“Change the World”
One of the most fascinating aspects of Barack Obama’s campaign is, in my opinion, his soaring rhetoric and that of his most passionate supporters, advisers and staffers. Obama himself and his supporters often chant that they are going to “change the world,” seemingly by doing as simple as electing a man as president.
The rhetoric may appeal to a lot of people, especially after eight years of George W. Bush and at a time of economic crisis, but it is going way over board.
Some will say, but they know they are not going to change the world, they are just positive, hopeful, etc. Could be. But it is perfectly clear, I’d say, that many of Obama’s supporters do believe they are going to change the world in only he wins. For millions it is not heated rhetoric at all, it is an ambition and a belief deeply ingrained in them.
Well, I’ve got news for those people: you’re not going to change the world. I live in the Netherlands, I am Dutch, and you are truly not going to change this country in any way, nor Europe as a whole. We will continue to do what we consider best, we’ll work with you guys when we consider doing so in our own interest, but we’re not quite willing to let you guys change ‘the world.’
Considering that we are allies of the United States it does not take a rocket scientist to understand what enemies of the U.S. think about the ‘positive’ rhetoric and ambition to change the world. Russia and China, Iran and North Korea, Venezuela and Syria are not even thinking about allowing Obama to “change the world,” nor are they deeply impressed by the rhetoric which seems to imply some sort of global agenda, which is – I have to say – troubling.
The rhetoric is grand, and Obama is using it to his advantage. He knows how to energize voters, and how to convince them to vote for him. This requires, it seems, over-the-top rhetoric and ambitions. As such, it is logical that Obama uses it.
However, Americans would be wise to keep in mind that, firstly, Obama is not going to change the world so they will be sorely disappointed, and secondly, ‘the world’ may not enjoy it very much that a man who is likely to become president says he wants to ‘change’ it in his specific way.
What “change the world” means to me is changing the way the America relates to the world (i.e. other sovereign countries). Respect for other governments, even if we don’t agree with their actions, means encouraging dialogue and diplomacy and avoiding dogmatic rhetoric and childish name calling. The “Axis of Evil” list is a good example of unnecessary comments that did nothing positive towards resolving the US concerns in North Korea. Now that there is dialogue and economic aid involved, North Korea has been moving in an acceptable direction regarding it nuclear ambitions. Admittedly it’s slow going but the more that the US engages them, the more we understand their hopes and needs. The proposed missile shield in Eastern Europe inserted an issue into the US/Russia relationship, which up to that point, had been warming considerably. The my-way-or-the-highway approach of the US did not acknowledge Russia’s concerns. This has led to a chill between the two countries and escalating threatening actions. We showed our lack of respect with our unwillingness to accept a negotiated location suitable to Russia. Another example would be the US embargo against Cuba. I always understood that capitalism and free trade were part of our success as a democracy. As I understand it, the more other people in non-democratic countries are exposed the USA through open trade, the more their lives would improve through the exchange of ideas and goods. Certainly life in China has changed with the increased trade. Cuba should be drawn into a close relationship with the US, not estranged by an embargo. Not to mention that many nations have regular diplomatic and trade agreements with Cuba. The point I’m making in a round about way is that, as an Obama supporter, I hope that the US can help facilitate change in the world through respect and dialogue with all countries. As you note, Obama does give many of us hope. Obviously a man’s words has to be translated into action. George Bush came into office as a uniter. That did not happen. Does the Netherlands consider Russia or China an “enemy”? I personally do not see either as an enemy until they attack us. They are trading partners, allies in many diplomatic efforts, competitors in both an economic and sphere of influence sense. Are they enemies?? Not today. Do I want a President Obama to “change” Europe, the Netherlands, Russia or China? No but I do want him to TALK with (not to, not at) all nations. That would be enough “change” in this world for me right now.