The other day, I caught the end of a news report on Somalia, and then later in the day came across the same topic in an interview asking the following questions:  “Will giving money to Somalia really help? Or, is that just the easy way for us to wash our hands of the situation?”

Since I regrettably hadn’t been following the issues of the Somali Crisis, I decided it was time to do some link jumping to see what I could find out about this Crisis.

As usual the first headline I came across was criticism about how the crisis was being addressed.  The headline read:  ”Aid Groups are misleading the public on Somalia” along with a  later statement that  “greater honesty about human blame is slowing the response“.

I could have easily stopped there and been satisfied with that, but for some reason I dug deeper.  I do enjoy seeing where the clues unexpectedly take me sometimes.  Here, I wasn’t disappointed and I’m truly glad that I looked beyond the headlines.

In my sleuthing around, I finally starting catching up on what I should have already known,  that Somalia was just one part of the Famine in the Horn of Africa.  I also realized three things about the different articles and commentaries I found about the Crisis:

1. As much as the internet empowers and spreads messages quickly, we need for people to be listening and seeking out those messages.   What a helpless feeling it must be to be empowered, yet to still feel that your voice isn’t able to take flight.  We’ve got the humanitarian and superstar performer, Bono, of U2 fame, being interviewed by CNN’s Anderson Cooper.  Both are humanitarians of immense integrity and aren’t asking for money, but instead  merely requesting 180,000 signatures to petition World Leaders to act on creating a safe passageway for aid to reach those in need.  The Interview was posted on August 10^th, and as of Sept 11^th, the petition goal was still not not quite reached, though respectably at 98%. A sobering situation. (Update:  I see now that they keep up-ing the goal.)
2. Next I realized, that even when we do get that opportunity to communicate our message, what message will we choose to put out there? Are we informed enough to hit the right priorities?  Are we addressing the real problem(s) and solution(s)?  Are we debating the right issue(s)?  Are we helping or hurting the cause?  What point are we trying to make?  Can we effectively change the message as priorities evolve with the situation?
3. As I “googled” for more information on the Somalia Crisis, I started piecing together a more complete story.  It wasn’t hard to find, I just needed to make the effort to look for it.  I found that just as money is only part of the solution, I realized how soundbites and headlines only communicate certain part of the messages about a situation, too.  To see the entire picture, we need to assemble all of the puzzle’s pieces.

For those of you not in the know, here are some of the facts that give a more complete picture of the Famine and the needs:

• Somalia is essentially the epicenter of the Famine in the Horn of Africa, with Somolia representing about 3+ million people out of the 12+ million people in the region.
• While drought is a natural disaster, famine is man-made.  Not only is the drought exacerbating the food and water shortages, but the 20year civil war is preventing Humanitarian Aid, for which funding is available, to get through to those most in need.
• The crisis goes beyond simply providing food and water.  It also includes: providing  medical care for disease and malnutrition;  money to overcome unaffordable food price inflation; a means to earn a livelihood amid drought-stricken fields with crops and lifestock that need a season to regrow.
• The reality is that the solution isn’t based on money alone.  This has become a Humanitarian Crisis because there still isn’t a solution in place to create a safe passageway for aid to get to those most severly affected.
• The situation has gotten worse, thus increasing the need for additional aid. And, the situation will continue to worsen as time passes if left unaddressed.  Beyond addressing the immediate needs, there is also the longer term need of  risk reduction, recovery and resilience, as well as mitigation and response actions.

To briefly paraphrase the CNN Bono interview, in Bono’s words:  “We mustn’t let the complexity of the situation absolve us from responsibility to act. That’s really the message. … Create a safe passage for aid. … This is a defining moment for us and there’s lots to distract us. …”

Is there really one headline that can capture the whole picture?  Not really.  But, there is one headline that matters most.  It is the headline that catches your attention to hook you to the issue and to spur you to take action.  Above is the headline that did it for me.  Which will do it for you?

Life is short.  All lives matter.  How can I use what I have in me to do more?  That’s always the question for me.  What is it for you?

