All of us have to own the pain that comes from living.
The pain that comes from not having what we want, even though we have worked hard for it.
The pain of living that comes from realizing that nature gave us so much and that is it.
The pain of living that comes from recognizing others have more than we do.
The pain that comes from not having behaved as we would have liked to.
The pain of living that will not go away and yet we must learn to manage.
To manage it we have to look at it. Squarely. In detail.
And if we at first flinch or turn away, we then must take a deep breath and look again.
Look again till we understand it.
And then accept it.
Accepting it does not mean the pain will go away.
We accept so we can learn from it.
Every single one of us has to look at their own pain. No one can spare us from it.
If they offer to, say ‘thank you but no, thanks’.
Facing our pain is at the core of the journey for existence each of us embarks in when we come to this world.
Yes, it has moment of beauty. Even happiness. Moments.
And like individuals, so with nations.
Nations are more than a collection of individuals, just like the liver is more than a collection of liver cells. To make up the liver they have organized themselves according to various functions for the sake of a purpose.
And that sum total of individuals that come together to form a nation bring their individual pain with them, which adds up to the total pain of the nation.
And the pain has to be looked at. Squarely. In detail.
The pain has to be looked at again and again until we get it. We as in the people and We as in the nation.
Sharing our individual pain with another human being offers comfort, soothing and perspective. But it is our individual pain.
No one can suffer for you.
We need our pain so we can improve ourselves. Push harder. Try and be the best we can be.
Our pain is a catalyst for action. It spurs us to growth. To take chances. And when accomplishment comes then we realize what great soother it is.
But it won’t erase the pain.
It helps manage it.
Nations that don’t look at their pain cannot reach their potential.
Leaders who don’t help us look at our pain are not leaders.
They are in it for personal gain or for the gain of a special group.
There is no forward movement without owning our pain, which if allowed to grow becomes rage.
We cannot own our rage unless we understand it.
When pain or rage owns us we cannot direct it properly, and so pain not owned may lead us to blame others for our distress. And so pile additional pain upon their pain.
A nation that does not dialogue with itself is a nation that has preferred to blame others instead.
In America, the dialogue about race has been forever postponed, and it is only now moving up to the top of the list where it belongs because of circumstances.
If a young man had not videotaped the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, we would not have known the fullness of our anger and the officer who pinned him down until he died would have been back on the beat, searching for someone else to pin down.
Even with that, if it had not been for the coronavirus, we would have reelected the previous president.
Think about it.
If we would have reelected our previous president we would have continued to be distracted by tweets and temper tantrums, and we would have postponed, again, talking to ourselves and to others about our pain.
Pain that is not looked at and understood becomes rage.
Finally, after much concentrated effort, people with diverse skills and a history of endurance, get to be selected as finalists for the academy awards. And then the winners are announced. But there are no losers once you’ve entered that special circle. They’ve all showed remarkable ability.
But how does anyone recognize the field that if pursued with tenacity is more likely to bring recognition?
Is there an answer for everyone? Given that we are all unique, is there a road for each one of us?
I say there is, and if asked to give a common denominator to all those roads it would be this: a person knows they are on the right path for them if they are growing stronger and wiser as they pursue it.
Chloe Zhao has just won an Oscar for best director. The first woman ever and the first woman of color to be so honored. What a feat.
But in her native China, news of her accomplishment was suppressed. Why?
Apparently, some years back she had made some critical comments about how her native country was being run.
She was born in Beijing of Chinese parents, having come to this country at a young age. Why wouldn’t all fellow Chinese not be proud of what she has accomplished?
The government’s decision to devalue one of their own is a sign of what is wrong with that regime, even as China is now reaching heights it had never reached before.
For China to devalue Chloe Zhao is to say to the world, ‘if you don’t think like us you have accomplished nothing.’ What absurdity. Furthermore, it is a sign of how creativity is and will be hindered by the regime and how it will be self defeating in the end.
Autocracies, like dictatorships, seed the grounds for their self destruction by suppressing creativity. And so will China.
For us in the rest of the world, the task is to keep alive systems that enhance it. And that comes with fairness to all and equality of opportunity.
Adhere to that path and we will grow stronger and wiser, able to resolve our differences and fear nothing as we move confidently into the future.
Alexei Navalny, who’s been in prison since January after returning to Russia from Germany – where he was treated for poisoning with the nerve agent Novichok – went on a hunger strike at the end of March after prison authorities did not allow his family to visit him following his reports that he had developed back pain and loss of feeling in his legs.
The prison replied he’s receiving adequate medical care.
But two days ago, the Associated Press reported that a physician who reviewed lab results of Navalny’s brought to him by his family, says his blood levels of potassium and creatinine are elevated and puts the patient in danger of death.
Here’s the problem: Putin would not mind it one bit if Navalny dies.
But the Russian people would lose an important leader.
Supporters of Navalny should insist that he give up the hunger strike immediately.
There are fights that can’t be won and that is one of them.
The Russian people are not ready to go into an uproar if Navalny were to die now.
Much work remains to be done and for that Navalny has to be alive.
Who knows what will bring Russians out of the stupor they find themselves in, allowing a man like Putin to rule them since 1999.
But the movement that Navalny has led has been making progress, slowly confronting Russians with the denial they are stuck in.
His dying in prison won’t help.
Prisons are bad places. Who knows what kind of pressures Navalny is being subjected to by fellow prisoners at the behest of the government, which may have led to the hunger strike.
Navalny has to focus on staying alive, not gamble with his health.
His supporters need to act fast while there is still time.
The New York Times said yesterday that an open letter had been addressed to Putin by prominent personalities asking that Navalny be allowed the care needed immediately.
This morning, the Associated Press stated that demonstrations on Navalny’s behalf are planned for this weekend in Moscow and St Petersburg.
The hope is that Putin will acknowledge the request.
But there is a good chance he’ll drag his feet and, in the meantime, Navalny’s health will worsen.
I can imagine Putin in his private residence, sipping from a glass of fine wine, as he muses over the events, relishing his returning to the spotlight he so enjoyed while Trump was president.
Now Biden is getting all the attention.
‘And to think he dared call me a killer, on national television,’ says Putin to himself, referring to Biden, a feeling of bitterness rising in him. ‘And now they want me to be charitable with my enemies… their Trojan Horse… because that’s all that Navalny is, an American agent.’
He ponders the thought and then, smiling to himself, says ‘Dear Alexei… to think that I feared you would one day dethrone me.’
Putin long ago signed a pact with the Devil. He has aided the brutal repression in Burma, propped up Assad in Syria.
One day soon, the Russian people will awaken. Alexei Navalny has been trying hard to do that.
But he has to stay alive.
For that, he has to quit the hunger strike.
In addition to the letters of prominent people in his support, we must encourage the effort to have Navalny be pushed forward as the choice for this year’s Nobel Peace Prize.
Alexei Navalny, with his enormous courage, walks in the steps of Andrei Sakharov, the Russian physicist and human rights activist who won the same prize in 1975.
That award did much to raise the consciousness of the world and prepare the Russian people for the change that followed when the Soviet Union collapsed on December 26th 1991.
In the middle of the night, on March 29th, Adam Toledo was chased down an alley by an officer who’d been called to the scene by a report of shots fired in the neighborhood.
In a recently released video (April 15th – per request of Chicago’s mayor Lori Lightfoot), Adam was carrying a gun as he runs away from the officer who’s frantically shouting at him to stop.
Adam raced on for a stretch before finally halting.
Careful observers reported that he threw the gun he was carrying over a fence before turning to the officer who was holding a gun pointed at him. I could see Adam putting up his hands. Briefly.
And immediately a shot is fired wounding Adam mortally.
The gun he was carrying was found near him.
What did the officer see that he so quickly fired after Adam turned to face him with his hands up?
I do not know.
But why did you run little brother?
Why?
What were you doing at that hour of the night, with a gun in your hands?
Earlier today, as I drove home and thought of how to approach my writing this piece, I happened to pass by a Boys and Girls Club. There were kids playing out in the yard. Kids your age, exercising, having fun, dreaming of their future.
