Sunday, January 16, 2011 - 5:21 PM
Most years during the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day weekend, I re-read a few of his sermons, as a way of reflecting on his legacy. This year, I read a passage in one of those sermons that seems especially timely:
Christianity insists that man is an end because he is a child of God, made in God's image. Man is more than a producing animal guided by economic forces; he is a being of spirit, crowned with glory and honor, endowed with the gift of freedom."
King titled this sermon "How should a Christian view Communism?" and in it he distinguished between the communist and Christian views of the human person -- the latter holding that all human beings are created in the divine image and thus "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights," in the words of the Declaration of Independence. Though King's primary devotion in his too-short life was to the civil rights struggle in the United States, he constantly connected this effort with the universal aspirations of all human beings to realize in fact this liberty and dignity. And as he spoke out against the human rights depredations of communist governments, he also condemned the hypocrisy of his beloved America in fighting against communism abroad while denying basic rights at home to a class of its own citizens.
The communist ideal largely perished with the end of the Cold War, and exists now only in a few flickering embers in isolated outposts such as North Korea. But one of communism's cardinal flaws -- this belief that human beings are subservient in value to the State -- persists still today in too many authoritarian nations.
This past week alone witnessed considerable ferment in the cause of freedom. The news was not all good. In its invaluable global assessment of each country, Freedom House found 2010 to be the fifth consecutive year of retrenchment for human rights and democracy. The proximate cause is the persistence of authoritarian governments who see their citizens as mere subjects of the State, but the report is also an indictment of sorts on the democratic governments of the world -- including the Obama administration -- for doing too little to support liberty beyond their own borders.
Yet in the same week that Freedom House issued its grim assessment, other signs told a better story. In an act unprecedented in the modern Arab world, the people of Tunisia rose up and rejected the autocratic rule of President Zine al-Abadine Ben Ali. And in a Middle East speech rather unprecedented for the Obama administration, Secretary Clinton traveled to Qatar to deliver a bracing call for reform, progress, and yes, freedom in the Arab world. Nor were these concerns confined to one region, as the next day she issued a stern and specific exhortation to China to respect the political and religious rights of its people. In this same week, President Obama began taking tentative steps to put deeds behind his words as he met at the White House with a group of activists dedicated to improving human rights in China, in advance of President Hu Jintao's state visit.
Does all of this signal a tidal shift in the sea of liberty? A few anecdotes from one week are too little and too soon to tell. As notable as the president's ouster in Tunisia was, the ongoing instability, violence, and rapid power shifts from the prime minister to the speaker of parliament foretell an uncertain future, and are a reminder of the fragility of democratic transitions. Moreover, as much as the people of Tunisia sent a jolt of inspiration across the region, the persistence of autocratic regimes in Arab countries testifies to their resilience in resisting reform. And as welcome as these latest gestures from President Obama and Secretary Clinton are, they come after two damaging years of comparative indifference by the administration to human rights and democracy -- an indifference that was as dispiriting to global democracy activists as it was reassuring to their oppressive governments.
Yet it is never too late to do the right thing. And this week of honoring Martin Luther King Jr.'s life provides occasion for rededication to his legacy as well, especially as we have a president who embodies much of what King envisioned.
As my Shadow Government colleague Mike Green pointed out in his excellent preview of the Hu visit, China's imprisonment of democracy activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo means that the White House meeting this week will be "our first summit (indeed, our first state visit) between a Nobel Peace Prize laureate and a world leader who is imprisoning another Nobel Peace Prize laureate." Martin Luther King Jr. also won the Nobel Peace Prize, in 1964. So here's an idea for President Obama this week, as a gesture on behalf of human rights, religious freedom, and China's imprisoned Nobel Peace Laureate: Why not present President Hu with a book of King's sermons?
I want to be the white man's brother, not his brother- in-law
Well, if Obama senior had heeded MLK, Obama today will be molecules drifting in space.
Well, MLK even has an Irish grandmother! Obsurd!
Most every racial minority today should want to have the same chance of having a white brother-in-law (or sister in law) as any white person. Whether one actually has one is not the question, it is EOE in courtship and marriage that counts. EOE to the bedroom is what thrills minorities, not just EOE to the lunch room. And, after many generations, EOE becomes E that is exercised. And we have cultural genocide, the way Tibet is going. Good!
Where are the white women at? A minority man should ask routinely as a choice.
Obama's position on Tibet should be that to ask Hu to be as kind and savvy as he can to China’s minorities, but Tibetan assimilation is Chinese social progress that the USA should never object to.
Why did Obama grant an audience to the Dalai Lama? This monk has too much baggage to promote freedom in China, as he is viewed as a separatist by too many Chinese people. This was a very illogical move. If traditional culture is necessary to happiness, then Obama should be very unhappy. And, not just Obama, likely most white Americans in the white melting pot are grieving for the loss of traditional culture.
What is Obama's position of busing of kids in the USA to coerce exposure and to dilute cultures? One battle cry for busing was "separate is inherently unequal"; does one want equality in China? Another was that "separation instills a sense of inferiority on black kids"; would separation, aka autonomy, not instill a sense of inferiority for Tibetan kids?
Obama is from Hawaii so he should be quite familiar with the Akaka Bill of 2000 that could have granted cultural autonomy to the Hawaiians. The US Senate rejected the Akaka Bill, citing the American “tradition of assimilation” (across the racial divide). Has there been one? Are persons of mixed races very common in the USA? Perhaps it is the thought that counts. The fact is that we should from now on create an American tradition of assimilation across the racial divide. China has had a far greater tradition of assimilation in the creation of the Hans, with little racial divide, socially a la the white melting pot.
If one ceases to be fervent about freedom of expression, say, one should see that China has a rather progressive social policy toward minorities. Why isn’t subtle drive toward assimilation socially salubrious for China? Do traditional cultures have intrinsic worth to humanity? Not much. Assimilation has far greater worth to humanity. Obama, for all people, should be quick to realize and accept this truism.
But a smug, feel-good gesture like that would likely do little to advance freedom in China and more to add to the traditional Chinese political grievance that Western countries still see China as a child needing quasi-imperialist tutelage.
Liu is a great man working for a stronger, more open China. His current fate is the fate of all too many that speak truth to power, but photo-op for Obama to neocons will not help Liu or his cause.
Shadow Government is a blog about U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration, written by experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition and curated by Peter D. Feaver and William Inboden.
Read More
(2)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE