Dear President Obama:
As you well know, Egypt is in a state of unrest and uncertainty. Sooner or later the political regime in Egypt will change. Regardless of how quickly it changes, or how it changes, you must be prepared to respond with the humanitarian effort. Quite frankly, it is not necessary to send troops or any of the like. Our intervention should not miltaristic, but humanitarian. And, no, we ought not guise militaristic efforts in the sheepskin of humanitarian efforts (Iraq, Afganistan, Vietnam, etc.)
The people of Egypt are already running low on basic food supplies, and it remains uncertain as to how fragile there structure will be once change has become a reality. Simply put, we know it will not in the ideal shape. Mobilize now humanitarian efforts from across the international community. This is not a political statement, but a human statement. This is not a natural disaster that has unexpectedly descended upon us. We have ample time to mobilize our resources and support the people of Egypt.
Furthermore, this will insure the people of Egypt trust us, and will continue to work alongside us. Instead of sending tanks, let's send bread. Instead of sending weapons, let's send water. Instead of sending troops, let's send rice. We have the opportunity to change our foreign policy from intervening with troops to intervening with food. Now, is the time, President Obama to lay aside the political implications and peer deep into the only issue that matters: humanity. Now, is the time, President Obama, to reinvision an America that supports humanity and democracy-building. Now, is the time, President Obama, to declare that when change is made for openness and freedom, we, the United States of America, will provide the basic needs for human survival. We will provide them not in an effort to control or manipulate a new government. We will provide them so that people can lay aside the basic needs, and focus on the higher needs of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
This I humbly submit for your consideration.
J. Zachary Bailes
Get mugs all sorts of goodies from 'One Race Human' on Cafe Press. http://www.cafepress.com/oneracehuman
Even as I begin this series of posts, I recognize the misleading title. As you will soon find, I don't believe in a progressive politics, in the sense that I don't support them as a political system. Quite frankly, any thing called "politics" will soon disintegrate into fractions simply because that's the nature of politics. Upon breaking up of some political system, we try to get people to hold onto the "core" values of a party. Lost in the years of evolution, is the necessity to be ever aware of updating and re-imagining the strategy with which one most readily associates.
I also find that we have narrowed "politics" into what Congress, the President, or other elected officials do. We are merely spectators, casting votes occasionally, and only getting angry when someone doesn't support us or when something annoys us. We rarely, if ever, stand behind and get passionate simply because some is doing something right. "Politics" must be recovered from the Platonic form: a way of life.
I find that the life of a citizen of the United States is plagued with trying to understand the United States. Even know, I find myself struggling to understand our perplexing state. We have the Tea Party that calls for rights for all, but I have not heard one Tea Party member call for greater responsibility. Rights and responsibility go hand-in-hand. Yet, my point here is not philosophical, it's human. We are to stand for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Yet, it becomes difficult to be happy when you know that if you're sick, there's no help for you. Even worse, if you're under the heavy burden of disease, you will live with that even if a cure exists. I don't see how people can push policy that fattens wallets while it makes gaunt our common humanity. I'm not interested in being right, or holding the truth as my champion trophy, I'm simply interested in caring for others, for my fellow Americans.
"Don't tread on me," is what the Tea Party member says. Yet, they can afford the protection not to be tread upon by disease and sickness. They can afford the marvelous healthcare, but try to tell that to the 129 million Americans with pre-existing conditions. Try telling the young woman that not because of her choices, but because of systematic, institutional, and generations-long oppression she cannot get the healthcare she needs. "Don't tread on me" is nothing but a reinterpreted slogan meant to procure privilege for some and bastardize the rest.
America is not about choosing who can pursue happiness. America is in the business of providing opportunity for all people, of all creeds, at least I thought it was. If people are going to wave a flag that once stood for freedom from tyranny, then live it out. Enhance healthcare, don't diminish it. We must stand-up in a unified voice and proclaim that we will make America the country that still bellows from deep down, you have the chance to pursue happiness. Whether you ever find it or not, well, it's your call. Yet, let us not be the people that stand in the way of progress, of change, of opportunity for all, by all. Healthcare is not a public option. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness demands it.
In the midst of conversation concerning harmful rhetoric, I've have spoken with both conservatives and liberals. Now, many conservatives have been supportive of conversations that unify. Many people forget that the talking heads on TV shows are still, just that: talking heads. They do not represent the cumulative belief of conservatives or liberals. Rather, we would be wise to think them as people that speak from an ideological home that get paid for extremism. Many talking-heads have, unfortunately, sold their souls (not to the Devil, for at least there you know what you 'sold' it to).
(More after the jump...)
In the wake of the AZ disaster people have attempted to isolate the responsibility of political rhetoric. From across the aisle people blame each other. Quite frankly, I'm not so sure there's ONE party to blame. We have, for quite sometime, thought that arguing against one another is political progress. Unfortunately, that's not the case. Yet, I am unsure if political rhetoric is to receive all the blame for this shooting.
This man could be mentally disturbed, and until the appropriately qualified psychologists make this call, we will not know. We can note from this event that there remains something eery about the whole situation. There were people that wondered about his stability, people that questioned whether or not he would one day erupt into violence. What surprises me is that people were not notified of this possibility.