Kids not running from their lives but embracing it.
Why did you run little brother?
There wasn’t anyone around who could take you under their wing?
There wasn’t anyone who could ask what you were feeling, what you kept to yourself and didn’t want to share? No one?
Why did you run little brother?
An African American family that was interviewed by a reporter of The Wall Street Journal about the shooting, said you had extended your friendship to their son. They thought of you as kind.
Why did you run little brother?
You could’ve stopped but you didn’t.
And now you’re not with us.
Daunte Wright, age 20, didn’t stop either the other day in Minneapolis when he was being handcuffed.
And he’s not with us either.
Adam, I know you can’t hear me, but there are lots of kids your exact age out there that I wish would learn from what happened to you.
Kids who have to stop when the police says stop.
Like all of us have to.
I never met you, Adam, but I wish I had, and so do millions of Americans, of every race and gender.
We won’t know what you could’ve become. But I know you needed someone to hear you out.
Someone to hear you say, ‘I don’t understand, I’m confused. I need guidance, clarity. I need a sense of direction, a sense that it is worthwhile to have faith in my potential. And I’m not going to get that running around in the middle of the night with a gun in my hand. I’m not going to get that running from the police thinking that I can get away with it.’
Adam, I know you can’t hear me, but there are thousands of kids exactly your age out there, all going through the same experiences you did, and failing to reach out to others.
We won’t let this keep happening.
No, we won’t. We’re going to try hard.
We can’t let it happen and call ourselves an exceptional nation.
We can’t let it happen and call ourselves a first rate power.
Something is wrong, Adam. Your death reminds us of it.
We can’t keep killing each other like we do.
Like in Atlanta on March 16th, or in Boulder on March 25th or two days ago in Indianapolis. Or the never ending body count in the South side of Chicago.
I watched the video as you lay dying.
Some newspapers chose not to show it entirely. They had their reasons.
But I looked for it and found it.
And I saw you lying motionless, as the police gathered round you trying to keep you alive.
And I saw the look of horror in your bloodied face, your eyes wide open, desperately clinging to life, as if saying, ‘I can’t believe this, I was just starting out in life and now I’m dying.’
On the afternoon of April 11th, in Minneapolis, with the trial of officer Chauvin under way for the death of George Floyd, Daunte Wright is stopped by police while driving his car accompanied by his girlfriend.
He’s commanded to step out of the vehicle and does so. Three officers are present. Two African American males and a White woman.
Officers determined that there was an outstanding warrant for Mr Wright’s arrest.
Mr Wright exits his car as he’s asked to do and an officer begins to apply handcuffs but has difficulty.
Then Mr Wright, inexplicably, pulls away, gets back in his vehicle attempting to leave the scene.
In the tussle that follows a gun is pointed at him as the word Taser! Taser! is shouted. The video shows the gun held steady. Then a shot is fired. Mr Wright drives off anyway but is able to travel only a short distance before he dies from the gunshot.
The police department reviewed the video and concluded the shooting was a mistake. The lady officer had pulled out the wrong weapon when she had meant to use the Taser instead.
Pause.
Anything is possible.
Pause.
But I don’t get that a seasoned officer – the lady has been an officer for 26 years – would get confused which side she carried the Taser on and which side she carried the gun that kills people.
I don’t get that an officer would not have been responsible enough to double and triple check each time they came on duty, which side is the Taser on, which is the gun that kills people.
I don’t get that an officer would forget to do that, knowing that, in the heat of the moment, things happen very quickly and thus you will not have time to ask, ‘Now, where is it that I carry my Taser?’
I didn’t understand, either, why the cuffing of Mr Wright was so difficult and could not be completed. And why the Black officer wasn’t talking to Mr Wright as he did so. Simple talk. Like, ‘Hey man, don’t do anything crazy, we have to take you in, we have a warrant for your arrest, be cool, okay?’
Mr Wright could have been the officer’s younger brother.
