Online, on-air, and among friends there has been plenty of talk dismissing the validity of Barack Obama’s candidacy. It’s not so much a discussion about can he win the nomination. That’s possible, most say, and they leave it at that, filed away in a little manila folder tabbed “As Good As it Gets.” It’s the national election that people adamantly fear he will lose.
There are all sorts of platitudes to buttress this intuition. America just isn’t ready for a black president being the primary crux. He doesn’t have enough experience, secondly. But what lies within these statements that empower them with such detrimental imperium? These justifications mask a latent submission to the methodology of our past, a belief that change is not possible in our time, that the powers-at-be will keep on being and have always been.
Zimbabweans went to the polls this week with a chance to legally oust their hero-turned-tyrant president from a possible sixth term in office. The country hasn’t just spiraled out of control; it has turned a tailspin into a drill-bit, burying the country beneath unthinkable inflation and imprudent policies. It is tragic. I feel for my friends there, some of whom have been forced to flee their homes in search of the means to provide basic necessities of life. I admire the entire country’s fortitude and resilience. Yet, how is it that Zim has not risen against its elite? How can it be, that even with nothing left to lose, there is nothing left to fight for?
That line in the sand forms and reappears with the tides of the times. In light of the political situation in my country, pawns will be pawns and kings’ll be kings. It becomes so ingrained in our mental faculty that the very notion of change becomes frightening, destabilizing, producing uncertainties. For what if the brave leader who seeks to guide us falls, what then? Shall I, humble peasant, be expected to lift his sword?
The situation in what China calls the “Tibet autonomous region” has left nearly one thousand buildings burnt to the ground, hundreds in jail, estimates between dozens and hundreds dead, and a society teetering on a Himalayan edge. What brought about this uprising? Why here and not Zim? For years, China has been pumping money into its rocky southwestern region. It came by way of new train lines, new roads, and subsidized business loans. In China, a country with an Olympic-sized pool of laborers and a rice bowl to fit them all in, well, the draw was too enticing to pass up. Thousands of ethnic Han Chinese flooded into the region, eager for their manifest destiny promised to them by politicians in a capital thousands of kilometers beyond the horizon. Immediately, the cultural chasms split. On the one side, you have Tibetans, a pious Buddhist population happy to live a quiet life observing its modest rituals. On the other, you have Han Chinese, cleansed by Mao’s Cultural Revolution of almost all respect for anything beyond money, power, and the respect they feel the two bestow upon their owners.
Yes, I am simplifying. But this is very much the situation. Beijing’s crude attempts at policing culture have been very well documented, including forcing monks into re-education camps and hoping materialism would supplant idolatry of the Dalai Lama. They failed. And while the ethnic cleavages reinforce social separation, they were not enough to propel peace-loving monks into murderous mobs. No, that final straw came atop the press pulpit. The incessant global glamorization of China’s “journey of harmony” to the Olympics provoked a generally pacified Tibetan peasantry. It was all the, “Hey World, look at us. We are China, and we are great. We don’t have any problems anymore because we blot them out of the newspapers and cut away from them on the television. We bully lesser nations with our economy. Denounce whoever we damn well please. And after these Olympics, there ain’t a damn thing you’re gonna be able to do to stop us from taking your lunch money whenever we damn well please.” That, that got ‘em.
It was another slap in the face of a people who have been pushed to the very edge of the world and still cannot find their peace. It was an affront on their dignity. And, savvy as they are, Tibetans knew it was now or never for one last push at some international press before China is given the credibility it feels the Olympics bestow. Here, the Beijing line is a one-sided world-view based on principles of power and ego. Incomplete control over Tibet threatens the CCP’s paper-thin confidence, and they will stop at nothing not to be embarrassed.
It is this weak ego prodding along the blind pursuit of power that is so hauntingly similar to the broken vanity of the U.S. Yet, each country has a palate of positive tools at its disposal, forces that inspire in me the idealism that things can and must change. Paramount to each, China has its Olympics and at home, we have the election.
Tibet rose up because it was being denied its rightful dignity. And that is the most difficult step to take, the step towards change. It is time for Americans to restore the dignity of our nation. Wobbling through the world as a belligerent bully wins no wars, no hearts and no minds. Sobering up isn’t go to be easy. But the first step is getting off the junk that got us here, the faulty choices that have run their course in our system. It’s time for fundamental change, and that will require a more mental than fun exercise. We must conquer our demons. Conquer our fears, and respect ourselves again. We need to believe that the U.S. is still capable of being the most progressive plot of land on this rock. No, not perfect, as Obama said in his historic speech, but willing to work towards perfecting it.