We
Are the Ones:
Avoiding Fascism in a Turbulent World
Sermon delivered by Rev Dr Claudene F Oliva, January 18, 2009
Unitarian Universalist Church of Evansville,
2910 East Morgan Avenue, Evansville IN
We
are the ones we have been waiting for. Our new President, Barack Obama,
said that.
But
before Obama, Alice Walker titled her book:
We Are the Ones We
Have Been Waiting For: Light in a Time of Darkness
(2006)
Before the book, we had the albums of Dan Curtin (2006) and the
Visionaries (2006), the music of Sweet Honey in the Rock (1998).
Before Obama, the book and the music, we heard that we are the ones in
the prayer of the Hopi Elders (2001).
Before that, we learned that it was an oft repeated phrase by Washington
street organizer Lisa Sullivan.
Before Lisa Sullivan, it was the concluding line in June Jordan’s poem
for South African Women: we are
the ones we have been waiting for 1980.
Before June Jordan, there was Ghandi: "We must become the change we want
to see in the world."
There was Buddha: There are two mistakes one can make along the road to
truth; not going all the way and not starting.
There was the Bible: Micah
6:8 “He has told you, O mortal, what is good; and what does the
Lord require of you
but to do justice, and
to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?”
Unitarian Universalists have always been haunted by and enamored with
the concept of social justice and our relation to it.
As a morally principled people, for many of us social action is
an important part of working for the good that we want in this world.
We flirt with ideas, fantasize about our role in social change,
yearn for progress and hunger for hope.
We WANT to be the ones that we are waiting for and, yet, we fear
that we are the ones that we have been waiting for.
We will never forget Marianne Williamson’s famous words: “Our
greatest fear is not that we are inadequate, but that we are powerful
beyond measure.” In an
unsettled way, we fear that statement in the pit of our stomach and yet
it also makes us proud. We are
the ones we’ve been waiting for. We have hope.
You
have heard these words before, yet I do not apologize. We must hear
ideas many times in order for them to be sewn into the fabric of our
being. This week we honor
and remember one of the world’s greatest theologians, orators and
activists, the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Junior.
Dr King understood our yearning and he also understood our
ambivalence and our need for vigilance. Even though most of his speeches
spoke directly to the civil rights issues of his time, his rhetoric is
as prophetic now as it was then.
In
1958 King stated, “Human progress is neither automatic nor
inevitable….This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time
for vigorous and positive action.”
Obama, in his election night speech noted: “This victory alone is not
the change we seek - it is only the chance for us to make that change.
And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It
cannot happen without you.”
King was outspoken in his quest for civil action. Obama, too, presses us
to expect more from politics, give more of ourselves and feel truly
invested in something bigger than a particular candidate or cause.
Obama cries out, “This is it. We are the ones we’ve been waiting
for. We are the change that we seek.[1]”
Dr.
King and President elect Obama speak passionately and repeatedly urge
everyone to get involved.
They have a strong regard, as did president Abraham Lincoln, for a
government that is by, for and of the people. Barbara Jordan reminds us
that we often place the emphasis in the wrong place in that phrase. To
Jordan, the phrase concerns a government that should be by the PEOPLE,
of the PEOPLE and for the PEOPLE.[2]
The people. That’s us. The people.
Some people fear that we are moving toward a fascist state.
The people are not a basic component of fascism. In fact, fascism
denies the principles of democracy. A fascist state is ruled by a
leader, a superhero if you will.
It affirms the “immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of
mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere
operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage.
Do
these remarks seem like a huge jump in our conversation?
How does one go from representative government to a fascist
state? Political consultant
and author Naomi Wolf suggests
that there is a simple, effective blueprint for turning a democracy into
a dictatorship, one that has been repeatedly and successfully used in
many countries. She worries
that President Bush has initiated most of the steps that lead us in that
direction.
[3]
(In fact, over the course of his presidency, President George W.
Bush and his supporters have been called fascists and Nazis thousands of
times.) Wolf asserts that
because most Americans were born in freedom, we have a hard time even
considering that it is possible for us to become unfree. This is because
we have opted out. We no longer deeply study our rights or our system of
government. I quote: “The task of being aware of the constitution has
been outsourced from citizens' ownership to being the domain of
professionals such as lawyers and professors - we scarcely recognize the
checks and balances that the founders put in place, even as they are
being systematically dismantled.”[4]
President elect Obama has also been labeled fascist.
How can that be? How can both men, the leaders of our government,
be labeled as fascists? Is it possible to live in a fascist regime that
is also a republican form of government?
My friends, allow me to delve into this area a little while for it
directly affects our major thesis: we are the ones.
The United States of America values democracy as a style that
recognizes the worth of each individual and requests their input.
However,
democracy is not our form of government, for in a democracy the will of
the majority is absolute and unlimited. Whether directly or indirectly
through representatives, a democracy is rule by the people.
The decisions of the majority are supreme and unappealable: they
are absolute. A democracy
subordinates the role of reason to that of free will.
So, for example, if the people vote to distribute all of the
money in the Treasury to the teenagers in our country, that would be the
people’s decision and it would have to be carried out. Some have labeled
this form of government, mob-ocracy. No form of democracy has ever been
successful.
The United States of America has a republican form of government. A
republic seeks to honor the role of the individual while safeguarding
the rights of the minority.
A republican form of government is created through a constitution and is
limited by its constitution. It separates power, is voted on by an
electorate, can be changed through amendment and has at its core a set
of undeniable rights. It is
executed through the reason of law.
This is the root of the tyranny of the vote. We, the electorate, choose
people to represent us and then must hold them to the fire for their
vote counts as our will.
How our representatives vote is the legislative power of the government.
While it can be constrained by the executive or judicial branches,
through a creative system of checks and balances, it is the fundamental
building block of our rights and protection.
This representative form of government only works when it is truly
representative of the desires of the people. Only then can it be of the
people, by the people and for the people. On election night in 2008, the
people of the United States of America chose the person whom they
believed would best represent them as our executive leader. They also
chose many of the men and the women who will make our laws.
Yet, in order to be effective, to be representative, the elected
officials must constantly be aware of the desires and needs of their
constituency. How can they know? How can they avoid the “bubble” of
Washington? How do they stay in touch with those people whom they
represent?
It is of special interest to note that Thomas Jefferson wrote James
Madison in March 1789 that:
"The tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread at
present, and will be for long years. That of the executive will come
it’s turn, but it will be at a remote period." (Text per original.)
Many fear that that remote period has come.
The time has come when we must
fear the tyranny of the executive for it is today that the executive is
presumed to be leading us down a fascist path.
Let’s turn now to fascism.
In 2003 Dr Lawrence Britt summarized the major points of fascism.[5]
For our purposes I have condensed them into three broad statements.
Statement number one: Through the rhetoric of threats to national
security the fascist government extols patriotism through slogans and
mottos, identifies enemies/scapegoats as a unifying cause,
disproportionately funds the military, and aggressively advocates
authoritative measures of crime and punishment.
Second statement: In a fascist state there is an underlying
disparagement of human rights and a rigidity of social roles using the
media as a source and the dominant religion as a tool to manipulate
public opinion. Intellectuals and artists are disdained and may be
censored or poorly funded.
Elections may be manipulated.
Thirdly: In a fascist state, corporate power is protected and labor is
suppressed through favorable laws and cronyism. The business aristocracy
is self perpetuating and self protective, using governmental power and
authority to protect friends and associates from accountability.
It is evident that the perceived threat to our country as a result of
the “9-11” crisis opened the door to a hungry acceptance of executive
directives which would make citizens feel more safe.
The repeated use of phrases such as “weapons of mass destruction”
and “axis of evil” clearly focused on our fear.
The ensuing war efforts vastly increased funding for the
military. There has been an
aggressive campaign to capture and punish our enemies, to the extent
that human rights have been violated.
There have been repeated cries that the media is biased and the
rise of emphasis on this “Christian country” has not gone unnoticed.
This administration has supported tax changes favorable to the
rich and big business – the trickle down approach – and has advocated
corporate friendly laws.
Jonah Goldberg notes that the motivating passions of fascism include the
cult of unity and the cult of personality, the faith that a great leader
would rise from among 'us' and bring everyone together.[6]
Certainly, Bush’s slogans have been utilized to create a unity which has
enabled an aggressive war effort. Nietzsche, who greatly influenced the
fascist movement, popularized the concept of the “superman” whose will
prevailed over those weaker than him.
As Bush’s popularity decreased over the years, he has been
accused of attempting to be this super-hero.
But
before we point the finger of partisanship, let us turn to Obama, not
yet in office, who has also been accused of a fascist approach.
Goldberg notes that “totalitarianism was for Mussolini a way of
uniting businesses, classes, regions, religions, institutions and people
from “all walks of life” …. “Fascism,” Il Duce declared time and again,
“is a religion.” And the animating dogma of that faith was that if we’re
all in it together there’s nothing we can’t do. Everything in the state,
nothing outside the state.
Goldberg notes that,
according to The New York Times, Barack Obama's own recruiters were
trained not to talk about issues, but to 'testify' about how they 'came
to Obama' the way one might normally talk about coming to Jesus…. Or as
his wife, Michelle, put it: 'We need a leader who's going to touch our
souls because, you see, our souls are broken.'[7]
Obama offers us a message of hope.
Bush is accused of excessive nationalism through his military zeal, but
militarism is not necessarily the only form of nationalism. Goldberg
notes that during the first third of the 20th Century militarism was
seen as the best means of organizing society. Since then, according to
Goldberg, liberals have been searching for a moral equivalent of war
that would inspire citizens to drop their personal ambitions and, in
President Woodrow Wilson's words, 'marry their interests to the state'.
… President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal of the early Thirties was
just such an enterprise, complete with militarized work, environmental
and youth programs - the New Deal was initially hailed by Italian
dictator Benito Mussolini as a great fascist undertaking.[8]
Obama’s policies have often been
compared to the New Deal.
