Damned good points to remember!

Assuming your two stories about Gandhi are true, I can see his logic in both situations.

Of course, I agree that he was only human with all the baggage that comes with being one.

It isn't every day... Thank God!... that you see an article on Common Dreams condemning both Gandhi and Nelson Mandela. This is the ideology of the USA Green Party... no leaders, just self-righteous little people who hate everything greater than themselves.

How dare you tell the truth!!!!!
And stop trying to take my pipe, I wan't to dream some more!!!!!

Look to YOURSELF! Be your own hero....

Democracy only works when citizens take responsibility, and responsibility entails demanding evidence prior to making a decision, and holding their elected officials accountable. Heroic leaders belong only in a monarchy.

Most of the US electorate's participation in democracy is limited to watching or listening to mainstream media soundbites that provide less information about candidates and issues than a toothpaste commerical provides about toothpaste.

Hmmm, I guess some of the messianic glow must be fading on Obama's halo. Commondreams would never have condoned this sort of critique of the DP and Obama a few months ago.

Comrade Freeze would rather we all march in his line, and behave like good Yellow Dog Democrats!

Jacob, you seem to have missed the whole point of the essay in your rush to bash the Greens. The author was condemning neither Ghandi nor Mandela; he was pointing that each was a flawed human being, not a demi-god as we are trying to make Obama out to be. Also, Jacob, you have a lesson to learn: nothing--nobody, nohow--is greater than those whom you, in your contemptible elitism, refer to as "little people."

For myself, I, too, was caught up in Obamania--for awhile. The past few weeks have taught me a bitter lesson: Obama, too, is just another politician who will do or say anything or pander to just about anybody to secure his election. He is a man of no honor. His loyalty lies exclusively with his own personal ambition, and let the country be damned. In that he is just like McCain. He is about as loyal to those of us who secured the nomination for him as any other candidate, i.e., not at all. Change? Don't make me laugh.

I will vote for Nader this year. I let myself get fooled into voting for Gore in 2000 and for Kerry in 2004; I will not make the same mistake with Obama.

Is there such thing as a perfectly enlightened leader

...who could step forward and guide humanity out of the chaos?

...away from war and injustice to a brilliant new civilization based on justice, equitable distribution of food and resources?

...who couldn't be bought out by special interests and big money?

Many people think there is a Teacher here for that very role. Will people listen to him?

Who is this Teacher???

www.Justice4Peace.org

Very good article and right on target. The need for a "leader", a "president, king, emperor, or prophet, messenger, or representative of a GOD" is very strong in human history----and a failed doctrine as history will attest.

In 1840 the newly formed "Republic of Texas" called all of the Plains Tribes "Chiefs" in Texas (mostly Comanche) together for a "peace conference". When they were gathered in the "Council House" the Texans changed the rules of negotiations and when the Comanches protested and desired to withdraw, the Texans opened up on them with newly acquired Colt Revolvers, killing more than thirty Comanche Chiefs, who had arrived as agreed, unarmed. This began what history would later record as the most bloody period in the history of both the Texans and the Comanches. It also altered the Comanche leadership approach. From that day forward, no man was called a Chief by the Comanche, from that day forward ALL Comanches were chiefs. They learned from the "Council House Massacre". They were successful and in 1868 after forty eight additional years of bloody war, the US capitulated at the Treaty of Medicine Lodge Creek----they surrendered to the Comanche, in every way. The Comanche were later defeated by the fact that they had allowed themselves to be confined on relatively small tracts of land,(which later became even smaller, and then disappeared altogether) disarmed and dismounted. They made the same mistake TWICE ( a deadly formula when dealing with Americans/Christians/Civilized People) but they succeeded where no other tribes had, by realizing that there is no real need for leaders-----only those who carry out the decisions of the majority, FOR the majority. Something modern humanity if it ever learned, has abandoned for the present aberration in "leadership" which has lead to destruction and disaster except for a few.
The USA never has been an "example for all to follow", but it could be---simply by learning from the mistakes of the past, and change the mistaken behavior.
It could be a refreshing change from history's long accounting if the present US administration were to become the negative example for all time-------it's up to us all.
There may not be enough time left for any more mistakes like these.
A political system that has always been under the control of "special interests" as the USA has been from the beginning.---- In the eighteenth century is was slavery/agriculture and the beginning of the industrial revolution; in the nineteenth century it was the Rail Road "tycoons" and industrial "Robber Barons", in the twentieth century it was Big Oil and Big Business.

