, and love each other. No other facet of being organized will motivate people more than being a part of a strong caring community. It will also provide an unparalleled sense of security that is very hard to find in life.
5. Courage. Acknowledge and accept your fears, but do not let them interfere with your activities. Change takes the courage to fight (ever non-violently) despite the seemingly insurmountable odds. Of course, courage must be partnered with understanding and vision to prevent brave but pointless acts.
6. Understanding. To be organized, we need to understand the cause and effect relationships or our actions, and how our actions will impact different audiences. Understanding other people, and how they think is also crucial. Also, a general understanding of the world is important. Overall, the more knowledge and problem solving skills you can fit into your brain, the better. It is much better to build a sturdy net to catch fish than to try to catch them with your hands.
7. Mass numbers. To truly be organized, you need lots of people working toward a common goal. They do not necessarily have to all be coordinated, but it helps.
8. Planning. Use all of your understanding to plan a campaign to actually reach the goal. Make contingency plans and make sure everyone knows what the plan is.
9. Love. By far the most important. This one encompasses everything we seek to change in the world. It can remake our entire world if we have the courage to embrace it. Love everyone, and only denounce actions. Forgive and give whenever there is the chance.
If we look at corporations, who have a massive amount of power in our society, we see that they are very very well organized. However, they concentrate on only: understanding, hard work, coordination, planning and keeping your word. Because they have mastered these 5 skills, the relatively few people under any given corporations employ have managed to affect the other 6.5 billion people and often not in a good way. However, their lack of concern about mass numbers, community, courage, and love leaves them vulnerable. An organization that embraced the vision of organization I have laid out here would easily out-power them and be able to wield the fiery-sword of influence to truly slay the injustice that wreaks havoc in the hearts of so many.
There is a strength to this outline that may not be obvious at first. It will bring people in by the droves. Having an effective and loving group actively seeking change, one that fulfills its members deep need to care for each other will be an earth-shaking movement that will fundamentally remake civilization. I have tried to outline my view on organizing, that couples the "professionalism" of corporate America with the love, courage and community that I have found to be amazingly effective at motivating and improving people.
I hope to see a movement that embraces all 9 factors, because, I believe, if I do see it, then we will be able to heal the world.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
"Students Against Hippies in Trees"
On Monday, I opened "The Daily Californian," the student paper of UC Berkeley, and I was greeted by a picture of a fellow I had just met on Friday at a welcoming party held by the Metta Center (a center for spreading education about non-violence). In the picture, he is just standing next to a tree, and cops are swarming him. He had been sitting in a tree on campus for the past couple weeks, trying to raise awareness about the undemocratic nature of the UC Board of Reagents. He was arrested on Friday around 2:15 and I met him around 4 at the party. He introduced himself as "Fresh," and I talked to him for awhile about the Democratizing the Reagents campaign. Pretty interesting stuff, he had alot of the same complaints that Brown students have, and is organizing around issues that sds is organizing around.
It is nice to see that even in places where sds does not exist yet, there are people organizing around some of the central issues which sds is doing across the nation. I am planning on contacting some of the other organizers of the campaign and tell them about sds, with the hope that they will hook into the sds network to help their cause (as well as maybe become an sds chapter :-) ).
But what I found hilarious about the article in the Daily Californian was that there is actually a group called "Students Against Hippies in Trees." And they showed up to protest the protest. Gotta love counter-protests, they are always kind of funny, especially when they have ridiculous names like that.
The thing that still boggles my mind is why the University cares that Fresh was in a tree for two weeks. It is not like the Oak Grove tree sit where they wanted to build something on the site. They had no designs on cutting down the tree that Fresh was in, so why did they make such a big deal about it? If they had just ignored him, his protest probably would have slowly trailed off and ended unceremoniously. But instead, they invested a tremendous amount of time, energy and symbolic investment into Fresh's protest. When he came down, it was in front of 150 people and he was arrested on the spot. Now that is an awesome climax for a protest, and bound to get plenty of attention, which is what he was after. If the administration had ignored him, I doubt he would have made it into the press very much. It is only because they responded that he even made a splash. It reminds me of that part in Harry Potter where Dumbledore is explaining to Harry that the only reason the Prophecy would come true is because Voldemort put worth into it and let it affect his actions. He sewed the seeds of his own undoing by putting faith in the truthfulness of that prophecy. Indeed, the prophecy is self-fulfilling, as long as he believed in it. The same is true of this protest. The administration believed that this protest would have an affect, and consequently, they reacted strongly to it. Strong enough to try, in the words of Fresh, a "sneak ninja attack" at night, and ban him from campus for a week when he came down. If they had just ignored him, I doubt anyone would have showed up to see the drama of a confrontation (there would not have been one if the administration had ignored him). Nor would the press have cause to write an article where there was no tension (they are annoying like that). The administration could have defused the tension of the situation by ignoring him.
All in all, this just shows the strength of non-violence. When your opponent strikes out, it only makes you stronger and your message more prominent. And while I am not sure how effective sitting in a tree for two weeks is toward democratizing the reagents (aside from getting press to the issue)... it sure makes for a good story.
It is nice to see that even in places where sds does not exist yet, there are people organizing around some of the central issues which sds is doing across the nation. I am planning on contacting some of the other organizers of the campaign and tell them about sds, with the hope that they will hook into the sds network to help their cause (as well as maybe become an sds chapter :-) ).
But what I found hilarious about the article in the Daily Californian was that there is actually a group called "Students Against Hippies in Trees." And they showed up to protest the protest. Gotta love counter-protests, they are always kind of funny, especially when they have ridiculous names like that.
The thing that still boggles my mind is why the University cares that Fresh was in a tree for two weeks. It is not like the Oak Grove tree sit where they wanted to build something on the site. They had no designs on cutting down the tree that Fresh was in, so why did they make such a big deal about it? If they had just ignored him, his protest probably would have slowly trailed off and ended unceremoniously. But instead, they invested a tremendous amount of time, energy and symbolic investment into Fresh's protest. When he came down, it was in front of 150 people and he was arrested on the spot. Now that is an awesome climax for a protest, and bound to get plenty of attention, which is what he was after. If the administration had ignored him, I doubt he would have made it into the press very much. It is only because they responded that he even made a splash. It reminds me of that part in Harry Potter where Dumbledore is explaining to Harry that the only reason the Prophecy would come true is because Voldemort put worth into it and let it affect his actions. He sewed the seeds of his own undoing by putting faith in the truthfulness of that prophecy. Indeed, the prophecy is self-fulfilling, as long as he believed in it. The same is true of this protest. The administration believed that this protest would have an affect, and consequently, they reacted strongly to it. Strong enough to try, in the words of Fresh, a "sneak ninja attack" at night, and ban him from campus for a week when he came down. If they had just ignored him, I doubt anyone would have showed up to see the drama of a confrontation (there would not have been one if the administration had ignored him). Nor would the press have cause to write an article where there was no tension (they are annoying like that). The administration could have defused the tension of the situation by ignoring him.
All in all, this just shows the strength of non-violence. When your opponent strikes out, it only makes you stronger and your message more prominent. And while I am not sure how effective sitting in a tree for two weeks is toward democratizing the reagents (aside from getting press to the issue)... it sure makes for a good story.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Catching up
So, I haven't written here in a month. Procrastination can be quite harsh when one is busy. So here is an update.
I have a job! I am Rabbi Lerner's assistant. For those of you who don't know who he is, he is the Editor of Tikkun, the Chair of the Network of Spiritual Progressive and Rabbi of Beyt Tikkun Synagogue. Back in the late 60s, he was the chair of the Berkeley Chapter of sds, and he helped found the New American Movement. He was one of the Seattle Seven, and he has pretty much been committed to activism for his entire life.
I also have an apartment. It is a small sublet to hold me over until May when I am going to get an apartment with Bucky and Dan. It is a decent place, alittle pricey, but it is only a block from work, so you can't beat the location. I think the room is a converted porch, given the fact that two walls are solid windows, and the door frame has the marks of having had two doors (one probably being a screen door).
I have had alot to do at work, and it is good to feel productive. I do alot of organizing and data management, which is right up my alley since it was what I did for sds and the other activist groups I was in. All in all, I am very happy with it. Although it was a bit difficult to get used to waking up at 7:30 or 8 every day.