Is this asking too much of the officer? Maybe. But not far away the trial of officer Chauvin was under way for the death of George Floyd. And during that horrific scene, there was at least one Black officer present, one Black officer who did not go right up to officer Chauvin and say, ‘there’s no need for the knee, let up. The man is down, he is handcuffed and no threat to anyone. Get your knee off.’
Back to Mr Wright. As he got back in the car and the gun is drawn, no one asked, ‘Is that the Taser or a gun?’
Too much to ask?
No.
In the lockers of every officer back at the station, a sign should be posted so that every time they open it they read, ‘Do you know which side is your Taser, which side is your gun?’
Too late for Mr Wright but others will benefit.
Now, to the role Mr Wright played in his death.
Why did he pull away from the arresting officer?
Why would anyone want to do that when you have officers – with guns that kill – trying to handcuff and arrest you for an outstanding warrant?
Was Mr Wright trying to prove something?
He won’t be here to tell us but it is madness.
Why would anyone want to do something like that?
Is Mr Wright an isolated case of reckless defiance in dealing with the police, or is it part of a trend? A right of passage? ‘To assert myself I have to defy a gun pointed straight at me?’
Something is wrong here.
I have not heard African American leadership calling for all their brothers and sisters, children and parents, to be cautious in dealing with the police.
But maybe I missed it. If I did, the call wasn’t loud enough or persistent enough, so try again. Please.
Try again and remind all Blacks and all of us that, yes, there is much work to be done to achieve equality of opportunity in this land but there is now, as we speak, at the helm of this country, people who are working very hard to act responsibly.
Can such actions exonerate our guilt, or that of our ancestors?
Big questions.
What price can you put on the life of a person, the damage done to forebears, the pass-on negative effects, generation after generation?
Say that a given amount we’ll call X is awarded to an African American. Does that really undo the damage? Can we then say the problem is solved, the damage has been undone?
No, we cannot say that.
The danger is that if amount X is awarded, core beliefs would not change and neither would the behaviors. Compensation without thoughtful reflection will be for naught.
On the recipients’ side, there’s the very real possibility that if monetary compensation is given, they will not use the funds properly, thus negating the intended benefits.
Should benefits then be managed by the government, as in the form of grants to educate, to house, to provide medical services, childcare?
This general direction I find more appealing.
For instance, all African American would be given subsidized access to whatever high school, vocational center, college or university they applied, provided they met certain requirements which themselves would be adjusted in consideration of hardships the applicant may have struggled with. The amount of the subsidies to depend on the preexisting financial wellbeing of each family.
This would make more sense to me.
And what of those who have no desire to attend a learning center? Shouldn’t they too have access to reparations of another form?
Say a person wanted to start a business. Grants could then be issued, provided the person goes through some training to enhance their chances of success, and which would be part of the package.
Will the rest of us feel that we are doing something special for African Americans by engaging in such an approach or a variant of?
I think we would. We would still have to be very clear that the entire program is only a gesture, a step, not intended to undo but to soften the vast multigenerational damage that has been done.
But here’s the guiding principle. The attainment of a sense of accomplishment by African Americans would be the marker of success.
When a person is able to affirm themselves in life, their field of compassion is enlarged and we become more forgiving.
Now, what about White Americans who have fared poorly in life? Who have not had educational opportunities and thus have always lagged behind?
Would they, seeing how African Americans were being assisted, not complain loudly, in word and deed, that the forces that kept African Americans oppressed have affected them also, and that if given a chance to affirm themselves in life, they too would be more compassionate and forgiving?
That would also be a valid point.
It highlights the powerful role that economic forces have played in the genesis and preservation of racism.
To have reconciliation we must have justice and economic justice is key.
Is it possible, then, to confront the root causes of racism and forge ahead?
Yes. Nation building demands it.
Providing our citizens with the tools to better educate themselves and become full participants in the economy will be central as we move forward.
Racial tensions must be addressed and we start by acknowledging that collective denial keeps us from accepting that there is a problem.
As we do so we must keep in mind that in racial matters there is no purity.
Anyone who believes they have had no racist thoughts in their life, please step forward for all to take a good look because you are a rare find.
