[Oe List ...] No Subject

[LAURELCG at aol.com]

Subject: Fw: A South African reflects on the election
 
 > > Peter Storey
 > > THOUGHTS ON AN AMERICAN ELECTION
 > > 
 > > I don't know how many people woke up at 3.00am for each of the
 > > Presidential debates. Americans of course did not need to, but
 > > Elizabeth and I did, and there were many others here in South Africa
 > > who would have done the same. Ours is more than an academic interest.
 > > In the developing world this US election is as important as any in our
 > > own country, because we live on the fringes of the American Empire and
 > > decisions made in the White House have enormous impact on our lives -
 > > not much  different really than long ago when a decree from Caesar
 > > Augustus touched the lives of Mary and Joseph and thousands of others
 > > in Palestine.
 > > 
 > > Perhaps that is why it is hard to believe that there are people at
 > > Duke Divinity School who are speaking of not voting. If you're one of
 > > them, I hope that you will change your mind. Even if you don't think
 > > it important for the sake of the people living in the United States,
 > > please remember the countless people in Africa, Asia, Europe, the
 > > Middle East, Iraq and other places, who are holding their collective
 > > breath as they wait for the decision Americans will make on November
 > > 2. In the days when only a powerful white elite had the vote in South
 > > Africa, I used to tell white people that for each one of them that
 > > went into the voting station, five poor, oppressed and marginalized
 > > black South Africans went with them - and when they cast their vote I
 > > hoped they would be conscious of those five voteless people leaning
 > > over their shoulder to watch whether they voted for their own security
 > > only, or to extend the hopes and rights of all. Americans, whose
 > > President has such influence over the lives of millions of people they
 > > have hardly heard of, bear a very deep global responsibility when they
 > > vote.
 > > 
 > > If you're Christian, then I can't imagine any reason why you would
 > > shirk that responsibility. Until very recently, where I live,
 > > Christians joined others in being willing to die for the right to
 > > vote, and when we cast our ballot these days, we do so with the memory
 > > of friends who did die. It is sad to hear of people in the US taking
 > > such an awesome responsibility so lightly.
 > > 
 > > While we know that in the ultimate sense no Caesar can usher in God's
 > > reign of justice and peace, the Caesar's of this world can and do make
 > > a massive difference to the lives of the people God loves, especially
 > > the anawim - the little people of the earth. Caesars destroy life or
 > > respect it, they rob or redistribute, they oppress or liberate, they
 > > exploit prejudice or encourage respect. They have power to take our
 > > best instincts - or our worst - and give them the weight of law.  When
 > > Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, "The law can't make you love me, but
 > > it can stop you from lynching me," he had the measure of both the
 > > limits and the potential of politics."  He knew that it would take
 > > more than better law to bring the "Beloved Community" but if the law
 > > could stop white bigots murdering black people in places like North
 > > Carolina, or open up a segregated institution like Duke University to
 > > people of color, how could Christians dare withdraw from that
 > > responsibility to their neighbors? Even if no political candidate can
 > > represent all that Christians regard as central, we must still take
 > > seriously the prophetic duty to hold our current rulers accountable -
 > > as Dr. King held President Lyndon Johnson accountable - for what they
 > > have done with their power, and be prepared if necessary to use our
 > > votes to remove them.
 > > 
 > > Significantly, Dr. King's most unpopular stand was when he went beyond
 > > the domestic American civil rights struggle to embrace issues of world
 > > justice and peace, challenging President Johnson on April 4, 1967,
 > > from the pulpit of Riverside Church, New York, about the immorality,
 > > cruelty and waste of the Vietnam War. Today the U.S. is embroiled in
 > > another immoral conflict and it is no secret that the vast majority of
 > > people outside the US are hopeful that Americans will use their votes
 > > on November 2 to remove their current President.
 > > 
 > > Here are some of the reasons why so many in the wider world hope to
 > > see a change in November:
 > > 
 > > We are troubled by the hubris, inconsistencies and lies that have
 > > characterized this administration's international actions. After
 > > promising a "humbler" foreign policy based on respect, Mr. Bush has
 > > acted with ignorance and arrogance in his relations with the rest of
 > > the world and its leaders. Those of us who have experienced the United
 > > Nations as a force for good and a champion of the oppressed have been
 > > saddened by his scornful undermining of the UN. In just four years one
 > > US President has almost destroyed a complex fabric of international
 > > treaties and understandings that took decades to build, and in his
 > > haste to wage "pre-emptive" war, has simply proved how dangerous that
 > > doctrine is. His war in Iraq has been exposed as being based on two
 > > great lies. Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, and was not
 > > implicated in September 11, 2001. Nothing can bring back the thousands
 > > of Iraqis slaughtered and more than 1000 Americans who have died for
 > > these lies, but American voters can end this reckless "High Noon"
 > > behavior in international relations.
 > > 
 > > There is understanding across the world of the security concerns that
 > > have been raised by the atrocities of 9/11, but the great flood of
 > > sympathy that flowed toward the US at that time has dried up, as
 > > American responses have been driven more by fear and vengeance than a 
desire to identify and address what lies behind the deep resentments
 > > in the Arab world. In particular, this is the first US administration
 > > to permit the terrible attritions in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
 > > to go on virtually unchecked. More than anything else, this festering
 > > conflict, and US bias toward Israel, fuels Arab frustration, hatred of
 > > the US, and acts of terror.
 > > 
 > > Christians in the developing world are concerned that this President's
 > > very public claims to be a follower of Christ embarrass our witness to
 > > the Gospel and exacerbate Muslim/Christian tensions. Because of Mr.
 > > Bush's claims to be led by God, Muslims in Africa increasingly
 > > identify America's foreign policy as a Christian "crusade" against
 > > them. In countries where Christians and Muslims have lived peacefully
 > > side by side for centuries, relationships are becoming more difficult.
 > > Moderate Muslims ask what the difference is between Muslim extremism, 
which they oppose, and US policies driven by a President who is
 > > captive to the views of a right-wing religious power bloc. They are
 > > concerned that US policy is helping to create a stand-off between two
 > > fundamentalisms, the American religious right and extremist Muslim
 > > fundamentalists. When told that President Bush is in conflict with a
 > > number of the key social principles of his own church, repeatedly
 > > denying its bishops' any meeting to discuss his policies, they cannot
 > > understand why he has not been denounced by his church.
 > > 
 > > In Africa, where we struggle to stamp out terrible abuses of the past
 > > and where the church has played a significant role in building a
 > > tenuous culture of dignity and human rights, one of the examples we
 > > looked to for inspiration has become tarnished. It does not help our
 > > case when the largest constitutional democracy of all permits
 > > prisoners suspected of terrorism to be taken to places on our
 > > continent, like Egypt, where torture is practiced. At the same time,
 > > this administration has quite openly bribed a number of smaller
 > > countries to change their votes to reject an International Court of
 > > Justice, which would help guard the rights of the weak and vulnerable.
 > > Understandably, people in developing countries conclude that we are
 > > not all equal under the law, but that there are different laws for the
 > > strong and for the weak.
 > > 
These are only a few of the reasons why most people in the wider world
hope for a change in November. In the developing world, ironically, we
are exposed to much more hard news - as well as real debate - about
the issues of US foreign action than most Americans ever see. We need
to be assured the US electorate will not be making up their minds
based on the sanitized coverage by networks afraid of being called
"unpatriotic," paid talking heads out-shouting each other nightly on
cable, and attack advertisements by political parties.

I have not referred to Mr. Bush's domestic policies, although many of 
them have strong implications for the developing world too. I am
concerned that good people in the US should know how important the outcome of 
the election is for their sisters and brothers in places
like Africa. I recall my sympathy to the view in 2000 that there was
little to choose between the two parties and their Presidential
candidates. At least in regard to foreign policy, this view was
desperately wrong: it is difficult to believe that another
administration could have permitted ideology to so trample good sense in 
international action. It is to be hoped that when you vote, you
will bear this in mind, knowing that you carry into the voting station
the hopes and fears of much more than America.

Respectfully, 
Peter Storey,
October, 2004.