The American people in the twenty first century can either make the choice to be the "negative" or the "positive" example for history---by making very important and essential changes in the leadership technique------which would be an example true power.

Or they can piss it all away and wait for Jesus to rescue them-----from themselves.

I am one of the descendants of one of those Comanches present for the 1868 Medicine Lodge Creek Treaty-----------I still do not have a "Chief".........nor do I need one.

We have good leaders, like Dodd, Kucinich, Feingold, Paul, but the news media won't select them for us.

As always Hari never disappoints me in his quest for truth. The lop-sided agreements that ANC reached with the ruling white minority are somewhat similar to Kenya's, Zimbabwe's and other African countries where the white settler community was entrenched. European settlers pretty much kept all the land and other economic resources that they confiscated from indigenous people before independence.

It is therefore not unexpected that most post-colonial conflicts in these countries are centered on the issue of land and other economic disparities emanating from pre colonial land grab and accords signed to achieve "independence". In the case of Kenya the new government had to fully compensate settlers who wished to move out of the land they occupied. Incidentally most of those who were resettled if /when the settlers vacated were not the original owners. I predict that South Africa will face similar problems albeit on a larger scale in coming years. Already there is a large population of young men in SA who are increasingly becoming restless with the status quo.

"If you care about the state of the world, you have to keep watching and pressuring and fighting, forever."

And therein lies a huge part of our dilemma - a lack of endurance. Really, very few can keep up the fight when "victories" are so few and far between and setbacks are so many and regular. Hell, most of us can't even hold a job, or maintain a marriage for more than a few years...

I made a joke regarding the author earlier, but let me correct him.

For one folks are not born sheeple, it is a slow and torturous nurturing process(The Truman Show)
Once folks are used to a plastic disposable world were everything, from what one eats, watches, listens to reads, or wears,and all resources and support systems, are reduced to the epitome of mediocracy, folks just give up critical thinking!
Mandela is a Knights of Malta Manchurian Candidate and Obama a CFR errand boy, was designed to fool Black folks into accepting the neocon agenda wholeheartedly.
No folks don't seek messiahs,
it's just that folks are so conditioned that they have lost the capacity to seek anything, and will accept any old con or crap without question or analysis

the ganges has been worshipped in indian religion and culture for the past 5000 years. literally, it made civilization possible in north india. this was transformed into bestowing mythological life giving characteristics to its waters. even today, hindus use ganges waters during birth, death, marriage rituals, in sickness. if possible, they desire to be cremated along its banks. and in 1942, when medicine was a lot less advanced, giving ganges waters to a sick person would absolutely have been acceptable and in good faith.

as to him 'happily glugging' antimalarial 'western' medicine. the cinchona bark, from which quinine was extracted was known to the east for a long time, so the medicine is hardly 'western'.and the choice of words - killed his wife - conjures an image of gandhis actions which mr. hari can have no knowledge of.

his advice as to how to resist the nazis, while possibly flawed (can we rewrite history)was what he himself followed his entire life, not responding with violence to the gravest and most violent of british and hindu actions. on several occasions, his prolonged fasts of protests against injustice, led him near to death. so his advice was consistent with how he lived his life. perhaps gandhis actions could not have resisted the nazis, but then, if gandhi was the opposition, maybe hitler would not be who he was. was it not in part the behaviour of the victorious allied powers post WV I that created him?
the british did enough damage in africa and the middle east. is it not to gandhis credit that their prized possession was bestowed to the rightful owners without cataclysmic violence. (the violence of separation if india and pakistan was despite his attempts )

so, he may have had personal faults, and he knew not the solutions to all problems, but do not belittle him over minor issues.

Consider the shop-worn phrase: the "nanny state". It is the result of the mainstream left's embrace of over-protective, smothering "mommy state" ideal of "leadership", combined with the mainstream right's embrace of the punitive, tough-love "daddy state". In the end we have a "leadership" that, in one way or another, treats citizens as children.