So how, then, does a republican form of government become a fascist
state? Each of our
presidents is accused of a focus on themselves as savior, whether
militarily or spiritually, an emphasis on their seductive power to lead
the nation to greater heights. Is this the making of a fascist regime?
Yes it is! BUT, fascism can only exist with a buy in, with a
constituency that is eager to say, yes, tell us how, show us the way,
make it so. While the
people of the state may feel that the new laws, the projects of the
state, are for the people, they are less and less
of and
by the people.
There is a relinquishment of power in the face a potential
savior, a stronger, safer nation and economic prizes.
Hope is placed in another, vacating the energies of the people.
The election of President Obama presages change.
Will we, the people, rise to the challenge of making our desires
manifest? Will we fight for what we want? Will we tackle the hard
issues?
In his day, Dr King noted that
“the movement for social change has entered a time of temptation to
despair because it is clear now how deep and systemic are the evils it
confronts. There is a temptation to break up into mutually suspicious
extremist groups, in which blacks reject the participation of whites and
whites reject the realities of their own history.”[9]
Today President Obama asserts: Americans [who] sent a message to the
world that we have never been a collection of Red States and
Blue States: we are, and always will be,
the United States of America. It's the answer that led those who have
been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and
doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history
and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day…. As Lincoln said
to a nation far more divided than ours, "We are not enemies, but
friends...though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds
of affection."[10]
By February 7, 2008 over 300,000 people had contributed to the Obama
campaign in 2008, just 38 days into the new year!
No one has ever built a campaign involving so many Americans as
true stakeholders. Obama stated that this level of contributors “speaks
volumes not only about the kind of campaign we're running, but also
about how we want politics to be.”…of the people, by the people and for
the people. We have hope.
President elect Obama’s rhetoric strives to forge connections among all.
Dr
King understood the alienation of people.
“Alienation is not confined to our young people, but it is
rampant among them. Yet
alienation should be foreign to the young.
Growth requires connection and trust.
Alienation is a form of living death.
It is the acid of despair that dissolves society.[11]
Obama might counter: [our campaign] grew strength from the young people
who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy; who left their homes
and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; from
the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to
knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans
who volunteered, and organized, and proved that more than two centuries
later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has
not perished from this Earth.
Dr.
King would remind us that we need more than connection.
In his words, “Jesus reminds us that the good life combines the
toughness of the serpent and the tenderness of the dove.
To have serpentlike qualities devoid of dovelike qualities is to
be passionless, mean and selfish. To have dovelike without serpentlike
qualities is to be sentimental, anemic, and aimless. We must combine
strongly marked antitheses.[12]
From another passage: “What is needed is a realization that power
without love is reckless and abusive and that love without power is
sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the
demands of justice. Justice at its best is love correcting everything
that stands against love.”[13]
Obama appears to understand that hope must be accompanied by strength.
His words, “And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores,
from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in
the forgotten corners of our world - our stories are singular, but our
destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.
To those who would tear this world down - we will defeat you. To
those who seek peace and security - we support you. And to all
those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright -
tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes
not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from
the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and
unyielding hope.
Obama acknowledges that “the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the
greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet
in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. “ Yet, he
exhorts us to participate. He promises to be honest and to listen even
in disagreement. He is
hopeful that we will get there. How we hope that he is being honest,
that he will rise to the challenge of governing this beloved nation. .
Dr.
King asserts, “A solution for the present crisis will not take place
unless men and women work for it.
Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable. Even a
superficial look at history reveals that no social advance rolls in on
the wheels of inevitability. Every step toward the goal of justice
requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle; the tireless exertions and
passionate concern of dedicated individuals.
Without persistent effort, time itself becomes an ally of the
insurgent and primitive forces of irrational emotionalism and social
destruction. This is no time for apathy or complacency. This is a time
for vigorous positive action.
It
is the shame of the sunshine patriots if the foregoing paragraphs have a
hollow sound, like an echo of countless political speeches. These things
must be repeated time and again, for men forget quickly, but once said,
they must be followed with a dynamic program, or else they become a
refuge for those who shy from any action.
If America is to respond creatively to the present crisis, many
groups and agencies must rise above the reiteration of generalities and
begin to take an active part in changing the face of their nation.[14]
Yes, we are the ones. Can
we make a difference? Si se
puede! We have the
yearning, we have the hope, we know what we want. Yes we can!
Yes, we must.
I
believe that Dr King and Mr. Obama might agree that Plato was wrong. The
human personality is not like a charioteer with two headstrong horses,
each wanting to go in different directions. Perhaps there is one horse
raring to go and the other plagued with inertia, perhaps too analytical,
too willing to see all sides of every issue, to stand up and make a
difference.
Let
us take up Obama’s clarion call. He says: This is our chance to answer
that call. This is our moment. This is our time - to put our
people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to
restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the
American Dream and reaffirm that
fundamental truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe,
we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who
tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that
sums up the spirit of a people:
Yes We Can for we are the ones.[15]