I have a job! I am Rabbi Lerner's assistant. For those of you who don't know who he is, he is the Editor of Tikkun, the Chair of the Network of Spiritual Progressive and Rabbi of Beyt Tikkun Synagogue. Back in the late 60s, he was the chair of the Berkeley Chapter of sds, and he helped found the New American Movement. He was one of the Seattle Seven, and he has pretty much been committed to activism for his entire life.
I also have an apartment. It is a small sublet to hold me over until May when I am going to get an apartment with Bucky and Dan. It is a decent place, alittle pricey, but it is only a block from work, so you can't beat the location. I think the room is a converted porch, given the fact that two walls are solid windows, and the door frame has the marks of having had two doors (one probably being a screen door).
I have had alot to do at work, and it is good to feel productive. I do alot of organizing and data management, which is right up my alley since it was what I did for sds and the other activist groups I was in. All in all, I am very happy with it. Although it was a bit difficult to get used to waking up at 7:30 or 8 every day.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Good News
Things are going quite well.
On the job front I had a staff interview (where the staff at the office interviewed me) for the Rabbi Lerner assistant job. They asked me about my experience, about how I would handle certain things I would have to do, like with organizing, office work and such. I think it went quite well. They tried to impress upon me the difficulty of the job and the fact that it is emotionally draining. They wanted to make sure I knew what I was getting into, which I appreciate. But I think I can handle it.
The staff was really nice and I can tell that it would be a wonderful place to work. They made me feel pretty at home. At the end of the interview Rabbit Lerner said that he would let me know by Monday or Tuesday whether I got the job or not, and that I was the lead contender. I am pretty happy about that. I just hope I get the job.
On the election front, Obama is doing really well. He is 100 delegates ahead in pledged delegates, and if you take superdelegates into account, than he is still 50-ish ahead. Plus the news says he is fund-raising twice as much as Clinton. I hope he can keep it up. I do not believe that John McCain would be able to beat Clinton or Obama, so if he wins the primary, then he will become president.
Kosovo is independent, which is also pretty good news.
And finally the Democrats in the House of Representatives finally gained the courage to stand up against Bush on giving immunity to the Telecom industry for warrentless wiretapping.
Yes, all in all, this has been a very good week.
On the job front I had a staff interview (where the staff at the office interviewed me) for the Rabbi Lerner assistant job. They asked me about my experience, about how I would handle certain things I would have to do, like with organizing, office work and such. I think it went quite well. They tried to impress upon me the difficulty of the job and the fact that it is emotionally draining. They wanted to make sure I knew what I was getting into, which I appreciate. But I think I can handle it.
The staff was really nice and I can tell that it would be a wonderful place to work. They made me feel pretty at home. At the end of the interview Rabbit Lerner said that he would let me know by Monday or Tuesday whether I got the job or not, and that I was the lead contender. I am pretty happy about that. I just hope I get the job.
On the election front, Obama is doing really well. He is 100 delegates ahead in pledged delegates, and if you take superdelegates into account, than he is still 50-ish ahead. Plus the news says he is fund-raising twice as much as Clinton. I hope he can keep it up. I do not believe that John McCain would be able to beat Clinton or Obama, so if he wins the primary, then he will become president.
Kosovo is independent, which is also pretty good news.
And finally the Democrats in the House of Representatives finally gained the courage to stand up against Bush on giving immunity to the Telecom industry for warrentless wiretapping.
Yes, all in all, this has been a very good week.
Friday, February 15, 2008
Funeral
I was in Pennsylvania for my Grandfather's funeral for alittle over a week. It was really wonderful to see all of my family, and it was reaffirming at this sad time. All 10 of my cousins on that side of the family were there, along with my brother, which is a first. The 12 of us have never been together in one place before. I just wish that we hadn't been brought together by such a sad occasion. But, I have the feeling that we will all be together again in early June for my cousin Rich's wedding.