The irony of the whole sad state of affairs is that the more people can enjoy the benefits of the democratic Constitutional republic as the FF envisioned, the less likely they are to engage in the civic duty necessary to maintain such a system of governance and to accept whatever Mommy and Daddy think is right for them.

This idea of deifying select individuals and hanging uncritically on their every word as if they are not also flawed human beings has been something I've been fighting for some time.

What a great article. I've been waiting for someone to bring up Gandhi's ridiculous religious fundementalism in these circles for some time.

http://www.thirdeyemag.com/opinion/unrealistic-expectations/

Here's a little something I wrote along similar lines.

Nobody is perfect. It is that simple.

Heroic. Hero.
They used to mean something before bush.
Now they are cheap, cheesy words. Everybody is a hero. A boy scout, a soldier, a cop, a firefighter, a teacher, etc. They're all heroes.
Once upon a time, the knight had to defeat the evil dragon at great personal risk to become a hero. The soldier had to win the Medal of Honor to be called a hero. A fireman had to risk his life saving a child from a burning building. A cop had to pull someone from a burning car to deserve that title. How many true heroes, REAL heroes, are rolling over in their graves now to see how cheap the title has become.
The last hero was Captain America and now he's gone. So is the title. We're all heroes. Hooray!

Our Constitution that elects representatives instead of placing proposals before the public makes the "hero" approach inescapable.

"Apartheid was not just a system of laws; it was an economic system where a tiny white elite owned almost everything." Then stated, Mandela, "discreetly buried the ANC's Freedom Charter, with its commitments to clean water, free healthcare and land for all. The result is that today whites own 70 per cent of the South African economy, despite being only 10 per cent of the population. Mandela believed this deal was the only way to prevent white flight and increase poverty. But he was wrong. Since the fall of apartheid, average life expectancy has fallen by 13 years. The black unemployment rate has doubled. This isn't because white ruled ceased; it is because it continues today, with a new black corporate logo."

This lesson is the last to be learned. Capitalism is the economic system, with its own objective laws, that both the Democrats and the Republicans must protect. This economic system, based on exploitation, is the root cause of the problems we face in this country and really the world. Maximum profit before people's needs can never be resolved within this system.

You need only look to the South African example for the answer to the question. Can capitalism be reformed?

Barack Obama can not change the economic system nor does he want to.

Everyone is the Hero in their own story.

The main lesson is: Never stop. The Hero keeps going. Always. No matter what. The Hero wins the boon, found deep inside the self, and brings it back for the greater good.

You're the Hero.

Or you're not.

It's up to you.

I don't need a leader or he-ro. I never have and I never will.
All I need is somebody to do their fucking job......the job I (we) supposedly sent them to do.
They are NOT leaders...they are public servants.

Anyone who thinks my previous comment about the USA Green Party is too harsh should try to remember Julia Butterfly Hill, whom the Greenies actually abandoned while she was still sitting 150 feet up in the Redwood tree she protected. Why? She was turning into too much of a star. And look how beautifully their "no stars" ideology has worked out, by turning them into the pitiful political entity that they are today!

What does that have to do with anything, Jacob?

This article was a breath of fresh air!

I'd add the Dalai Lama to the list for accepting a Congressional Medal from Bush-Pelosi while NOT protesting the Iraq war - THAT photo-op - Dalai-Bush-Pelosi musta sure made the Iraqi people and the people of the Middle east feel real swell huh? And, instead of staying on the sidelines, he allows himself to be used by the U.S. in its geopolitical fight with China.

Are the Chinese guilty of doing some negative stuff in Tibet. Sure. But before the Communists, Tibet was a grotesque and vicious feudal state - see Michael Parenti's article, Friendly Feudalism: The Myth of Tibet.

And Kara, that same kind of vicious, feudalism characterizes the Hindu fundamentalism that helped create the violence during the partioning of India. Fundamentalist, patriarchal, racist Hinduism is incredibly obnoxious. Over all, I sympathize with Asias desire to escape the Western imperialist yoke, but let's be careful not to get too romantic about it, ok?

I and so many others are sick of "Gandhi" being raised up as the epitome of the fight against injustice. Are you going to tell me that, say, the American Indians had no right to defend themselves and they were somehow less spiritual than Gandhi because they did? Bulls**t!

I think this article confuses self-serving politicians - from Churchill to Obama with leadership. The exception was Gandhi, and his attacks on him were cheap, completely out of context, mud slinging.

Of course the people should lead, but even the most democratic, grassroots peoples movements require a forceful charismatic spokesperson -there is nothing childish about this, it is the nature of reality.

Can anyone give an example in history of any kind of movement for revolutionary progress - no matter how democratic, anywhere in history, that didn't require charismatic, forceful, and usually quite courageous, spokesperson for the movement?

"Can anyone give an example in history of any kind of movement for revolutionary progress - no matter how democratic, anywhere in history, that didn't require charismatic, forceful, and usually quite courageous, spokesperson for the movement?"

Nope. If the truth were otherwise, we'd be anarchists, not progressives.

I wish.

Human groups coalesce around leaders. That's biology.

The problem is in not making gods out of mere mortals. Even greatness has its flaws, as the article points out.

There are people of Greatness.

Just not lately.

Anywhere. (Althout The Elders are giving it a go.)

The Greens have almost all the truth on their side, but their anti-charismatic ideology keeps them bottomed out at one or two percent of the vote in every election. Although it may comes as a surprise to the collectivist Mr. Hari, people actually vote for one name at a time on a ballot, and who are the Greens running for President? The freaky and unintelligent Cynthia McKinney, who couldn't even get renominated as an incumbent in her 70% black district in Georgia! She'll be lucky to poll 2% anywhere, but at least there's no danger of anyone confusing her with a "heroic leader!"

What! You expect us to unfurl ourselves from our fetal position? Of course, you jest.

I totally disagree. The day you stop dreaming is the day you start dying. Like Studs Terkel says, Hope Dies Last. I am always pining for the next Ghandi, MLK, JFK, Lennon. I constantly dream for the day when a leader stands up and has the guts to dream of a better world and says "You know, we'll work on the economy, and restoring the constitution, and bill of rights, civil liberties, but beyond that its time a world leader actually lead, I am going out to work for World Peace and Prosperity, to make peace with every nation and to work hand in hand with every nation to try and remedy global warming and to end the food crisis and provide a home and medical attention for everyone that needs it, I know this sounds like some pie in the sky dream, but damnit if I won't try" That is what I dream of hearing from a world leader. To this very day John Lennon is the only soul that ever embarked on a tour for world peace. Not the Pope nor Ghandi nor Mother Teresa ever toured as he did asking each world leader for peace.....if you stop believing or stop dreaming or hoping you might as well call it a day.....

During the Watergate scandal, one of the lower level participants, a young man whose name I no longer remember, finished his depressing and damning testimony before the Ervin Committee. One of the Republican members of the committee, desperate to pull a shiny penny out of that pile of manure, asked the young man what he would say to other young people thinking of coming to Washington to engage in "public service". The witness' swift and deadpan reply was, for me, the highlight of the whole scandal and something I will never forget. He said simply, "Don't come."

Here it is over 30 years later and not one thing has changed. The vast majority of politicians are megalomaniacs and sociopaths who are in politics to exercise power and enrich themselves and their friends at the expense of the public. The public itself is mostly in a trance. They vote for a candidate who appears to be the most like themselves . . . and that's what they get. The apotheosis of this was the election of George Wanker Bush, certainly one of history's most stupid and lazy megalomaniacs and sociopaths.

Re: kara.korum June 26th, 2008 2:17 pm:

In the interest of furthering the author's imploration to not treat even the best leaders as untouchably heroic....

I don't know the full story of Gandhi's and his wife's illnesses, but let's assume the author of this piece did some diligent research.

You argue that Gandhi's quinine/cinchona bark wasn't really "Western". If so, why did he not allow his wife to use it? Why did he not himself rely solely on the holy water of the Ganges for his own cure? Did he get a quick lesson in the empirical method from observing the effects of this treatment on his wife? What about the author's comment: "For the rest of his life, he continued to condemn the medicines that had saved his life, and told his followers to eschew them"?

Leaders by definition are those who are followed. Since the vast majority of human beings are clueless by nature or upbringing leaders will always exist but usually are thrust into events as accidentally as their followers.

The real question may be how to learn to lead oneself -- not how to learn to become a "leader". Lots of suffering and mistakes are necessary to learn anything real.

Are there any real leaders in the sense of mass movements? I doubt it. It all seems more accidental than planned and any historical story can be concocted to explain random events. So-called leaders emerge after the story is over and written by "historians".

And this from a man who was fawning over Obama and attacking Mrs Clinton during the primaries. Only now that the evil mommie monster is dead does Mr Hari concede that perhaps the supposedly pristine Mr Obama may have feet of clay. Or perhaps the real message of this decidedly disingenuous article is simply: "Obama is Churchill, Obama is Gandhi. Vote for him because this is as good as leaders get. I was right after all."

Yeah, I'm going to attack Mother Teresa now, Jacob. She also availed herself of the best Western medicine available, while the poor people who made her famous were "taken care of" in primitive conditions. What happened to the millions donated to her anyway?

Liberal with an Attitude - pay attention! What about Dennis Kucinich with his Department of Peace and his articles of impeachment? Is he not a hero?

What about Cynthia McKinney, who fearlessly spoke out and was attacked by her own party. That would be why she lost the nomination, twice, Jacob. She was a threat, and she was targeted.

And, of course, Ralph Nader, who had been viciously attacked by Dems and Repubs, yet fearlessly fights on for the good of people of the USA.

They are present day heroes. I salute them.

Great article, great point. This "Holding Out for a Hero" attitude in America gives me and many others around the world regularly the creeps, generally. It's definitely not progressive but rather reminiscent of the 1930s. Fascistoid, in other words. They want einen FÃœHRER, right?

I submitted an essay pointing out these similarities a while ago, but CD didn't want to publish it. So I am happy that someone else finally made it, because this needs to be pointed out. The author could have been a little more hard-hitting, IMO, though. Because this IS a frightening development.

"Dewey Defeats Truman"
Chicago Daily Tribune,
November 3, 1948

A fine article, Johann. And itself a fine example of the maturity you ask for.

Now I am ready for Chapter 2, which expands upon the idea of how all rule, to certify the representation you ask for, is subjected to the final say of the people; and Chapter 3, which lays out the sorely needed standards of conducive public discourse.

It is difficult for us to guarantee ourselves the things we sometimes think that only in such accountable hindsight as yours we can have. But shame on us if we don't try to go the distance.

ALSO, NativeSon,

I so much appreciate your words and mindset, I'd like to quote you on our pages, if that would be alright with you. If so, please write me at mike.montagne [at] perfecteconomy [dot com].

And thank you for writing them.

Our country cannot stomach someone who actually acts 'For the People'. For some reason, about half of us think that obcene riches await and want to make sure they get to hang onto it when they get that way.

this is how i've been feeling for years. right, what people need is to take responsibility for what they want and ask themselves how badly they want it. the tragic irony is that throughout history the Utopian paradise we've all been waiting for and praying for has been within our grasp all along but for us to choose it. jesus said 'no one will say "here it is" or "there it is" for the kingdom of God is within you.'it won't land on us like a ufo one day. that's why i'm an anarchist- because 'it would take more than a man to lead the slaves from bondage-it would take a god.' no one not even 'good people' are worthy or capable of power.people are waiting for a political messiah to wave a magic wand for them but what they need to do is mature. realize that if so much as one out of hundred people refused to cooperate with society's lies and betrayals, no army or gov't could force them to cooperate in their own exploitation. realize that they are the ones with the decision making power over themselves and bullies and tyrants throughout history have recognized that people's inhibitions hold them back from exercising that power they've always had.

With all the leaders cited in this piece except Ghandi, NONE was ever going to change the structure of "How we do business." Always the same acceptance: Masters, Overseers, Serfs and somehow the Serfs are only supposed to challenge the Overseers, on Master's Plantation. Who wants to take on the Plantation "System"? Who's going to nail Master's ass to the barn door - figuratively or literally? Anybody? Or are we just gonna cut and paste around the edges (as we have done for 40 years)while Master sodomizes us and our children to death.

I'm real tired of the imitation humans parading as Overseers "who really really like us and would be one of us if not for the responsibilities of their 'position'. THEY ARE ANIMALS LIKE THE MASTERS THEY SERVE.

The arguments Johann Hari makes here would be reasonably passable bullshit, 35 years ago, if it weren't for the striking fact that life on this planet is about to make the big spinning maelstrom down into hell. Master's Plantation System creates the maelstrom and allows only one course - straight to hell. That's short for kill the biosphere, kill all organic life. That's hell for us. Degraded people. Degraded planet. Followed by death. Their System is doing it - Pump and Dump on all levels.

