Monthly Archive for September, 2009

America takes the helm of leading the world with its new president Obama at the United Nations

Published on September 25, 2009 in Global Politics. 0 Comments

quote to tickle thought: Like all of you, my responsibility is to act in the interest of my nation…but in the year 2009…the interests of nations and peoples are shared (Barack Obama in his address to the United Nations General Assembly)

news flashes: Obama seeks UN help; Russia hints at shift; Chinese president pledges further assistance to other developing countries; as Qadhafi deal goes south, should Trump be fired?

in perspective: America’s new President, the western industrialized world’s first non-white leader, reported on his country’s position with regard to global issues for the first time in mid-September 2009. His words about America’s commitment to cooperation in a global world were met with rapt attention by the other 100-plus country leaders gathered in the august General Assembly chamber, where every seat was occupied and standing space was at full capacity. Yet the words delivered on behalf of a newly friendly United States carried the weight of global impact because of the leadership the speaker represented.

In the midst of a global economic crisis, America elected a smart and globally savvy young leader who embodied the best of the world’s youth in promoting progress over the cautions of tradition-bound politicians. Half white and half African black with a wife descended of American slaves, America’s new president bore the stamp of a pedigree to lead the world simply by being at ease in the world he had been elected to lead.

America’s previous leaders in the forum of world leaders had been, by turns, superstars or misfits. America’s leader in 2009 was at home in the global forum and the world listened. Leaders of both developed and developing countries attended to his address with all the focus turned onto a compelling new arrival on the global scene.

America’s address was followed by one on behalf of Libya, whose African leader affirmed the country’s commitment to joining the global mainstream of prosperity after nearly 50 years of fighting to recover from centuries of European colonialism. Rejected by the host country of the United Nations based on vague perceptions, he presented a drawn-out but eloquent case for the United Nations to relocate into a more hospitable environment.

The upshot of the contrast between the two presentations was clear. America was welcomed because of its new position even while doubts about its sincerity and follow-through remained to be allayed.

The conservative New York Post the next day called the new America president naive, among other negative characterizations relating to dealings in a global world. From a bird’s eye view, however, there was no doubt that America would continue to lead the world if it trusted in the leader it had elected based on the character of a man solid enough to have garnered America’s confidence in a global economic crisis.

Post to Twitter

Art unites even when it divides

Published on September 21, 2009 in Global Communication. 0 Comments

well said:  Only through art can we get outside of ourselves and know another’s view of the universe which is not the same as ours (Marcel Proust)

in the news:  Will massive Juanes concert in Havana stir winds of change?

in other words:  It was estimated that a million people attended  a peace concert in Cuba organized by the Latin muscian Juares.   The controversy surrounding the event centered on whether the Cuban government would be legitimized for its tolerance and whether peace would actually be promoted.  Heavily involved in the controversy were Cuban exiles living in the United States, many of whom had suffered under the current regime.

However legitimate the concerns, it was the great emotion underlying the response to a massive musical event that remained of consequence once the experience had ended.  The Cuban government had not interfered  and a million young people had bonded during a rousing, uplifting period of togetherness.

In the rapidly shifting contemporary world, there were refugees, exiles and displaced persons to be found on every continent and of every age.  In addition, countries were prone to change as much as people.  Those separated from home countries could be stuck with entrenched attitudes that no longer applied.

As the grand unifier of human experience, art could be the instrument of furthering communication about change even if its subtleties worked beneath the radar of emotionally-laden political vehemence.  Like the vibrations lingering long after a live concert has ended, the music was created with the intention that it live on to touch and color perception for ever after .

Post to Twitter

America's new president on world center stage at home

Published on September 19, 2009 in Global Communication. 0 Comments Tags: , , , .

quote to tickle thought: After all, there is only one race — humanity (George Moore, Irish playwright, 1900)

news flashes: Obama rejects race as lead cause of criticism; Obama rolling into week of big diplomatic stakes (with UN in New York and G-20 group of countries in Pittsburgh); struggling at home, Obama to get warm UN welcome

America made history with its 2008 election by electing the western industrialized world’s first non-white leader as the one most likely to fix a global economic crisis. With that decision, America also chose openness and compassion in its approach to challenges since an eight-year fear-based policy of exclusion and privilege had consistently led to failure. And while America struggled with its new identity as global maverick in racial equality, its newly regained status as world leader was destined to be dramatically demonstrated when America sent its new leader to the forum of world leaders on home turf at the United Nations and in Pittsburgh during the fourth week of his first September in office.

Powerful and blessed by both geography and ideology, America can seem to lack perspective on itself through self-absorption. Americans can seem very much like the French, stereotyped as being so pleased with their home that they have little use for the rest of the world. Yet on the global stage where he will stand in equality with the leaders of the world’s 191 other countries, America’s delegate will be the crown jewel due to the profound commitment to human progress he represents on behalf of his country.

Achieving the level of power needed to lead a country is truly a well-tested gift of mastering a broad range of skills. Models of democracy and tyrants alike, the leaders of the world’s 192 countries have learned the ropes of meeting their nation’s needs. As heads of sovereign states, they are as equal in the world as are the members of a family on the smaller scale.

Rich or poor, great or small, every country of the world has a leader and each one matters at the United Nations and in the global forum. Each has a personality as distinct as the country represented, whether a European economic power or a South Pacific island nation pleading for world attention to the impact on its ability to contribute to the global family due to climate change.

As proven by the 2008 election, America loves a challenge and is fully up to meeting the demands. If anything, it may need a bigger mirror in which to fully appreciate its own glory. Watching its new president on the global stage during his first participation in the United Nations process provides just that opportunity.

