Volume 4, Issue 2
Any success in guiding cultural change for unity depends upon the relevant nature of hope. Hope is based on eternal principles, structure of sound character, and the belief that there is a greater society in which all participate equally in the individual pursuit of happiness. Defining the character of a nation requires a faith that recognizes truth. Truth, properly defined, generates hope. Hope renders peace in unity of purpose.
President Obama will be tasked with projecting hope for the future while at the same time demonstrating that accomplishments have been achieved. He’ll be walking a tightrope. The state of the union is not sound. Past achievements and the efforts of government have not let confidence in the future. He will undoubtedly proclaim or exhort that the United States is still the greatest power on the face of the earth economically and politically. He will further boast that we are the light of the world in our commitment to freedom. He is right in these claims. We are strong, however we are not strengthening. Hope for the future cannot be based on past claims or current status.
Upon what then should this hope be placed?
It is that the United States of America, in its founding, declared rights of individuals as independent from government, that families have the right to determine their own values, and that the Christian faith, as well as all faiths, are to be protected in society and never questioned or relegated to second tier status in reference to an elitist government’s order.
The citizens of the United States are distressed in the great divide of our cultural identity and purpose. In one context, the Bernie Sanders movement of the Democratic Party and the Donald Trump movement of the Republican Party are similar in that they represent the frustration of the American electorate with their government. On the other hand, they are different in that Senator Sanders represents the ideology that has been trying to change the relationship of society with its government first manifested by Karl Marx. Its premise is that there is inequality in economic outcomes which must be rectified by total government control and redistribution of wealth by the government. Donald Trump represents a movement of people who believe that at one time the United States was a great nation, and should be restored to those principles upon which thesuccess was realized. It is a philosophy that government should be limited and efficiency is eclipsed at a point of largesse. In other words, government is incapable of solving all problems, authority and power should be managed between the federal government and states, and individuals should have rights over the government.
The establishment wings of both parties are vexed over the fact that the status quo and “business as usual,” which they represent in concept, is now an anathema to activists of both the right and left.
Minorities see the situation somewhat differently. They see themselves as always having had problems in being afforded equal opportunity in their pursuit of happiness. In this conclusion, they are right, and their emotion should be respected. However, they have an obligation to advance a future hope in which we all participate equally.
The electoral process for electing the next President of the United States is precariously close to producing a result that will further divide the country. The Republican Party is on the road to a brokered convention. The problem is, there’s no one left with the moral authority to conduct the brokerage. Many of the delegates attending the national convention are typically party establishment members. Being a delegate to a convention in many states is a perk for supporting the local party. They may or may not reflect the will of the electorate as dictated in the primaries.
The Democratic Party is on course to nominate former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Her personal negatives in public opinion polls are at 67%. These are not what are called mild negatives. They are not based on political philosophy. The words used to describe the negative by the public are “liar” and “untrustworthy.” These are deep, hard negatives, yet 50% of those polled say they are likely to vote for her.
In a possible general election between Secretary Clinton and Donald Trump, the emergence of a third party candidate is likely. Whether or not he or she is successful depends on their vision for hope. If in fact Donald Trump or a third party candidate won one blue state, like New York, Secretary Clinton could not garner 51% of the Electoral College. If this were to occur, pursuant to the Constitution, the U.S. House of Representatives would then be responsible for electing the next President. It is the current House that would convene to do this, not the newly elected Congress.
What then is the message for hope?
It is that there is a purpose in life greater than ourselves, defined by our faith and respect for each other. Economic opportunity, security, and individual values are to be advanced in freedom. An unrestrained pursuit of happiness, based upon our individual desires, is the goal of the civic exercise.
The current fear and frustration of the American public will be relieved once a leader emerges who exudes character based upon principles that bind us, and one who reflects commitment to freedom, yielding the threads of confidence for the social fabric. Hope is synonymous with freedom.
Every American has a moral obligation to decide what they believe and on what foundation they base that belief.
In walking the tightrope tonight, it is my hope that the President will not base our country’s future on a world view of more government control of our lives, rather than stressing individual liberty and faith as critical and essential elements of the relationship between government and its citizens.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe and hope.
What do you believe and what are your hopes?