Monday, April 30, 2007

The true politics of terrorism

We’ve heard the arguments: “support the Democrats and you support terrorists.”

Has it occurred to no one that support of Republican positions on war-making, foreign policy, religious (in)tolerance, immigration, free trade, globalization, and ‘democracy-building’ are the precipitating cause of Al-Qaeda’s use of terrorism? Combine xenophobia with economic colonialism, and the United States appears to be a monster that actually hates democracy.

It may seem troubling, but next to George Bush’s fascist totalitarian tendencies, Al-Qaeda looks like a group of freedom-fighters.

George long ago lost the battle for the ‘hearts and minds’ of the people through his devotion to running a dictatorship while waving the flag of ‘freedom’. He also lost any chance at winning over the hearts and minds of those in the Middle East, desperate for change in their own cultures. Instead, George’s divisiveness, hatred of compromise and conflict management, opposition to communication, and rejection of consensus-building (except the first, all of these the true hallmarks of leadership), have led to rampant recruitment of opposition to United States policy.

The problem is the administration’s stances. It isn’t George as a person (who is offensive in his own way), or the citizens as people. It isn’t even our military. It is how and why we use our might, influence, and wealth to force our way on others, to the detriment of others. This means that it is an issue of mindset. It is our use of resources, our view of interacting with other nations, our view of economics, and our view of war.

The Democratic Party is very likely to make some big mistakes, especially when it often seems to overly pursue consensus. But the Republican positions foster consumerism, which is the biggest reason people of other states begin to despise us. When we have “a consumer society” as Pres. Bush has so often declared and supported, we create a society that is selfish, isolationist, and exploitive. Consumerism isn’t about freedom, choice, or economic success/security; it represents the worst version of us.

So here’s the test, Democratic presidential candidates: can you stand up and call on the end of consumerism? Can you say that our supposed national trait of ‘unity’ is more important than tax cuts for wealthy corporations? Can you support the health of our nation and make inroads to strengthening our global position?

Probably not, but at least a return to the center is better than a culture of divisiveness we have come to expect from the self-proclaimed ‘compassionate conservative,’ also known as ‘the decider’ who sold himself in 2000 as “a uniter, not a divider”. If that’s his self-image, then how awful it will be for him when he realizes that no one has divided the country, and the world, as thoroughly as George W. Bush.

No comments: