Monday, October 12, 2009

A Peace Mandate for Each of Us--Not Just the President

This past Friday not just Americans, but likely the world was shocked by the announcement that the 44th President of the United States, Mr. Barack Hussien Obama was selected as the 2009 Awadee for the Nobel Peace Prize. Mr. Obama himself mentioned in his comments at the White House Rose Garden that he was, "surprised and deeply humbled by the decision of the Nobel Committee." Of course this has not been enough for both many of supporters and all of his detractors and socio-political enemies. He seems live in a world where he is damned if he does or damned if he doesn't...no matter what it is.

I read and re-read several blogs and op-ed pieces before writing this post today.  Once such post by NYTimes columnist Thomas L. Friedman entitled, "Peace (Keepers) Prize." He makes the argument that "The Nobel committee did President Obama no favors by prematurely awarding him its peace prize." He goes on to say "...and it dismays me that the most important prize in the world has been devalued in this way."  Devalued?  I was floored at that assertion.  Very harsh words to say the least.  The rest of his column is a speech that Friedman feels Obama should give, where he thanks all of the soldiers who have been "keeping the world safe." Thus, the thought is, there is no peace without peace keepers.  However "peacekeepers" don't have to be the military. I thought the article was more than arrogant and extremely dismissive, but I wanted again to see what was being said.

Another NYTimes contributor Marueen Dowd, wrote a fictional and deeply satirical phone conversation between Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Here I was given a bit more insight to another take on the issue that was creatively written but still I found troubling in some ways. The best line is from Bill Clinton where he says, "Any peace prize that goes to Henry Kissinger but not Gandhi ain’t worth a can of Alpo."  That got me thinking as well. However it was a conversation with my father, Vernon Mitchell, Sr., that really made me reflect.

"Pop what do you think about Obama and the Peace Prize?" I inquired. "Well, I think it is a great honor no matter what folks are saying. We have to look at President Obama's global impact, not just his impact on American soil." That made me think.  "Look back to the election," my father proclaimed. "Folks all over the world were rejoicing at what the election of Obama meant for them. We cannot underestimate that."  I couldn't agree more.

So the question still remains, "Was it too soon?"  Maybe. However, I am not inclined to give such arguments that much weight. The decision was made by the Nobel committee was one that I am certain they mulled over again and again, knowing full well the possible political implications for Mr. Obama. All we can do now it accept what is, in the hope that the award will continue the push toward progress and holistic freedom for those who lie on the fringes of economic opportunity and peace.

As a historian, I also began to think about context, which is what I believe my father was doing in his own way. When I think back to last November I distinctly remember the news coverage that showed people, and children in particular, all over the world cheering and crying tears of joy. I remember thinking what does this mean to them?

I knew what it meant to me as an African American, but what were the global implications?  For one Obama's election signaled the first time that anyone of African descent (or non-white) was elected the leader of a Western Nation. That is huge when you think about the legacy of colonialism and imperialism has ransacked the globe from the Transatlantic Slave Trade to Europe's carving up of the African continent. Think too about Asia, Austrilia, and the lands in the Pacific.  All have been adversely effected by encrouchment from the West and many deivstating ways. Even now.

Ironically today is Columbus Day.  The day that has been set aside to honor the "discovery" of a new world that just happened to already have people living in it.  I think not of discovery, but of destruction of culture and a celebration of human tragedy via the so called free market.  Within the field of history we speak constantly of the "Columbian Exchange" which is a term used to discuss the "exchange of culture" between the Spaniards and native indigenous populations in the Western Hemisphere.  While we think pleasantly of corn(maize), horses, and potatoes, no one wants to discuss the impact of diseases like small pox or syphilis. So, Obama being in the White House is transformative in ways we, as Americans, can only begin to imagine.  He is the personification of hope, of dreams deferred for the global community.

Those who view the 2009 Peace Prize as a mockery I'm sure had nothing to say when Al Gore recieved for his efforts to inform the world about the climate change.  Then again maybe they likely did.  I take heart in the fact that President Obama is keenly aware of his position in time and takes everything in stride. Obama accepted the award as a "call to action" to confront the global challenges of the 21st century. Furthermore he stated, "I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments but rather an affirmation of American leadership on behalf of aspirations held by people in all nations."

