I found myself wondering, “Hmmm, how old is Karl Rove anyway?”.

Offbeat, as usual, it was only very recently that I rented a DVD of the film, The U.S. versus John Lennon. I found myself surprised by my own reaction to the film. Much of the footage of John and Yoko seemed all too familiar to me, so there was no big surprise there. That the FBI viewed John Lennon as some sort of national threat was just plain weird, but these days I guess it probably doesn’t have the same shock value that it would’ve had nearly eight years ago.

However, what made this film an absolutely mind gripping experience is the nuanced commentary on how Nixon’s Administration attempted, oftentimes succeeding, to manipulate the media, the anti-war movement and the youth vote in 1972. At some point in the film, I found myself wondering, “Hmmm, how old is Karl Rove anyway?”.

I’m not saying that I’m shocked by what Nixon orchestrated. But, was rather jolted by outrage as I watched what people who were of age during that turbulent era lived through. Why were they not more involved in the last presidential campaign or the anti-war movement? It was obvious from the film that although Nixon would plan to be out of the White House when mass protests were held, that the demonstrations were having the desired impact. Nixon was nervous. Only the youth were unaware of their power. Is this their legacy now? Are they apathetic or less ideological now because they never felt validated that they could effectively bring about change? If this is the case, perhaps it explains how the Bush administration happened (again).

Well, why didn’t the fear of “Nixonism” motivate more people to get involved in 2004, especially since we have been taught at least since our junior high history classes that history can repeat itself, right? And, history has indeed been repeating itself in a very eerie way since 2003. The footage of Nixon in The U.S. versus John Lennon was mesmerizing and it was actual proof. If I closed my eyes and just listened, it sounded very much like our current “decider”. One could have easily substituted the words “Iraq” for “Vietnam”.

As the film chronicled the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, it occurred to me that 2008 would mark the 40^th anniversary of that historic event when the Democratic Party opened the political process to all because of the mounting anti-war sentiment and the contentious politics that had overshadowed the convention. I thought about my more mature friends (you know, the ones who lived through that turbulent era) who are ideological, but just couldn’t find the time to get involved in the last presidential campaign. Some even used their children’s overscheduled lives as an excuse. I love children, even the bad ones, but soccer practice in the burbs is just simply not a valid excuse. You see, I think that getting involved in selecting our nation’s “decider” is a great way to teach your children how to become good citizens and it demonstrates an appreciation for the sacrifices our forefathers and mothers made on our behalf. It can also mean the difference in whether or not your child ever has to see military combat.

I know that Yoko Ono Lennon has dedicated much of her life to finding ways to pay a public tribute to her husband’s magnificent legacy, but I couldn’t help wondering if this film was a direct message to the American people, urging us not to forget our own collective past.

Global Citizen or Denizen?

Nancy Pelosi, the strong-willed Speaker of the House, has come under attack this week for her diplomatic visit to Syria. Yes, that’s right, her “diplomatic” travels are under scrutiny by the current administration because President Bush doesn’t believe in speaking to people he doesn’t agree with. Fight them, yes. Speak to them, no. Ms. Pelosi’s actions here are quite laudable though. She has demonstrated the kind of chutzpah that separates true leadership from well, plain old pettiness.

The public criticism of Ms. Pelosi’s visit to Syria reminded me of something I had read several months ago that seemed very befitting to the contrast between President Bush’s handling of foreign policy versus that of Ms Pelosi’s. I had been given a catalogue for Claus Miller’s “Signs for Peace” exhibition which features conceptual artwork created from the fingerprints of peacemakers around the world. Walter Veltroni, Mayor of Rome, writing in the preface of this catalogue, reflected on a quote from Kofi Annan who was in turn explaining peacemaking from the perspective of traditional African society:

When dealing with conflict “people gather together under the largest tree in the village and talk. And, ‘if you can’t solve the problem, you meet the next day and you keep talking till you find the solution.’ This is the only path to follow, in dark difficult times such as ours, marked by terrorism and war: the path of dialogue, discussion, mutual respect, and negotiation. Peace is the way to achieve peace. It is a task that each of us can take upon his or her own shoulders, with humility and responsibility, knowing that every small act, every symbolic gesture, may be useful. For lighting up hope. For dispelling fear and egoism, which would be overcome.”

Ms. Pelosi is obviously ready to find her own “Sign for Peace” and actually reported that she felt hopeful for the future at the conclusion of her dialogue with Syrian officials. Perhaps, by reaching out to Syria in such a diplomatic way, this small symbolic gesture of Ms. Pelosi’s could have powerful consequences. Maybe, it will even serve as a signifier to other leaders in the Western world that it is time for them to recognize the importance of their role as global citizens rather than denizens. It’s time to talk and of course, listen.

Artruism: The Art of Altruism

As we come closer to entering the full on political season, the media has already bombarded us with wannabe presidents readjusting their historical decisions to go to war in Iraq and creating addendums to previous statements captured in the media, all the while “youtube” creates a cyberspace “gothcha” reality show of the ‘08 presidential campaign. Does anyone else feel as though we should probably be voting for our next president with a cell phone rather than going to a poll?

Nevertheless, as the presidential contenders carefully parse their words now in an effort to position themselves in concert with current public opinion about the war with all of their carefully constructed media sound bytes, I am reminded just how refreshing it is to be engaged with the artistic community rather than the political one. For example, Tina Schelhorn maintains the very strong opinion about the war that she articulated back in 2003 and she has never apologized for it or repositioned it in anyway, but rather created a larger forum through photography to help others express their opinions too. One of the most compelling anti-war photo exhibitions that I have viewed is Ms Schelhorn’s “images against war” .

The exhibition was inspired by Ms. Schelhorn’s participation in anti-war protests in Germany before the invasion of Iraq. After attending several such protests, she concluded that the anti-war message was not effectively being heard and perhaps it would be best conveyed visually. As an artist and an owner of the Gallery Lichtblick in Cologne, she committed to creating visual protests against war and consequently submitted a call to artists to join her. More than 600 photographers from around the world submitted their own visual statements against war to be displayed in “images against war”. Ms. Schelhorn was overwhelmed by the strong response and particularly that the photographs included images from World War I to the most recent conflict in Lebanon. This exhibition that Ms. Schelhorn created has become one of the most democratic of demonstrations that I have ever experienced. The exhibition is about the collective strong opinion of artists who feel it is their responsibility to reflect upon the state of our global society through their camera lenses. The most refreshing part of the exhibition is the way in which Ms. Schelhorn chose to display the images. She deliberately separated the photo credits from the images and simply listed them together on large text panels and in doing so, she also separated the ego from the exhibition which was particularly significant since the contributors are well known international photojournalists, fine art photographers and commercial photographers. Perhaps this is the most altruistic photo exhibition one could hope to view.

Wecome to PaxMuse

Thank you for visiting PaxMuse blog. This newly created site will explore issues of peace and social justice from diverse perspectives (i.e. media, art, history, science, law, current events, etc). The overarching goal of this site is to provide information and space for positive discourse about peace-related issues. The aim is to allow for a discussion that is open, inquisitive and solution-focused, rather than overly cynical or critical.

So, will it be possible to learn how to become a better global citizen through a blog? What kind of cumulative effect will the dialogue from a blog about peace have on individuals, the blogging community, or even the world?  Join the blog and let’s find out.  And just so you know, I have enlisted the help of a team of diverse professionals to post here periodically to facilitate the understanding of peace from a myriad of viewpoints.  I look forward to hosting a lively blog site!