Restraint is another important condition. While all of us ought to be vocal in discussing racial issues, all must also be willing to check uncontrollable rage because to have a fruitful dialogue we cannot insult each other.
When I picture Martin Luther King, a giant in the struggle against racism, what first comes to mind is his equanimity, his calm courage, paired with the unyielding belief that hope lies in accepting our humanity. That is where it starts.
And it is in all of us. Sometimes hidden from sight, but often shining brightly.
Consider this. At this very moment, on Mars, lies an immensely complex device able to travel from one point to another on the surface of the planet. A rover they call it, and they named it Perseverance. They called it that to acknowledge that such astounding feat of engineering is the result of cooperation, imagination, love and dedication, the ability to dialogue and trust and experiment and take chances.
So think about it.
If we can do that, surely we can address the problem of racism.
Perseverance travelled 293 million miles over 7 months to get to Mars. And it takes 12 minutes for a message sent from Earth to reach it. What a feat.
And on top of that, on April 11 (approximately), a tiny – 4 pound – helicopter that made the journey tied to Perseverance, will do a flight of its own. The first ever in Mars. It is to last only 90 seconds. And they named it Ingenuity.
What an apt name.
Sometimes it takes picturing up in space – far, far away – all of what mankind can do, to discover that with Perseverance and Ingenuity, we can solve our problems here on Earth.
As of today, 536 citizens have been killed by the repressive forces under general Hlaing, the Burmese dictator, who seized control of the country on February 1, three months after his party had been soundly defeated at the polls the preceding November 1st.
General Hlaing did not have the decency to respect the will of his people.
But his people, undeterred, have continued to protest the general’s repressive actions in a huge civil disobedience movement.
The courage and sacrifice of the Burmese people are heroic.
You have to wonder what goes on in the mind of the general. How does he justify the killings of men and women, young and old? Just what does he say to himself in his private moments?
Does he say to himself that he is better than the protesters?
He must.
Does he look at the pictures of the men and women killed by his soldiers?
He probably does.
Only to then justify his actions.
We are left to imagine the poverty of soul of the general. His profound lack of humanity. His absence of compassion.
And we are left to wonder, how could a man like that ascend to a position of leadership? But he did.
He did because others around him lacked the courage to confront him as he rose in the ranks while sharing in the belief that, as a class, they were better than the citizens of their country.
What ghastly spectacle is taking place in Myanmar today.
And the butchering of a people goes on while the military enjoy the support of the governments of Russia and China.
What does that tell us about the dictators that rule those countries?
That they are just like general Hlaing. And were Russia and China to face an insurrection in their respective countries, their people would be treated equally ruthlessly, equally brutally.
That’s what the people in Russia and China have to look forward to.
The price of silence.
Just this past August, in the republic of Belarus, rigged election results were vehemently contested by the people, but the president of the country, Alexander Lukashenko, violently squashed the protests and refused to step down.
Of course, he travelled to Moscow to meet with his master, Putin, and get instructions.
Putin would know. He has over three decades of experience in silencing people. Three decades of experience in devaluing his fellow citizens.
Meanwhile, as fear reigns in Russia and China and other parts of the world, the deaths keep mounting in Myanmar.
And the majority of us keep watching. Shrugging it off.
But the unchecked butchering of a people does something to us.
It degrades us.
In New York City a Filipino woman was shoved to the ground and kicked in the head by a man who shouted she didn’t belong in America. There were bystanders who watched the action and said nothing.
I hear that some governments, including our own, have placed sanctions on general Hlaing, other officers and businesses owned by the military. But that’s not enough.
Is there anything the rest of us can do?
In this age of high internet connectivity, surely there is something we could possibly do.
Talk about it. Yes. That’s a start. Not let it just pass. Not simply change channels. But pause for a moment to think, how is it affecting us?
How does it affect us that the Butcher of Burma carries on with near impunity?
Should we not feel the anger?
Should we not write something about our anger at the killings? Write to our governments, to the United Nations, to the Russian and Chinese people, even to their leaders.
Could we do something… something… instead of being silent.
Earlier today, Brandon Elliot, 38, an African American male, was arrested for the assault on a 65 year old Filipino woman near Times Square in New York just two days ago. He has been charged with assault as a hate crime. He had been living at a nearby shelter.
The video, shot from the lobby of a residence in front of where the attack took place, shows Mr Elliot shoving the woman to the ground, then kicking her in the head. She was on her way to church.
The cruelty of the act is horrifying.
Mr Elliot had been on parole since 2019 after serving 16 years for the murder of his mother in 2002 when he was 19 years old.
The Filipino lady was identified as Vilma Kari and has now been released from the hospital.
Mr Elliot will be put on trial and convicted. Maybe he’ll never again see the outside of a prison.
And I wonder, did this man, taken into the prison system as a 19 year old, ever learn anything in the 16 years he was incarcerated?
Was he still beating up his mother when he shoved and kicked Vilma Kari?
Did he get the help he needed while in prison?
I ask you to please pause and think of this. Do we not have an obligation to educate those who commit violent acts?
Did Mr Elliot get psychological assistance to resolve the issues that led to the killing of his mother? Did he get help to bring light to the matter? Was he taught how to make a living upon release?
Prisons are well known for not providing such assistance. Well known for pretending to do so but not committing to helping heal the offender. Well known for punishing and brutalizing the inmates, numbing them to their pain and that of others.
And it keeps happening with our tacit approval because we don’t want to look at the ugliness that goes on inside those walls, as if we believed that such ugliness would be good for the inmates.
Mr Elliot’s actions showed complete disregard for the consequences. He acted in broad daylight with no intent to cover his tracks. In other words, he didn’t care.
What takes anyone to that point, after spending 16 years in prison?
Pause and reflect on it.
The pain Vilma Kari has been through is enormous and I am so glad she has survived. She is a strong and courageous woman. But if prison had done their job this would not have happened.
Very soon Mr Elliot will go on trial. He will be convicted and receive a long sentence.
But next to where he sits during his trial, there should be another seat, a vacant one, where society should be sitting, because we should be on trial, too.
Mr Elliot will return to prison and we will say to ourselves that justice was done.
China has become a challenge to the essence of your system. A challenge far more subtle than the one that Fascism and later the Soviet Union presented to us during the last century.
Before us now stands a nation which has risen faster than any other. A nation that has used their market power (at 1.4 billion people, more than three times our own) and unquestionable ability and made itself the most desirable destination for businesses the world over.
The prospect of being in China is so enormously attractive to business, that most will look the other way when the matters of suppressing the Chinese people’s free speech and the repression of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang are raised.
Money talks, reason the Chinese autocrats. And for business that is what is most important.
The Chinese autocrats are careful observers of our system and have learned that it is money that wins elections in America. If you don’t have it in abundance, then you can’t win an election in this country.
In America, the Chinese autocrats are convinced, money is the true free speech. (they are trying to convince their own citizens of the same)
China needs only to look at the electoral contest for the US Senate in the state of Georgia earlier this year. If money had not poured in from the Democratic Party coffers, the Republican party would have won at least one of the two seats at stake and then held a majority in the Senate. President Biden’s hands would have been tied, with no other recourse than to try and convince Mitch McConnell to let the administration pass a bill or two.
China knows that our system is riddled with malfunction.
It has taken forever to address racism in our land and violence tied to it is widespread.
Legislators (in both parties) will do whatever possible to rearrange the boundaries in their districts to ensure their supporters are in the majority and thus retain their seats.
There is a vast number of highly paid lobbyists in congress doing whatever they must to win favor for their business interests.
The Chinese autocrats know that the injustices in our system will not go easily away and may take decades to fix. They can see it in their own Hong Kong – where the financial sector is vastly rich but the rest struggles and housing is punishingly expensive.
And so China has come to feel certain that their political system is superior, and will eventually lead them to become the world’s most powerful nation.
So long as their people remain productive and hungry to become wealthier, China will have the most attractive market in the world, and western business interests and their lobbyists will do whatever is necessary to keep pouring in.
