Home > About Rich's Work > Rich's Blog: Redeeming Hope
Printable Version
Tell a friend
-
An Authentic Voice of Hope
Today I feel compelled to talk about John Edwards’ speech last night, but I am continually drawn to the night before and Barack Obama. Indeed, with each passing moment, his speech burns brighter in my mind and heart.
There were certain qualities to Obama’s speech that make it remarkably authentic and incredibly refreshing. For me, it is not that he is new on the political scene; in fact, it took me awhile to get over the idea that the Democrats had even selected him for this coveted spot. He’s young and relatively inexperienced (I know those are the very reasons why they chose him!).
Still, in a time when political figures seem to have latched onto notions of engendering a sense of possibility and hope – something that I believe is vitally important in public life and which I have been writing about for years – Obama did us all a great service.
While his speech had a decidedly quiet nature to it, his words reverberated throughout the land. He talked about hope almost always in the context of historical examples, demonstrating that it is rooted in something larger than yesterday’s anecdote:I’m not talking about blind optimism here—the almost willful ignorance that thinks unemployment will go away if we just don’t talk about it, or the health care crisis will solve itself if we just ignore it. No, I’m talking about something more substantial. It’s the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores … The audacity of hope!
He discussed hope in terms of enduring American ideals – about the place and role of the common person, the ever-expanding circle of inclusion, the ability of all people to reach for the American Dream:The people I meet in small towns and big cities, in diners and office parks, they don’t expect government to solve all their problems. They know they have to work hard to get ahead and they want to … But they sense, deep in their bones, that with just a change in priorities, we can make sure that every child in America has a decent shot at life, and that the doors of opportunity remain open to all. They know we can do better. And they want that choice.
He reminded people that these are the United States of America – that while our nation is big and diverse, we nonetheless subscribe to the notion of e pluribus unum:Yet even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, there’s not a liberal America and a conservative America—there’s the United States of America.
Even when he talked about his personal life story, it was not to brag about himself, or to ask us to like him, but illustrate that he knows in his bones of what he speaks.My parents shared not only an improbable love; they shared an abiding faith in the possibilities of this nation. They would give me an African name, Barack, or “blessed,” believing that in a tolerant America your name is no barrier to success. They imagined me going to the best schools in the land, even though they weren’t rich, because in a generous America you don’t have to be rich to achieve your potential.
Indeed, his speech, his words and his delivery, asked the listener to explore his or her own conscious. What kind of America do you want? How will you engage? What are you willing to think about?This year, in this election, we are called to reaffirm our values and commitments, to hold them against a hard reality and see how we are measuring up, to the legacy of our forbearers, and the promise of future generations. And fellow Americans—Democrats, Republicans, Independents—I say to you tonight: we have more work to do.
We have much more work to do. We live in a time when far too many Americans have retreated from public life, and form each other, into close-knit circles. We don’t trust many of our leaders. There is a lack of social cohesion. But most people are good and decent. They want to try and do the right thing. They want to belong to something larger than themselves. They want to make a difference.
At issue is whether we will re-engage – beyond the current argument about the War in Iraq. Will we look beyond ourselves and think about our relationship to public life? The sentiments in Obama’s speech offer a path of possibility. They are rooted in more than nostalgia, more than a heated argument, more than mere rhetoric. They come from the history and story of America and from our own inherent aspirations to reconnect.
Three cheers for Barack Obama!
(For other views on the speech, look here, here, and here) -
A Profound Quiet
On Monday night at the Democratic Convention all talking and rhetoric stopped for a moment during the solemn and touching remembrances for 9/11. (Click here, here, and here for accounts)
I often chagrin the fact that 9/11 is exploited for political and consumer purposes; last night was different.
A profound quiet seemed to come over the proceedings as a few speakers gave words to haunting memories that still swirl within us. This time there was no rhetoric; no pleas to go out and buy more consumer goods to bolster the flagging economy; no war-time language to persuade a nation.
No, this time we were quiet. This time the words revealed our souls to ourselves. We were not divided along red and blue states. This time we were Americans.
As I watched the events unfold, even the talking heads on television were at a loss. They could not explain how the nation has become so seemingly polarized just two years after 9/11. In the days that followed those attacks, Americans seem united – not just in the face of terrorism, but in their resolve to address pressing social ills such as our public schools.
People have not changed since those September days. Our souls have not been corrupted. Our aspirations have not evaporated. Our desire to do the right thing has not abated.
The memories last night of 9/11 should not be consumed as some kind of nostalgia or cheap tear-jerk. Instead, let it remind us of what is lodged in our souls. I say this not just to our political leaders, but to those in the news media who must choose how to cover politics, and to those of us as citizens who must decide whether to engage in public life and how best to do so.
