Epilogue to Obama

It’s official. The US has gone from having a leader who mocked superstitions to one who disregards scientific debate. From a leader who opposed loopholes to one who supports exploiting them. From a leader who knows the works of theologians to one who is ignorant of the most basic theology. From a leader who understood the dangers inherent in advancing technology, to one who wants to start another nuclear arms race.

Not that any leader is a necessary or sufficient cause of change per se. Any leader of a sufficiently large organization is more likely than not being buffaloed by the system, more so than the person is producing change freely. But no man is an island, which also means that each person has their own system already established when they reach a point of power. It’s that power system that worries me.

This shouldn’t be the time to give him the benefit of the doubt. Centrism cannot exist outside of rational discourse, which cannot occur when the other side is irrational. And “an argument against a closed mind is an closed fist.” I say this not to mark a return of a world of “might makes right” and other fascist tendencies, which are reprobate. But if you serve to protect those who are being rightly condemned, then you function as a mafia wife and the resultant system will be stronger. Support of the enemy today will not put you in a better position to fight it tomorrow.

Instead, the better outcome can come as a result of defining goals concretely and acting appropriately towards fulfilling them:

“Stories about what a nation has been and should try to be are not attempts at accurate representation, but rather attempts to forge a moral identity. The argument between Left and Right about which episodes in our history we Americans should pride ourselves on will never be a contest between a true and false account of our country’s history and its destiny. It is better described as an argument about which hopes to allow ourselves and which to forgo.” – Richard Rorty

It was said by Viktor Frankl that “what is to give light must endure burning.” If burning must commence, may the light be redeeming and worthwhile.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s