With their growing riches, the people in China will continue to bow to their leaders and accept the electronic surveillance of their activities, while looking the other way when dissenters and non conformists in their midst are caught and silenced.
The prospect of world supremacy is now within reach, says the Communist Party to their people, and if some don’t get to see it, then their children will, so every sacrifice is worth it.
And America, like Britain and other European powers before her, will accept that its time has passed, all the while muttering to ourselves, ‘but isn’t money free speech? Or did we get that wrong? Did we let our soul end up in business’ pockets?’
And we will remember Teddy Roosevelt,
“The things that will destroy America are prosperity at any price, peace at any price, safety first instead of duty first and love of soft living and the get-rich-quick theory of life.”
But it doesn’t have to be that way.
We talk frequently about how we can rise to the occasion and indeed have done so often. But China’s challenge is quite different. They are aggressively seeking markets everywhere, Africa, the rest of Asia, Latin America, even in Europe, while saying, ‘Like what you see? It’s our political system that makes it possible. Be like us, adopt our system and riches will be yours too.’
Implicit is the message, ‘Money rules. Make that your focus.’
But isn’t that what most of us believe also?
The Chinese have, very cleverly, adopted a most tangible aspect of our system – the importance of money to reward productivity – and then paired it with an equally appealing notion to many. ‘Leave the political thinking to us. Don’t trouble yourself with such cumbersome thoughts. Let us all make lots of money, but let it be clear that such money will not allow you entry into the higher ranks of the political system that rules the nation.’
‘There will be no Donald Trumps here in China’s system – people making their fortunes in business and then parachuting into political leadership. The highest posts in our system are reserved for those who have devoted themselves from an early age, to the business of running a nation and apportioning its fortunes.’
‘Why should riches and politics, both, be the privilege of the very talented or very persuasive?
‘If we divide up those two realms, we will all be better off. Politics must be a discipline separate from the accumulation of riches. It requires special talents to better distribute the wealth. That way it is done fairly, and not according to the wishes of the person who made the money and whatever biases they may have. We communists say, come to China and make money, but we will keep enough of it for the government to better spread it around and make the nation stronger and fairer.’ (later on, we’ll want more of what you’re making, but not now)
If China can keep money from corrupting the communist party, they will be very hard to beat.
But they can be beat.
How?
By using our liberties to strengthen our nation.
China is exposing our weaknesses. Our challenge is to correct them quickly enough.
Why is it that the richest nation in the world has such problems with poverty, with access to medical care, with providing quality education to all our citizens? In New York City, year after year, the school system cannot deal with the blatant segregation that keeps Blacks and Hispanics marginalized.
Why is it, that racism has been allowed to fester in the country for as long as it has?
Why is it, that in the richest nation in the world there is so much violence?
What is wrong that we feel such distrust for our fellow citizens that we must keep ourselves armed to the teeth and cannot consent to regulations limiting the purchase of weapons?
The rest of the world looks at us and says, ‘yes, America, you have shown much creativity in many fields, but there is something very flawed about you. We would like to try out the Chinese model instead.’
The rest of the world looks at us and says, ‘yes, America, you have great companies, Apple and Google, Amazon and Facebook, Intel and Qualcomm, Disney and Netflix, but in a very short time, China has come up with Alibaba, Tencent, Huawei and they are a force in electric vehicles and a leader in artificial intelligence. Yes, the Chinese have stolen technology, but they are creating their own, too.’
The rest of the world looks at us and says, ‘There are imperfections to both systems, yours and the Chinese, but the Chinese model seems to work faster, so we may just go with them. Do understand that we, too, are in a hurry. And our people will accept that some freedoms will be restricted and deferred.’ (never mind how long)
For the first time ever, then, the rest of the developing nations in our world are seeing close competition between two systems that believe in markets and want to pursue maximum riches.
And while China keeps rising in spite of their freedoms being severely curtailed, to those who point out the contradictions in our system, we answer, ‘The path to equality of opportunity is most desirable but tough. We’ve been at it for a while but have not been able to prevent the wealthy from dominating politics to secure their privileges at the expense of the rest. But we believe that, eventually, we will have a fairer nation.’