——————————————————————————————-

How to Take Action Now on the Horn of Africa Famine :

• Sign Act One Dot Org’s  Petition to World Leaders
• View Suggestions at World Humanitarian Day’s “Take Action on Horn of Africa”

Get Inspired by the following Videos:

• Watch: Anderson Cooper’s Interview with Bono and Kna’an
• View Official Video of: World Humanitarian Day 2011 – ‘If I Could Change’ ft. Ziggy Marley
• View or Download: Save The Children’s Urgent Appeal Exclusive Download of  ”I’m Gonna Be Your Friend” by Bob Marley

When people argue over politics, the arguments usually eventually always come down to the same cliché positions that puts you either on the side that “government is necessary” or “government should not intrude.” 

The pro-government people defend their idealistic view that government can efficiently provide services and opportunities to the less fortunate in order to level the playing field.

At the same time, the anti-government people focus on their idealistic vision that self-regulation and personal responsibility is their cure-all for society’s ills.

Pro-government advocates, just like their anti-government counterparts, generally don’t ever acknowledge that any inefficiencies, flaws, or limitations exist within the system they believe in.  

In reality, does either system alone really function ideally? Don’t we probably really need a blend of both?

Absolutes of “all of one” and “none of the other” just doesn’t seem to be the way reality works.  We hear more and more about irrational consumer behavior and the need for practical application of economic theories.  Academic textbook theories just don’t play out that way in real life.

I guess it would be equally idealistic of me to hope that someday we might see each side acknowledging the merits of the other to the degree that we can almost no longer tell which side someone is on. 

But then again, if arguments didn’t have sides or didn’t end with clear winners and losers, wouldn’t that make the news rather uninteresting then?

I’m hoping that news outlets (traditional and/or new media) can work towards finding a way to generate interest in a more productive dialogue than just 30-second sound bites.  Or maybe a grassroots effort is where a solution is more likely to be born? I don’t know. 

Either way, it seems we are at the point of figuring out ”when” and “how” public political debate should change.  I’d say we’re way beyond questioning ”if” they should change.

What about you?  What do you think it will take for some of the current public political discourse to rise above the level of pointless schoolyard squabble?

Election Day is just one day.  One Day that has been a long time coming.  One that will soon be here and will soon be gone.  But is it an end or a beginning?  Either way, many will say that it will be another four years before they get their chance to vote again.  But, that isn’t quite true.

The General Election is no doubt a very important decision day.  Yet it need not be a once-every-four-years event.  This election period has been one of the longest and most polarizing in a long time.  Combine that with the current financial crisis and the recent bailout package, one good thing that has happened is that people have again found their voice.  Current technology is making it so much easier to get information, to organize a collective voice, and to get those voices heard.  Keeping informed on the issues and participating to our government in any way that we can (including writing to our representatives) is something we can and should continue to do, Election Year or not.

Let’s stay informed and involved in government and hold our representatives accountable, not only on the national level but also on the state and local level, too.  The more informed we are along the way, as issues are being discussed and debated, the easier it will be for us to know where we stand, when to get involved, and what the real facts are when those more difficult decisions need to be made. Cramming for the test doesn’t lead to the same level of understanding and learning that comes from being involved and engaged in the pros and cons of an issue along the way.

Regardless of who wins this election, we all must strive to respect all models-of-the-world.  How else will reaching across the aisle be achieved.   Remember that respecting another person’s point-of-view doesn’t mean that we have to agree with them.  Once we can accept that different people have come to their own conclusions based on their life experiences and exposures, only then can we sincerely attempt to communicate with each other in ways that move us towards seeking that common ground from where we can them move forward together rather than driving people away from each other.

So, voting is “making a choice.” Keep in mind that this choice is not limited to just politics.  In a way, we vote every day with the decisions we make, e.g., what we buy; where we go; who we associate with; what behaviors are acceptable to us; what rules we choose to follow and enforce; what standards we set for ourselves and others; and what kind of lifestyles we want to lead.

It might be worthwhile to look at how you make your decisions. Most likely you have different decision-making processess for different situations depending on the complexity and familiarity of the issue at hand. Some questions to ask yourself include:  How quickly do you make your decisions?  How much time do you spend gathering evidence?  Are your decisions impulsive or a result of careful deliberation?  How informed are you before making your decisions?  How committed are you to your decisions, e.g., will you stick to them or change your mind soon?   How much of your “head” versus your “heart” (your emotions) went into your decisions?  What was your decision criteria?  What are the consequences of your decisions for yourself and others?  How do other people make their decisions?  