I was a a pallbearer along with my brother and my other male cousins (all seven of us). I am glad that we were all there, not just because it was good to be together, but because the coffin was very heavy. It was made of very beautiful mahogany, which was my Grandpa's favorite wood. The ceremony in the church and at the cemetery were surprisingly reaffirming. They brought our family and Grandpa's extended community together to share our grief and support each other. Looking at it from an anthropological standpoint, this ceremony is not only meant to be a send-off to the person who has passed away, but to bring people together; to reinforce a community of people who have suffered a severe loss, and to provide an outlet for grief. It is a ritual that had a palpable affect on the mood of my family. It helped everyone overcome the loss and united us to support each other. Whoever devised such a ritual obviously had a great deal of insight into human society and what people need when they sustain such a loss.
I believe the spirit of my Grandpa was present in the funeral. He devoted so much himself to his family, he gave everything to us and treated us wonderfully. His kindness and generosity helped to make our family strong and loving. It is fitting then that his funeral served to reinforce us and to help us. I think he would have been very happy to know that even in death he could help his family and give them strength. At the cemetery was very cold and windy, half of the people gathered were shivering. But, at the end, the sun came out and took the chill out of the air. It was such a magical moment, like he was saying goodbye.
My Grandfather will always serve as an example to me of how I should live my life. He had his priorities straight, with his family always coming first. Generosity, kindness, and humor were among his most notable traits. His selflessness bore fruits so rich and sweet that he managed to hang onto life for years while living in a very difficult state. I hope that one day I will be able to emulate his generosity and selflessness.
I was a a pallbearer along with my brother and my other male cousins (all seven of us). I am glad that we were all there, not just because it was good to be together, but because the coffin was very heavy. It was made of very beautiful mahogany, which was my Grandpa's favorite wood. The ceremony in the church and at the cemetery were surprisingly reaffirming. They brought our family and Grandpa's extended community together to share our grief and support each other. Looking at it from an anthropological standpoint, this ceremony is not only meant to be a send-off to the person who has passed away, but to bring people together; to reinforce a community of people who have suffered a severe loss, and to provide an outlet for grief. It is a ritual that had a palpable affect on the mood of my family. It helped everyone overcome the loss and united us to support each other. Whoever devised such a ritual obviously had a great deal of insight into human society and what people need when they sustain such a loss.
I believe the spirit of my Grandpa was present in the funeral. He devoted so much himself to his family, he gave everything to us and treated us wonderfully. His kindness and generosity helped to make our family strong and loving. It is fitting then that his funeral served to reinforce us and to help us. I think he would have been very happy to know that even in death he could help his family and give them strength. At the cemetery was very cold and windy, half of the people gathered were shivering. But, at the end, the sun came out and took the chill out of the air. It was such a magical moment, like he was saying goodbye.
My Grandfather will always serve as an example to me of how I should live my life. He had his priorities straight, with his family always coming first. Generosity, kindness, and humor were among his most notable traits. His selflessness bore fruits so rich and sweet that he managed to hang onto life for years while living in a very difficult state. I hope that one day I will be able to emulate his generosity and selflessness.
Sunday, January 20, 2008
A Glimpse of the Ocean of Hope Through the Oil Slick of Cynacism
Obama won in South Carolina!
I have spent a good amount of time (given my copious amounts of free time due to unemployment) observing the candidates and their campaigns. I have done some research, and I have to say that while Obama had my support from the start, he has only strengthened it. Edwards was also pretty awesome, but he is out of the race now.