Eventually? When will that be?
Can we in America take the challenge that China now poses and speed up our renewal?
I hope so. But China will keep beckoning and whispering in the ears of businesses, ‘come, my friends, make money and trust that you will be able to go back and hire lobbyists and finance campaigns to keep yourselves in power. But you must not say a word about the ‘reeducation’ of Uyghurs in Xinjiang, the suppression of freedom in Hong Kong or our plan to retake Taiwan.’
‘Trust us,’ says China to our businesses, ‘the soul of America is in your pockets. We will help you keep it that way. Shake that money and all will listen. It’s the money folks that are the true gods of this world and money the true free speech. Never lose faith and may the best nation win.’
And if we here in America fall for it and forget that free speech is the right to dissent, even if we are wrong, then we will play China’s game. If we forget that free speech must always respect other people’s rights, whether we approve of them or not, then we will play China’s game. And so fall under the spell of autocracy and dictatorship – governments that make gods of their leaders and compel the person to bow.
Soon enough the Thought Police will come for our neighbor.
‘Did you hear what happened to Fred?’
‘No, what?’
‘He was down at the pub and talked too much.’
‘How so?’
‘He was being critical of our leaders.’
‘Hmm… you know… I warned Fred about that. He’s a good guy… has a good business… makes money…. has a nice house,too… what’s the point?’
The point is we tarnish our humanity when we surrender our right to express our own thoughts.
With our humanity tarnished, we then become less creative, lose personal power and diminish our capacity to fully love.
A man of enormous courage, who has for years campaigned against the corruption and despotism of the Russian government, deserves the world’s full support.
As of today, he is still in prison. And the sad likelihood is that Putin and his collaborators will make up new charges to prevent him from being released. Ever.
Why? Because Alexei Navalny is too much of a threat.
The mention of Navalny stirs up in Russians the possibility of a new and better world.
Putin cannot accept that.
A nation with a history of great achievements, has lain in a semi dormant state, unable to fully develop its tremendous capabilities, while under the control of Vladimir Putin.
Imagine for a moment, all that the Russian people could be contributing to the world, where they to be living in a political system that allowed for the free expression of ideas.
The arts would then blossom, and so would technology, industry and science.
The lights shining from Russia would be seen by all nations.
So, yes, we need people like Navalny to stir us up.
As we speak, in not far off Myanmar, a dictator is now butchering its people, shooting dissidents in the head. Why? Because he must remain in power.
In Hong Kong, protesters are being put in jail because Xi Jinping is convinced he must mold all Chinese in his own image.
In Xinjian province, the government has been forcibly reeducating Muslims so that they, too, become more Chinese.
Isn’t it amazing how some people can persuade others to remain silent, and surrender their ambitions of personal fulfillment, not just for a little while, but for a lifetime?
Putin could change this for Russians at any time. If he believes that most Russians are with him, then why not hold free elections and let them decide?
But he won’t because he’s afraid Russians will choose Navalny over him.
So he prefers to keep things under his control so he may govern until his death, maybe 20 or 30 years from now.
What’s lost in that deal? That generations of Russian people will not see their possibilities fulfilled.
But that is not a concern for Putin. Power is.
Just like it is for Xi Jinping. Or General Hlaing in Myanmar.
Putin will not step down from his position unless forced by ill health or the Russian people revolt.
So, yes, Alexey Navalny is a threat.
He is a threat because he has the courage to dream. For himself, for his beloved Russia and for all of us. He has become an inspiration to men and women the world over and so become part of us.
What a distinction. What an honor.
As stated in Wikipedia, ‘Navalny was nominated for the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize by multiple Norwegian members of parliament.[359][360] An Internet petition to the Nobel Committee in support of Mr. Navalny’s candidacy has been signed by over 38,000 people.[361]’
I am here adding my name to such petition.
Oscarvaldes.net
Cc Editor of the New York times, the Washington Post, The Economist, Amnesty International.
Oscar Valdes 