| | ***(Let me preface this note by saying I'm not an expert in politics, nor am I an expert in International relations, nor am I a seasoned theologian. But I do care about the world. Oh, and I'm also not predicting the end of the world or citing that the "End is Near." So don't freak out by the title.)
I'm not sure if you all know this, but two days ago, the former Prime Minister of Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto, was assassinated in Rawalpindi after speaking at Political Rally for the Pakistan People's Party (PPP). I won't go much into it because you can just read about it here:
Pakistan | An Assassin Strikes | Economist.com
However, I did want to say this. I was very disheartened when I watched the news yesterday. I was watching CNN and they were talking with Rudy Giuliani as he was responding to  the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. Apparently no one really knows who did it. Some suggest that the President of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, and his followers were behind it. Others suggest it was the Taliban or Al Qaeda. People are arguing about who how she died exactly. There's video of a man who fired three shots directly at her and then proceeded to detonate the explosives that were to strapped to himself. Despite this, officials in Pakistan say that she wasn't killed by any shrapnel or bullets or anything from the explosives. I haven't quite figured out what they're suggesting she died of, but I've only figured what they're suggesting she didn't die of.
So who knows who did it? I don't, that's for sure.
Anyways, this is my problem. They were talking to Giuliani about this, and he just starts going on and on about how terrorism is alive in the world and how we need to put an end to this, and how this is what he's been talking about all along. "Terrorism is our #1 priority," he said. I know this may be hard for some of you to understand, but it made me very angry that he said that. For this reason: he really didn't seem all that sad that Benazir Bhutto was dead. What it felt like was that Giuliani was capitalizing off of Benazir Bhutto's death. And while I recognize these are just my feelings, at the same time I wouldn't put it past a politician to do such a thing.
And you know, I'm not just bashing on Rudy. I would suggest that all of us pay close attention in the coming months as to how many times Benazir Bhutto's death is referred to with terrorism. Already they're having specials on the news, "Is Pakistan the new face of Global terrorism and instability in the world?" This kills me. I wonder how much people really care about Pakistanis? I wonder how much they're interested in the fact that people lost their hope of a step towards a more free Pakistan when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated two days ago? In my opinion, I don't really feel like these people are that concerned with the plight of the Pakistan people who are truly hurting because of her death. Instead, I'm sure they've got their campaign strategy managers all coming up w th ways to fit Bhutto's death into furthering the credentials of their campaign. "Look at Bhutto," they'll say. "Isn't this reason enough that terrorism is alive in this world and that we need to attack this. People, this is what I've been trying to say all along and now, because we have not given enough attention to this, people around the world are suffering."
 Listen for that. I'm sure in some way, form, or fashion, you'll hear this. And I say be weary of it. Too, be aware of politicians who mud sling. Mitt Romney is becoming notorious for this. It's terrible. if you were really the best candidate for position, why would you feel the need to mud sling about other candidates. If you were the best candidate available, wouldn't you be good enough that your integrity would stand out against those who are supposedly trying to decieve of other people? Romney has been slinging Mudd at McCain and Huckabee and it's disgusting.
"But Matt, don't you know that? That's how life is. You can't avoid that. People are selfish." I'm sure this is running through some people's minds right now.
I couldn't agree more. But I say that this is a tragedy. And we shouldn't just concede to this. Instead, we need to be speaking against this manipulation of an international tragedy. I don't know how to do that. Obviously none of us have an international platform to say these kinds of things. But I do remember something that Mother Theresa said about feeding the poor and I think it applies here, "If you can't feed one hundred poor people, then just feed one poor person." Essentially, don't concede to being void of action just because you can't make an impact on a global level. If you don't have a platform, then make a commitment to be aware of these things yourself.
The other thing is that we should mourn the loss of the Pakistanis ourselves. I know that we're in America and that most of those reading this may not have any Pakistani blood in you, but this is indeed becoming a smaller world. Independence and separation are no longer an option anymore. Nor is dependence. Instead, interdependence. The idea of global brotherhood and sisterhood, this is the idea I'm getting at. If we can't learn to mourn for our brothers and sisters who live in other countries, we will surely destroy ourselves eventually. Now, I'm not one who believes that when the end of the world happens that it God will come down from the clouds and start destroying things. Instead I believe that the end of the world will come when we become, as nations, so self-consumed with our own survival that we fail to learn what it means to be a global family. Our world is growing at a rapid rate. In Jesus' time, the world population was 230 million people. At the end of the first millennium it was 270 million people. In 1820, it was roughly 900 million people. in 1950, it grew to around 2.8 billion people. Today it's around 6.8, almost 7 billion people. Also today, there are 2.8 billion people who live on less than $2 a day. Essentially, the entire world population of 1950 lives on less than $2 a day. In the next 25-50 years, the world's population is expected to double. Can you imagine if in 25-50 years, that 6.8 billion people live in poverty? It's not unlikely to me if we continue to view ourselves as independent and not interdependent.
What we need to do, whether we're polticians or artists or economists or teachers or bus drives or the people at the corner store, is we need to look at our world as a body. Our physical bodies are made up of many parts that are not parasitic to one another, nor are they independent of one another, but they are interdependent. They work to make us walk, to make us run, to make us hug someone that we love. Without all of our parts working together, the body would not function. they could not separate themselves from one another.
Tying this all back up, when people get assassinated, we really need to spend some time mourning and in silence with our brothers and sisters. We need to ask ourselves how they are hurting. We don't need to speedily respond to the circumstance by citing our political agendas, suggesting that if people would just vote for us, that these kinds of things would not happen. We're human beings, we can't fix it all. Surely not alone. We need to learn what it means to be interdependent.
 When I read the Bible, I feel that what God is not saying is, "You've gotta learn to get it right or I'm gonna come down there and destroy all of you with supernatural disasters." I don't see him as a cosmic policeman waiting to implement his wrath. He is not a cosmic sadist. Instead what I see him saying to people is, "You've gotta get it right, or you're going to destroy yourselves. And this is what it'll look like, (insert some prophetic image)."
I think we should pay attention to the suffering around the world. I think we need to learn to love those who are suffering around the world, and try to understand their pain. I do not think that pain and suffering is a commodity for America to capitalize on. If we don't learn to understand this, we will surely ruin not only our own country, but we will, without a doubt, ruin our world.
***(It's also a kind of ramble, but if I told you that in the beginning, there's a greater chance you wouldn't have given me the time of day.) |
| | Posted 12/30/2007 1:04 AM - 28 Views - 0 eProps - 0 comments
- recommend
  - recs0
- share
- email
 - sent0
|