Clinton, on the other hand, has always bothered me. It may have to do with the fact that I protested her when she visited Brown because she was to the right of Bush on the war at that time. She was saying we needed to commit more troops. But now she has changed her mind, and unlike Edwards she has not apologized for supporting the Iraq war in the past. That reeks to me of the acrid smell of an unwillingness to accept responsibility for one's actions. I have heard from friends in the Obama campaign that Clinton is using alot of nasty political tricks, like fake mailers. Clinton's campaign has seemed to be just trying to play the game and win that way. I have no respect for that, nor the use of underhanded politics. I found a webpage that outlines alot of the reasons I dislike Hillary... please refer people to this site: http://2parse.com/?p=210
Piled on top of all this, I recently read "The Left Hand of God" by Michael Lerner. He related the following account. The Clintons ran for the Presidency in 1992 on articulating a new "Politics of Meaning" (the same as the title of another one of Lerner's books). They wanted to make significant change, and had a fairly ambitious agenda. Lerner describes how he was called to the White House to advise them early in 1993. He describes how behind the scenes, they were excessively concerned about poll numbers and what they had support for. Lerner advised them to take a bold stand on issues, that if they made a good argument and appealed to people's moral compass, they would gain the support they need to make those ambitious changes. But, they chose to only do what they thought they had support to do (i.e. not much), to listen to what political consultants said, and abandon their politics of meaning. Especially with health care, Hilary chose to do what was "realistic" instead of taking a bold stand on something she knew was needed. Unfortunately, doing what is realistic is a self-fulfilling prophecy, it is like a runner deciding they will only try to run a 6 minute mile when they are actually capable of running a 4 minute mile with alittle more perseverance and courage. When I read this I understood why I could not support Hilary. She is not willing to be a leader and go against poll numbers. That is what is wrong with the Democratic Party overall, they do not have the confidence in their own beliefs to take stand based on them nor do they have the courage to do what is right even if it is thought to be unpopular. While I disagree with the Republicans on almost every issue, I do wish that the democratic politicians had their level of confidence and courage.
I am ever so thankful that the alternative to Clinton is an inspiring leader. I would hate to have another year when I am just voting for someone because the alternative is worse. I actually WANT to vote for Obama. I WANT to see him in office. He is not afraid to take a stand on issues (although still not as much as I would want), and he is smart. All the debates I have watched have shown the depth of his thinking, and his refusal to dumb it down when he presents it to the public. I feel like Clinton dumbs down her issues and does not believe the American people are smart enough to understand the nuance. Obama's policies, while not perfect, are a huge step in the right direction, and when you look at the details, they are quite different from Clinton's.
I feel that Obama could go farther than what is outlined in his current policies, especially given the way he is able to convey his message. A poorly written book is never read, even if its ideas are phenomenal. An engrossing book, however, will catch one's mind in an un-escapable lust to read it, even if it is void of good ideas. Well, Obama is that rare combination of an engrossing book with good ideas. He articulates his ideas to appeal to people's moral compass instead of their self-interest, which is far FAR more compelling than the typical Democratic party line of appealing to people's self-interest. Great leaders always as you to help others, not to help yourself. It is a far more appealing and engrossing message, and when coupled with good ideas, vision, and courage it will (and has) completely overhaul civilization as we know it.
But I would say the most inspiring thing I have read about Obama is how he treated Richardson during a debate. Richardson spaced out, and did not hear the question. Obama whispered "Katrina" to him. I found this story here: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/29/14329/8255/991/445490
To me, this tells me more about who he is, and his ability to be a leader than anything. Understanding people well enough to instantly sense what is on their mind, and the will to help them if they need it is a treasured combination.
I truly believe that he is running because he thinks he has the chance to do good for people, not out of self-interest or ambition. I can count the number of politicians who seem to possess this treasured outlook, on one hand. I still do not think he will be able to do too much because of the way the government is structured (even Eisenhower couldn't end an infant military-industrial complex). However, if he can manage to employ his movement organizing powers while he is still in office, than I can catch a glimpse of the ocean of hope through the oil slick of cynicism.
I have been writing this post over a few days, and in the course of this my Grandpa has passed away. He was a kind and generous man who placed his family above all else. I am reminded of Exodus Chapter 19-ish, where it is explained that living a mean and selfish life will have ill effects lasting three or four generations in one's family, while living a generous and loving life will see rewards unto the thousandth generation. My Grandpa is a prime example of this, I can see the glow of his love reflected in my family, strengthening and helping us throughout our lives. Thank you Grandpa.
I have spent a good amount of time (given my copious amounts of free time due to unemployment) observing the candidates and their campaigns. I have done some research, and I have to say that while Obama had my support from the start, he has only strengthened it. Edwards was also pretty awesome, but he is out of the race now.
