Daring to HopeBy Christian de la Huerta October, 2008.
|
All the challenges we face today as a species can be said to be linked to that issue. Experts tell us that the most effective way to deal with world hunger, health care or overpopulation is to educate women. The environment? Women are innately, physiologically, more in tune with the cycles and turnings of nature. It is our disconnectedness to nature that brought about the environmental quagmire in which we find ourselves. War? One who is biologically geared to engender and carry life is more likely to value it. In general, women's leadership styles tend to be more inclusive, less authoritative and hierarchical, and more conducive to dialogue, interchange and nonviolent conflict resolution.
It is not my intent here to idealize women, who are clearly also capable of cunning, violence and brutality, nor do I mean to demonize men. But this planet sure could use more balance in leadership! Ultimately, what our world needs is a renaissance of the feminine in all of us, regardless of what's between our legs.
Given these convictions, it might seem contradictory that I am supporting Barack Obama for president. The truth is, I believe that he embodies qualities traditionally associated with the feminine more than any other candidate, including Clinton. Now, I realize that in some circles such a statement would be considered detrimental to Obama's standing, particularly in times of war. However, I think it is high time that we move beyond the sexist stereotype of women as emotionally driven, fragile weaklings. Power has many faces and is not limited to expressions of brute force, domination, or coercion.
A few years ago when Governor Schwarzenegger derided his Democratic legislative opponents as "girlie men," gay and lesbian groups took offense. Even openly lesbian State Senator Sheila Kuehl, in condemning the Governator's comments as "blatantly homophobic" failed to challenge an even more subtle and insidious prejudice: the underlying premise that to be "girlie" is a bad thing and a basis for an insult.
I suspect that sadly, but understandably, Hillary has felt obligated to act all tough and macho in order to get elected, perhaps overcompensating for the perceived handicap of being a woman. However, her aggressive and hawkish stand on the Iraq war, as well as the harsh and divisive tones and strategies her campaign has occasionally exhibited, have been a turn-off for me and many others.
Though many people in our country are still frozen in post-9/11 fear and subconsciously long for a strong, authoritative Daddy to take care of us and make everything alright, I think Clinton may have failed to read the signs that more and more of us are breaking out of that old, tired and unsustainable behavior pattern.
Perhaps, another time, the sheer possibility of having a woman president would have been enough to evoke inspiration. Tragically for Hillary, however, Barack seems to have cornered that market this year. My heart goes out to her.
Of course, an Obama presidency is not a done deal. Many things could still block, impede or derail his campaign. A recent New York Times article gave voice to a concern I -- and, apparently, many others -- had been hesitant to even talk about: that he might be assassinated.
And yet, in spite of that, I choose to hope.
I can enumerate many reasons why I support his candidacy, not the least of which is that he bridges generations, races, and religions. He even seems to bridge between political parties, with the term "Obama Republicans" already having entered the discussion. The response he elicits from younger generations inspires me and gives me hope. And that's the bottom line. I have not felt such hope in a politician in quite some time. Make that ever. I was too young and still living in Cuba when Kennedy was around.
Hope requires risk and, yes, audacity. When we allow ourselves to hope we risk broken hearts, disappointment, disillusionment. There is always the chance that things will not work out the way we wanted. Hope takes courage, and the word courage comes from the French "cour," which means "heart." Hope--and courage--reside in the heart. Hope transcends logic and unleashes the soul. Hope belongs in the realm of the spirit.
Hope is precisely what the times are calling for. Obama's message of hope is ultimately a sign of revolution, a spiritual revolution. Notwithstanding his obvious and abundant personal charisma, the reason he is filling stadiums with 20,000 people is that he is funneling a movement. He has tapped into a groundswell of desire for change, for a break from the past, for liberation, even for responsibility. We are tired of divisiveness and polarization. We are shocked and appalled to witness our personal freedoms and civil rights eroding in this very country, a beacon of liberty for so many in the world. We are heartbroken by the way America's image has been tainted in the last seven years. We long for something fresh and new. We want change!
I think -- I hope -- that, finally, enough of us have had enough!
People want to believe that yes, we can, make a difference in this world. That America can rise from the ashes of fear-based belligerence, unilateral arrogance, negligent self-absorption, exemplified to the extreme by Bush's "I am the decider" and "It's my way or the highway" mentality. That Americans are waking up from a post 9/11 semi-catatonic state and are now ready to take a more active role in our government. That our country is ready to assume a more responsible, humble and enlightened leadership role in the world.
For that, I believe, we are willing to make changes -- sacrifices, even.
For Obama's is a call to action. His role is to lead us, guide us and inspire us, not to do it for us. He can't. Change must begin within, with each one of us. And it begins by daring to hope.