Obama's remarks about his prize sound very similar to another American who won the same prize. On December 10, 1964, Martin Luther King remarked during his acceptance speech, "I accept this award today with an abiding faith in America and an audacious faith in the future of mankind. I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history."

Premature or not, this is just another chance for this nation to show itself to be what it says on paper.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Those coveted words were penned on July 4, 1776 and have been the bedrock of our so called democracy. More Americans need to wash off the dirt of pessimism and the filth of ignorance and arrogance and cleanse themselves in the waters of justice and peace that we affirm in the words of our Declaration of Independence.

I've said this before and I'll say it again, President Obama cannot do this alone. It will take the work of each of us in our own way to see the transformation we want in this troubled republic. For now, let us each accept the Peace Prize with our president and roll up our sleeves to do the real work nation building at home and abroad.  Violent action can only secure peace for a limited time--if you want to call that "peace" at all.  Respect, tolerance, and education can do much more than any weapon ever could to establish a true communion of global brotherhood.

2 comments:

the uppity negro said...

I struggle as to what does Obama really signal to us as being the leader of major westernized nation. While it is a big deal that someone with his skin color is in the position that he is in, I question what position that really is: is it president of a democracy or the leader of an empire?

We've more than seen evidence since Obama has been in office that he wasn't quite the altruistic revolutionary that many of us thought. I had conceded that feeling after the Jeremiah Wright incident and just trumped him up as yet another left-leaning politician, but putting the emphasis on politician. I think that's what we have to keep in mind: he's a politician and damned good one at that.

Obama receiving the Nobel Peace Prize, however, was evidence that the rest of the world doesn't necessarily see him as such. They see him as some hope-bearer. Its easy to hope, humanity wants to hope, I just hope that this isn't some false hope. But you're right, Obama campaigned on "Yes WE Can" and not "Yes I Can" and so many of us have forgotten that.

negrointellectual said...

Brother you are quite right. Your question about "what we have to keep in mind" is more than insightful and causes me to think. You mentioned, "president of a democracy or leader of an empire?" Sadly enough I think it is both.

America has the uncanny ability to act as both unifier and divider. We have had imperial efforts also marked by democratic zeal which often times masks larger diplomatic agendas that are rooted in maintaining a predictable, sustainable, and safe market for our goods.

However, those days are quickly fading as our share of the global market decreases or at the very least is compressed by the entrance of once third world nations entering the "free market" in a competitive capacity.

More importantly, as we shift from a producer nation to a consumer one such issues as education and healthcare become all the more important not because we should be doing and expecting better, but we are fighting against entities that DO NOT want them to get better. It's akin to trying to run for president of the United States and your "war chest" only has $10K. You won't make it out of your home state let alone a primary, no matter how good your ideas may be. You have to translate your politics into dollars to compete politically, which is a crying shame.

Check out the rise of privatized prisons and also how much money insurance companies and pharmaceutical empires are investing into making sure that not just the public option isn't passed, but that no semblance of healthcare reform is enacted. It's not good for business to have people who are educated and healthy making sound socio-economic and political decisions.

Capitalism profits off the creation and exacerbation of inequality...PERIOD. There must be some sort of mechanism to help people when things get bad, not make them rich, but providing for them the opportunity to "get back on their feet" (as cliche' as that sounds).

At the end of the day it is the people that suffer. They can get caught up in "birther"/"tea-party" nonsense, etc., but WE ALL will suffer from the cancer of greed that is unregulated and under-supervised capitalism. Any ethnic, racial, gender, sexual preference, or pseudo class debate just causes confusion and prevents any political progress that will help the citizenry who are not part of the one percent who control the majority of wealth in this nation.

It is the same formula that allowed the captains of industry to wreck havoc on America during the Gilded Age.

For many in the global community, marked by the words of the Nobel committee today demonstrate that that Obama provides for them hope.

So is America still the bully pulpit for politics and unilateral strikes against those who do not like us? It has since the end of Spanish-American War and we'll see at the end of President Obama's first term how things have changed, if at all.

My personal take is that we cannot underestimate the influence of the private sector/business. They are not worried about the human capital in any republic, they are concerned with only the bottom line...PROFIT.

The sooner we as Americans understand that the better off things will be for us. The ideology that "what is good for GM is good for America" is part of a legacy not of opportunity and shared concern, but one of exploitation and death.

Creative Commons License
Negrointellectual by Vernon C. Mitchell, Jr. is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at www.negrointellectual.blogspot.com.