Clinton, on the other hand, has always bothered me. It may have to do with the fact that I protested her when she visited Brown because she was to the right of Bush on the war at that time. She was saying we needed to commit more troops. But now she has changed her mind, and unlike Edwards she has not apologized for supporting the Iraq war in the past. That reeks to me of the acrid smell of an unwillingness to accept responsibility for one's actions. I have heard from friends in the Obama campaign that Clinton is using alot of nasty political tricks, like fake mailers. Clinton's campaign has seemed to be just trying to play the game and win that way. I have no respect for that, nor the use of underhanded politics. I found a webpage that outlines alot of the reasons I dislike Hillary... please refer people to this site: http://2parse.com/?p=210
Piled on top of all this, I recently read "The Left Hand of God" by Michael Lerner. He related the following account. The Clintons ran for the Presidency in 1992 on articulating a new "Politics of Meaning" (the same as the title of another one of Lerner's books). They wanted to make significant change, and had a fairly ambitious agenda. Lerner describes how he was called to the White House to advise them early in 1993. He describes how behind the scenes, they were excessively concerned about poll numbers and what they had support for. Lerner advised them to take a bold stand on issues, that if they made a good argument and appealed to people's moral compass, they would gain the support they need to make those ambitious changes. But, they chose to only do what they thought they had support to do (i.e. not much), to listen to what political consultants said, and abandon their politics of meaning. Especially with health care, Hilary chose to do what was "realistic" instead of taking a bold stand on something she knew was needed. Unfortunately, doing what is realistic is a self-fulfilling prophecy, it is like a runner deciding they will only try to run a 6 minute mile when they are actually capable of running a 4 minute mile with alittle more perseverance and courage. When I read this I understood why I could not support Hilary. She is not willing to be a leader and go against poll numbers. That is what is wrong with the Democratic Party overall, they do not have the confidence in their own beliefs to take stand based on them nor do they have the courage to do what is right even if it is thought to be unpopular. While I disagree with the Republicans on almost every issue, I do wish that the democratic politicians had their level of confidence and courage.
I am ever so thankful that the alternative to Clinton is an inspiring leader. I would hate to have another year when I am just voting for someone because the alternative is worse. I actually WANT to vote for Obama. I WANT to see him in office. He is not afraid to take a stand on issues (although still not as much as I would want), and he is smart. All the debates I have watched have shown the depth of his thinking, and his refusal to dumb it down when he presents it to the public. I feel like Clinton dumbs down her issues and does not believe the American people are smart enough to understand the nuance. Obama's policies, while not perfect, are a huge step in the right direction, and when you look at the details, they are quite different from Clinton's.
I feel that Obama could go farther than what is outlined in his current policies, especially given the way he is able to convey his message. A poorly written book is never read, even if its ideas are phenomenal. An engrossing book, however, will catch one's mind in an un-escapable lust to read it, even if it is void of good ideas. Well, Obama is that rare combination of an engrossing book with good ideas. He articulates his ideas to appeal to people's moral compass instead of their self-interest, which is far FAR more compelling than the typical Democratic party line of appealing to people's self-interest. Great leaders always as you to help others, not to help yourself. It is a far more appealing and engrossing message, and when coupled with good ideas, vision, and courage it will (and has) completely overhaul civilization as we know it.
But I would say the most inspiring thing I have read about Obama is how he treated Richardson during a debate. Richardson spaced out, and did not hear the question. Obama whispered "Katrina" to him. I found this story here: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/29/14329/8255/991/445490
To me, this tells me more about who he is, and his ability to be a leader than anything. Understanding people well enough to instantly sense what is on their mind, and the will to help them if they need it is a treasured combination.
I truly believe that he is running because he thinks he has the chance to do good for people, not out of self-interest or ambition. I can count the number of politicians who seem to possess this treasured outlook, on one hand. I still do not think he will be able to do too much because of the way the government is structured (even Eisenhower couldn't end an infant military-industrial complex). However, if he can manage to employ his movement organizing powers while he is still in office, than I can catch a glimpse of the ocean of hope through the oil slick of cynicism.
I have been writing this post over a few days, and in the course of this my Grandpa has passed away. He was a kind and generous man who placed his family above all else. I am reminded of Exodus Chapter 19-ish, where it is explained that living a mean and selfish life will have ill effects lasting three or four generations in one's family, while living a generous and loving life will see rewards unto the thousandth generation. My Grandpa is a prime example of this, I can see the glow of his love reflected in my family, strengthening and helping us throughout our lives. Thank you Grandpa.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)