Reactionary fallout from having overturned a white male monopoly on power percolated primarily from America’s white ultraconservatives during the first half of the new administration’s

Post to Twitter

A future shaped by a new global fiction,

Published on September 11, 2009 in Global Communication. 0 Comments

Well said: Literature is news that stays news (Ezra Pound); fiction reveals truths that reality obscures (Ralph Waldo Emerson)

In the news:  Authors rally behind Google book settlement (The Authors Guild)

In other words:  A global world calls for a global literature as revolutionary in communicating ideas as was Guttenberg’s printing press.  The literature of global discourse must by necessity be radically different from its classic context.  In an interconnected world dominated  by internet news and information, cell phone image and exchange, Twitter and whatever new medium arises, literature will serve as the time-tested and trustworthy mediator between cultures.

By definition in the Oxford Dictionary, literature is written work, particularly that whose value lies in beauty of language or in emotional effect.  The ephemeral forms of modern communication are certainly informative but much of that body hardly makes a long-term impact.  For sure, most do not merit permanence.

Yet permanence matters, not just in pragmatic affairs such as legal contracts, but also in keeping a continuity of awareness in a fast changing world; not only over a lifetime, but across generations and through history.  As a case in point, the seventieth anniversary of the Second World War has brought up questions about pre-war agreements between Germany and Russia with regard to Poland.  Those issues are an intrinsic element in global relations between countries.  They are of personal concern to the citizens of those countries when they interact in a mobile global society.

Global literature will contribute to the resolution of conflicts and the spread of cross cultural understanding, tolerance, cooperation and even affinity, by focusing on commonalities and working uniquenesses into universal themes and archetypes.  Global literature will transcend the narrow national perspective to meld into the greater human view.  It will be democratic, with beginning works made widely available on the internet for culling by experts for merits of transformation into permanent work.

In that regard, any mechanism that gets an author’s voice out to the largest possible audience is to be welcomed.  Legal matters such as compensation for work and and protection of intellectual property  rights are critical factors in the revolutionary area of global literature.  They are new frontiers of opportunity for all the actors  invested and involved in the spread and preservation of  worthwhile, useful, beautiful, uplifting and even enjoyable ideas common to all humankind.

Post to Twitter

Who are the Obama Haters in 2009 America?

Published on September 9, 2009 in Global Politics. 0 Comments

quote to tickle thought: It is a very great thing to think as you like; but, after all, an important question remains: what you think (Mathew Arnold, Democracy)

news flashes: US economy stabilizing in all regions; Obama’s approval rating tumbles to lowest point at 53%; planned Obama speech to students sparks protest; “tea party express” takes protests across country; Blackwater (security firm) tapped foreigners on secret CIA program; Cheny criticizes probe of Bush-era CIA interrogations

in perspective: A mass-forwarded e-mail from a conservative source served to summarize sentiments of “tea-party” rallyers prior to the new President’s September 9 address to the joint sessions of Congress on health care reform in America. The ability to read and reflect on the e-mail without instant deletion was a measure of liberal tolerance in an America where headlines blared the stirring of animosities in a country suddenly too peaceful for some who had thrived for eight years on imperialism and bloodlust, both military and economic.

The e-mail entitled “Well said– I don’t know where this originated but I like it!” began by stating that the forwarder of the message wanted to make clear to “all who would listen” that this was one person who WOULD NOT unite behind Obama! A platitude followed about respect for the Office and a bow to Obama’s abilities as an “orator and wordsmith.” The sender would pray for Obama, BUT that was it. From the day of receiving the e-mail, presumably in a build-up of like-minded thinkers, the e-mailer would see what could be done to make sure “He” was a one-term President!

“Why?”, the e-mail went on to say the sender did not share Obama’s vision or values for America, including his views on abortion and his Marxist views on re-distributing wealth and raising taxes on the wealthy. Unlike what Obama had stated, the e-mail claimed, America was not arrogant, even though a September 8 poll released by the World Economic Forum showed America had slipped to second place behind Switzerland in economic competitiveness, due in large part to the global economic crisis that had originated in the United States.

The e-mail continued with a roster of protests about Obama’s liberal agenda with regard to extending rights of homosexuals and “giving more to illegal’s (sic) than American citizens,” reduction of the military, his sitting down with terrorist regimes and his spiritual beliefs “(at least the one he has made public).” It went on to an assertion that “I have a higher obligation to My Country and my God to do what is Right!” by opposing the liberals that for eight years had been a “vocal and irreverant minority” led by entertainers with no credibility but celebrity, who had attacked President Bush and his spiritual beliefs, and who had mocked the core values so important to the founding and growth of the Country, including capital punishment, the right to bear firearms and the right of free speech.

The e-mail concluded with an affirmation of “Never!” on uniting behind Obama, of refusing to “retreat one more inch” in favor of those believed to be the embodiment of “Evil.” President Bush had made many mistakes, the missive said, but he had “weighed his decisions in light of the long-established Judeo-Christian principles of the Founding Fathers!!!”

In conclusion, the sender of the e-mail would be a “thorn in the side” of those who, if left unchecked, would destroy “our” country. Compromise would be defeat! The hope was that the election would wake those who had sat at the sidelines and allowed the “Socialist-Marxist anti-God” crowd to change what had been good in America.

The e-mail ended with “God bless!” and “in God we Trust.” The final words were “I WANT THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE BACK.”

The question left by the e-mail in the mind of a progressive American was in regard to the “American way of life” the e-mailers of the message wanted back. Was it an America in a “dog eat dog world” with its economy tanking as in the last months of the previous conservative administration? Or was it an America that never was, an uninformed fantasy of egoistic omnipotence disconnected from the modern reality of a humane and global world?

Post to Twitter