Decisions do shape our futures.  Choose wisely. And, keep in mind that decisions are learning opportunities, too.  And, decisions and points-of-view should also be reassessed and re-evaluated whenever new evidence or experiences provide us new insights.  

Surely we will have one president for the next four years, and this isn’t something we can change.  But we can change how we interact with our government during this time.  Whether it be in our day-to-day decisions or in direct involvement with our government representatives, let’s be sure to exercise our decision-making responsibilities actively, reasonably and respectfully.

Blogging about politics is always risky. Usually quite early on, a reader will recognize which party you support and will respond accordingly — they’ll either keep reading if they identify with you or they’ll move on if they don’t. Few stick around to hear what someone of an opposing political party wishes to espouse unless they’re looking to judge that opinion and its believer as being ridiculous. I say this because I, too, have been there and done that (and try as I might, I still go there more often than I’d like to admit).  We are all human (if that’s an acceptable excuse, I don’t know; you be the judge on that.)

I could avoid the topic all together, or not. As citizens, I don’t think we can continue to avoid these difficult conversations.  I would agree that fighting for the sake of fighting doesn’t accomplish anything.  So what do we do?  How do we approach these conversations respectfully while still being true to ourselves as bloggers and as citizens with points of view looking for solutions and not as journalists that are obliged to be objective in their reporting of events? 

That reminds me of some of the latest advice out there on how to be successful in social media by joining the conversation.  Do so by being yourself. Don’t pretend to be someone you are not. See some of these references yourself here:

• (from Twitter) garyvee says – “if you’re shy – become the greatest shy guy on earth” 08:43 PM September 19, 2008 from twhirl in reply to garyvee
• (from Twitter) garyvee says – “if you’re not good at monetizing, get a bus partner that can.” do what u do & bring in others who can do the other stuff. 08:39 PM September 19, 2008 from twhirl in reply to garyvee
• Another great proponent of being yourself is Chris Brogan in his latest free e-book on “Personal Branding for the Business Professional“: “Be yourself.  It will become apparent rather quickly if you’re being someone that you’re not.”

So, what’s my point? I guess this is maybe (or not) a bigger lead-up than necessary to a thought I wanted to bring up around a recent YouTube video posted by an Iraq War Veteran. It’s a very well done and a very sincere video. That is why I want to be very careful not to disrespect its intent. Check it out here:

Powerful YouTube clip, don’t you agree? I think so. I say that and I am not even a McCain supporter. And, I’m not here to to take anything away from our military’s sacrifices.  Their sacrifices are immense and can never be repaid. [Update 9/25/08: Here's a link to a YouTube video of a soldier with the opposite point of view.]

Nobody likes war, not even McCain himself. He honestly said so himself in his RNC speech where he spoke of the impact on war on himself and his family. As bad as war is, there is the belief that fighting is a necessary evil. McCain ended his RNC speech with words of “fighting” for what you believe in, as seen here:

Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t like the idea of fighting for peace. I want to believe in diplomacy and other means to the same end.  Whatever you do believe, it is clear that this can be a very difficult discussion to have among people of differing points of view.

That’s why I’m looking forward to the work of the upcoming Transpartisan Alliance which is a group that wants to show people how to have respectful dialogue. Here’s how they describe what they stand for:

Transpartisanship acknowledges the validity of truths across a range of political perspectives and seeks to synthesize them into an inclusive, pragmatic whole beyond typical political dualities. In practice, transpartisan solutions emerge out of a new kind of public conversation that moves beyond polarization by applying proven methods of facilitated dialogue, deliberation and conflict resolution. In this way it is possible to achieve the ideal of a democratic republic by integrating the values of a democracy — freedom, equality, and a regard for the common good, with the values of a republic — order, responsibility and security.

I’m hoping the upcoming Presidential and Vice Presidential debates are civil and at least not more polarizing than necessary, if necessary is even an appropriate word. But, regardless of how they go and who wins the debates and the election in the end, solving today’s problems requires engagement of all parties and understanding of all points of view. I’m looking at Election Day as the beginning of that work, not as the end of a fight.  Am I being naive that progress can be made on this front?  I hope not.