The Post-Election Hangover

Rx: a hair of the dog that bit you. More politics, in the form of two more pieces published by Inter Press Service.

International Observers Turn the Tables
Electoral observers put the vote under a multi-national magnifying glass
http://www.ipsnews.net/new_nota.asp?idnews=26105

Clear Skies, Some Cloudy Intentions
Long lines and electoral entrepreneurship at the polling places in north Miami
http://www.ipsnews.net/new_nota.asp?idnews=26117

My heart goes out to all the people who worked feverishly for weeks or months on various campaigns and who did not see the results they fervently hoped for. Electoral politics is cruel, but as with baseball, spring training will come around again soon -- only a year or two in this case (I vowed I wouldn't use a sports metaphor, but now that the elections are over ...). Anyway, the issues that motivate people don't stop being important just because some candidate wins or loses.

In the wake of this election, though, I fear for the world. To the many decent people who voted for Bush/Cheney sincerely believing it was the right thing to do, on the long chance that you read this, I ask you to take a deep breath, step back, and try to look at us as the rest of the world sees us. It's hard. It doesn't always make sense. We can ignore the rest of the world and it will rarely bother us (9/11 being the exception that proves the rule), but whenever we sneeze the rest of the world catches malaria, or cholera or AIDS.

We had a huge reservoir of international good will in the wake of 9/11, but now the dam has been busted by smart bombs and that sympathy is gone with the flash flood. Now, in most of the world, most people oppose our government as arrogant, fraudulent and destructive.

There was a period when al Qaeda was concentrated in Afghanistan. but they've long since decentralized and franchised out some of their operations. Meanwhile, our blunderings have given the Qaeda brand tremendous name recognition and prestige in too many places.

Overwhelming military power is about as useful against them now as a surface-to-air missile against a tornado. Their cells may be in Hamburg or Bangkok, Madrid or Jakarta, Rome or Doha, Orlando or Salt Lake City. They have all the explosives and low-level nuclear waste they need to wreak terrible havoc -- they don't need a suitcase nuclear weapon.

But there's no way to invade or bomb a bunch of cities. We can't find any of them without widespread international cooperation. They have become a political and intelligence problem, and continuing to treat them as a military problem has given their recruiting a huge boost. We've become, in effect, their marketing department.

The world is not an action movie. As overwhelming and unchallenged as our military and economic power is, we still cannot impose our political will when most of the world sees our government's actions as contemptuous and counter-productive.

Leadership has to be granted; you can't force it down people's throats. Before you can lead people or countries effectively, you have to listen to them, understand their hopes and fears, and find some common ground. Because it's not leading if they're not following, and nobody will follow if they don't believe it's in their own interest. Could it be that negotiation and cooperation are a big part of leadership?

This probably sounds like fuzzy-headed liberal thinking, doesn't it? Or maybe I'm just making this up? OK, don't take my word for it. Jump on the web and see what foreign newpapers are saying (many of them have English-language editions). Look at foreign polls, which have been widely reported in this country. Talk to foreigners and immigrants, who are all around us even in red states. And don't turn away: look hard at the hostages and the casualties.

If we're not going to make a serious effort to understand the world we bestride like a colossus, we should pick up our feet of clay and head home.