Very slow, reluctant
start at the gym this morning. I had
last night to blame. That old,
incandescent dynamo Sly Stone came on and helped me get through. The tune wasn’t one of the glorious feel-good
anthems from the early days, nor was it the hands-down performance to beat, from Woodstock, the ‘Higher Medley’ . I might
have driven that stair-master out the window with that on. And it wasn’t from the masterful “There’s a
Riot Going On,” nor was it “Fresh” neither but rather a tune from the seventh
album recorded in 1974, the last one they all appear together on as a “Family”
Stone: “Small Talk.” It’s an imperfect
album and certainly Sly is well adrift by this time as the look on the cover,
testifies. But there are some gems within
and “Loose Booty” is one of them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_Talk_(Sly_and_the_Family_Stone_album)
Rose Stone has an irresistible vocal break early on, Cynthia
and Jerry as always, with the cool horn fills that make you want to walk like
Redd Foxx. As the title suggests the
ditty is largely about getting your ass in motion, in an unapologetically positive
fashion.
Life can be confusing, any given
day
And if you feel like losin', get on
out the way
This stuff will be amazing, here is
all you do
How minutes turn to days in, doing
what I do
All cool. But from
the start Sly keeps repeating: “Shadrach, Meshack, Abednego,” over and over. What’s up with that? We’re talking ‘The Book of Daniel Chapters
1-3.” These are the three devout young Jews from Judah who Nebuchadnezzar
wanted flamed alive for not bowing down to his idol. But no matter how hot Neb’s made the flame he
couldn’t burn them and instead he saw the trio and a mysterious fourth person,
walking around inside the furnace, at ease. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadrach,_Meshach,_and_Abednego A parable of faith and devotion.
I got that. I just labor to
connect it with walking around with your funky backside in a groove. I just read the full passage in ‘The Good
Book’, perhaps expecting to find that the trio (quartet?) danced out of the
fire, grabbed Nebuchadnezzar hands, and commenced to do a two-step, but
no. There is no such thing. So Sly, (who, praise God, is still doing his
thing, in spite of quite a bit of indulgence,) as my grandmother used to say,
‘what does this have to do with the price of eggs in China?’
Now our President, who in my opinion, walks in a fashion
even cooler than Redd Foxx, was in South Africa for Mandela’s funeral and he
went over and shook Raul Castro’s hand.
Great. In the end it was as easy
as: 易如反掌[1] Certainly
the great man’s passing was an opportunity to walk-the-walk of reconciliation,
not just talk about it. I’ve long hoped
that during Obama’s second term, with little to loose, he ends the tired
charade and normalizes relations with Cuba.
The Republicans still have no clear message on immigration, no clear
message of participation for Hispanic voters, and even if they throw Marc Rubio
up there to run, its’ going to be a killing-floor of primary cycle hatred
before he ever faces a Democrats.
Republican’s and the Hispanic vote are going to be Déjà vu all over
again, only worse, as the demographic tide will have risen further and there’ll
be a larger Hispanic population voting.
So even if it means annoying some portion of Cuban voters in
Florida, do-the-right-thing. The Times did back flips trying to explain how complicated
this all was:
The question is whether Mr.
Obama was trying to signal a desire to change hearts by shaking Mr. Castro’s
hand. If so, the Cuban president would become the latest adversary that Mr.
Obama has sought to turn into a friend — or at least a less dangerous opponent.
“A less dangerous opponent.” Really?
Is there anyone who truly sees Cuba in this day and age as “dangerous
opponent?” Dangerous to what? Our ideals?
Sure. But our ideals are strong
enough to let others pursue different paths.
We don’t have to cease our critique of the lack of human rights, the
lack of freedom of the press, the unlawful imprisonment of people. We don’t have to say that one party rule is
something we think highly of either. But
prohibiting Americans to visit, prohibiting Americans to trade; what on earth
does this accomplish in this day and age?
Cubans are further impoverished, but not to the point that the Party is
ever overthrown. To change people’s
minds, you have to speak with them.
John Foster Dulles snubbed Zhou Enlai at the
Geneva Conference in 1954, by refusing to meet or even shake the Premier’s
hand. Nixon of course practically
stampeded down the airstairs in 1972 with his hand out extended to press flesh
with the awaiting Zhou, hoping, in no small part, to undue the residue of
Dulles’ ungentlemanly gesture. I believe
it's a rather small thing to ask that we have Presidents brave enough to shake
hands. OK. There are some people you don’t want to
break-bread with until they atone or meet you in the middle. But our Cuba policy is such a blatant anachronism and
hopefully this is an auger for rapprochement.
I’ve had front row seats at the last twenty years while America
wrung its hands over whether or not to engage with China, the faltering but
steady progression that Nixon began on that first dash down the airsteps. People who expected that trade was going to
somehow lead to a multi-party democracy in China have been disappointed. But China is unrecognizably different, freer, more prosperous, reflective, communicative, evolved, than the shattered
revolutionary landscape of 1972. Four
hundred million people have risen from subsistence level living to something like a
middle class existence. I don’t care who
you are, if you don’t think that is a “human good” unto the world, you’re
wrong. Are there untold attendant
risks, has it been dirty and venal and unfair.
Of course. Every industrialization
is. But engagement with the world has
been good for China and good for the United States, despite the differences
that remain. And engagement with Cuba,
rather than make-believe isolation is in both countries’ best interest as
well. Come the day.
No comments:
Post a Comment