Friday, October 18, 2024

#292 / Global Citizens




David Swanson is an anti-war commentator. I subscribe to his periodic newsletter, and thought I might share, today, what Swanson had to say on July 29, 2024. Swanson is not much in favor of any major political party, or in favor of any major party political leader. In the particular pronouncement I am sharing below, however, Swanson focuses in on J.D. Vance and the Republican Party (including its presidential candidate, Donald J. Trump):

I want to suggest an alternative worldview to that promoted by J.D. Vance and company. Like the Olympics announcers passionately demanding patriotism moments before swooning over John Lennon’s Imagine, much of our discourse misses the central role of nationalism because it is so thoughtlessly assumed.
The problem is not just that Vance promotes ideas like increasing birth rates cruelly and should do so in a kind and considerate way. The problem is not just that Vance really wants white people in the United States increasing their birth rates and should want the same for everyone holding a valid U.S. passport. The problem is not just that Vance wants women burdened and endangered in ways men are not subjected to. The problem is not just that Vance cannot imagine caring about anyone other than one’s own children and yet wants to hold a key position in determining the life outlooks for everyone’s children. These are all major god damned problems. They won’t all vanish the instant a different problem is addressed, much less when it is recognized. But they are united by an overarching problem the recognition of which points to an alternative that is inspiring and liberating, whereas the only alternative offered by the corporate media or the Democratic Party is mealy-mouthed mush.

Here’s the problem: neither Vance nor CNN nor Kamala Harris imagines all the people sharing all the world. They never think as global citizens. Once you think as a global citizen, you not only become a fan of every Olympic athlete, a brother or sister of every courageous activist, a proud confederate of every great author and artist on Earth ever, and an opponent of everybody’s wars, but you also gain the ability or permission to notice and say “The birth rate is not decreasing, it’s increasing (you idiot)!” It’s increasing globally, and pretenses of impenetrable borders and of humanitarian wars and of the fictional nature of climate collapse won’t keep the population of human beings within the borders of the United States from increasing. So, by all means, Vance should be nicer to both ladies and cats, but fundamentally he should shut up until he gets his facts straight (emphasis added).


There is a line from "Ripple" that I think we might consider, right here, as a way properly to react to what Swanson is saying. "Ripple," for any who don't know it, is a wonderful Grateful Dead song that I have mentioned in an earlier blog posting. Here's that line  I am thinking of: 

You who choose to lead must follow....

I was in "politics" for many years (albeit on the "local" level). And here's what I know, from my personal experience. In any election, voters have what amounts to a "binary" choice, with imperfection guaranteed on each side. In our current presidential election, we have Trump/Vance versus Harris/Walz. That may be frustrating, for those who recognize imperfections in each ticket, but that's the truth. So, if you are a person who believes that we do, indeed, need to start thinking of "global citizenship," and if you are a person who is inspired by John Lennon's song, "Imagine," with its vision of peoples who are "sharing all the world," I would like to suggest that you not spend a great deal of time worrying about the failures of imagination you might detect in Kamala Harris. Not yet, anyway. Focus first on that actual binary choice that is facing the nation - and you, as a voter - right now.

If Jerry Garcia and the Grateful Dead were right - and I think they were - then what we need to do is to decide between those who step forward to "lead" - whoever does that - and to elect those "leaders" whom we believe are the best suited to accomplish what we care about, given the binary choice with which we are inevitably faced. 

Then, after we have made our choice, we must ask - we must actually demand - that those who choose to lead must "follow," follow those who have elected them, and who expect that their elected leaders will rise to the challenges that truly confront us now. 

We need to be "global citizens." So, we should vote for the candidates whom we believe will best listen to that demand. But we do need to demand it, before, during, and after the vote!

My own thought is this: I don't think that J.D. Vance and his running mate are our best choice, if we're looking for leaders who will try to promote and support global citizenship. But if we also don't think that Kamala Harris and her running mate have made the right commitments on this issue - which is what I am getting from Swanson - we need to make sure that "those who choose to lead" will follow. 

My plea is that if there are deficiencies in the candidates on both sides, the way you see it, you don't sit this election out. Vote the best you can. 

And then demand. 

Those who choose to lead must follow. Self-government means a lot more than voting. It means that we get involved in governing, ourselves, which certainly means, at a minimum, that those who represent us will, in fact, represent our views, our hopes and aspirations. 

That's how we'll get to that commitment to "global citizenship" that Swanson is urging. 


No comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comment!