We could see ourselves again last night – yes, for some that means as Democrats; but for everyone, it means as Americans. -
News from the Convention?
The noise is deafening at times: the pundits and news media who tell us there is nothing newsworthy about the political conventions which start today. They’re wrong.
They, of course, want to use the master narrative of conflict as the gauge of newsworthiness. If there is no conflict – no floor fights, no battle for the vice-presidential spot, no tension between different party factions – then there is no news to report.
I don’t agree. In fact, the typical political conflict – “he said, she said” – usually turns most of us off from politics. It may make good viewing, but it doesn’t address our core concerns or hopes.
So, I happen to be one person who believes the conventions have a lot to tell us – even now, when prominent journalists have called the upcoming political conventions "staged," a "set-piece," an "infomercial," an "empty ritual," and, perhaps the cruelest characterization of all, "little more than a reality show."
I plan to watch the conventions to find out:
•What tone will the convention take – I’m tired of all the Red/Blue division. Will either party try to reach out and give people room to join them, or will they strike a highly-partisan tone, one that causes people to come out fighting and “take their corners”?
•What will they ask us to do – will the conventions pretend to ask people to “give of themselves” through “new social contracts” or “covenants,” but fail to really ask us to do anything significant?
•Will they pander to people or engage them – will the candidates and their proxies auction off the public treasury by “selling” programs and tax cuts to people; or will they level with people about what needs to be done, by whom, and what it really cost?
The planners of each convention had to make explicit choices when it comes to these and other questions. The answers reveal what they value and how they see us. That will tell us about them, their vision, and how they see America.
Throughout this week, I’ll pose more questions and ideas. Then we’ll follow the Republican convention, too. All in all, I think we can learn a great deal from these conventions. Stay tuned. -
Convention Coverage
As we all follow the upcoming political conventions, please check back often. Next week, I will be offering frequent thoughts on what we are hearing from the Democratic Convention, and on what we should be hearing. I'm also interested in what you want to hear from the convention speakers, so add your voice in the comments section. -
Facts Aren't The Whole Story
I went to see Michael Moore’s film Fahrenheit 9/11 this weekend. It was a powerful movie. For those people who already believe the War in Iraq was a bad move, it only gives more ammunition to confirm their position. And yet, as I watched the film I found myself deeply disturbed. The film distorted certain facts by providing little context; used editing techniques to suggest seamless connections that actually were "jumps in logic"; pulled at people's heart strings (my own included) and yet did not give any air time to the complex issues surrounding Iraq and terrorism. In fact, it was not so much an argument or a helpful illumination of a tough situation as it was a long campaign message – only this time I had to pay to get in. It succeeded in squeezing out any ambiguity of a situation riddled by inherent tensions and competing options.
Recently, the Washington Post ran an article that showed how George Bush and John Kerry routinely use different facts to talk about the economy. Kerry emphasizes that 1.8 million jobs have been lost and that newly-created jobs pay less. George Bush argues that the economy is on the move, producing new jobs in recent months and showing signs of recovery. The story showed how both sets of facts are true. And yet both candidates argue as if the other set of facts simply do not exist.
There’s been a lot of talk about fact-checking during this campaign. The Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania has an entire website devoted to checking the facts on every political ad that appears on the air or in print. Accuracy is an important piece of running a campaign, but we must focus on what creates genuine accuracy. Focusing on single facts alone never reveals the whole story. In a country where we are told we are divided, the question is whether people can see beyond their existing arguments; whether they can consider the full picture and its competing factors; whether they are willing to learn anything new about a situation; whether they can break through to reach some new common ground.
So long as public discourse revolves around distorted facts, and so long as it plays with people’s context, we undermine people's sense of reality. This causes people either to opt out of public life entirely (see the 50% of people who don’t vote) or to simply choose up sides before engaging. It allows all of us to lock into positions before hearing another side. Both Michael Moore's film and the Bush/Kerry ads would benefit greatly if they told people the whole story and then made their argument from there. If they said, "Look, here's what is really going on with the economy -- the good, the bad and the ugly -- and why I think my opponent's proposals won't succeed in taking us forward, and why mine will." Then people won’t feel as if they are being so manipulated. They won't feel that the only choice they have is to latch on to one limited position or another, simply because there is no viable alternative. Then they won't feel that their reality has been distorted simply because someone wants to pursue their own point -- at any cost. We are indeed divided on many issues. But we are needlessly divided at times -- concocting arguments, stories, and out-of-context facts that push us into corners, inflame our irrational emotions, and strike fear into us. We need to start with the whole story and argue from there. So, let's have a real debate about issues such as the War in Iraq and the economy (and others). Let the real arguments fly. Then let's see where the chips may fall.