You may not know this but richfilth animals let alone the billionairefilth lack the gene for self-restraint. It's part of their arrested infantile development. By this point for large numbers of them, this condition has metastisized into full blown psychosis. One of them has gone POTUS.

Lesser of evils is always, finally, a choice for evil. Like having a limited thermostat in hell. You can turn the temp down a little bit, for a little bit.

Peace.

P.S. in societies where gender slavery is normative, women are always sacrificed to the male ego. Part of running a society based on exclusion.

I only wish someone had included these two episodes about the Mahatma in the film, "Ghandi". Oh, yeah the wife drank the Ganges water but I get the medicine. The bitch dies, I am saved, and then I say how nobly she died.

Also a few statements of how Europe should have surrendered and the Jews should have thrown themselves into the gas chambers would have been appropriate. Didn't think "Ghandi" was another "Exodus" before. Sad.

Slightly different take on the Sainted Mahatma.

Would have been a much better article if it had stuck with the idea presented and not gotten sidetracked into the criticism of specific less than perfect personalities. We could all benefit from developing the evils of hero worship.

Our Infantile Search for Heroic Leaders
-This is basically a lesseroftwoevilistic argument.

"It is difficult and disturbing to try to figure out what is wrong in the world, and how to put it right."
-Says who? Its greed. Always has been, doesn't take a rocket scientist.

"Barack Obama is considerably better than John McCain..."
-Predictable conclusion, vote for Obama.

Notice how rare it's getting for anyone to make an argument in favor of Barak Obama that isn't based on the tired, old, lesseroftwoevilism. He has painted himself into a corner. The same goes for the discredited and despicable Democratic Party as a whole.

This discussion is depressing! Why is everyone critizing Obama and giving McCain a pass? So many of you sound like the tonsils of David Brooks, Karl Rove, William Kristol. Yes, the
Democrats have a LONG way to go, but being pissy and giving support to the republicans is against your self interest. I have become part of the democratic party and I am working for changes along with lots of my grassroots neighbors.
Vote on platform. Voting for the person not the party is a crap shoot at best.

GKL June 26th, 2008 11:01 pm
"Vote on platform. Voting for the person not the party is a crap shoot at best."

So lets look at parties: Green Republican Democrats

Invasion and Occupation of Iraq
Oppose
Support
Support

Patriot Act
Oppose
Support
Support

Invasion of Afghanistan
Oppose
Supported
Supported

Kosovo War
Opposed
Supported
Supported

Military Budget
Reduce
Increase
Increase

Israeli Occupation of West Bank and Gaza.
Oppose
Support
Support

Global Warming - Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Support
Oppose
Oppose and Failed to Act.

Right to Choose
Support
Oppose
Support (?)

National Health Insurance
Support (single-payer national health insurance)
Oppose
Oppose

Clean Water
Support
Oppose
Weak Support

Death Penalty
Oppose
Support
Support

Labor: Wages and Unions
Support
Oppose Workers
Minimal Support
(Global) Corporate Power

Trade Agreements and Institutions (NAFTA, FTAA, CAFTA, WTO)
Restrict
Expand
Expand

GKL which one looks the best to you?

This is one of the main lessons of Green Island - We the People control everything. We have representatives for one thing or another, in the true sense and spirit of that word and function, but power is NEVER 'delegated'. Green Island http://www.rudemacedon.ca/greenisland.html

"There are no perfect leaders, but there are always better and worse ones. I would have backed Gandhi against Churchill, and Churchill against Hitler - while always condemning their flaws." That sort of position requires actually knowing what the leaders represent and making complicated assessments of them. For instance Gandhi was good on Indian independence because he saw the British for what they were, and bad on Hitler, because he saw the British for what they were, and had more experience with their particular brand of colonialism.

There is no point at which an individual or social movement reaches wisdom. "Leaders" depend on each of us to continue to search for truth, to help devise solutions. Those leaders who cannot be corrupted by money are easily corrupted by vanity and by the uncritical adulation of their "followers". They are also shaped by their own experience and particular mix of human strength and weakness. Each of us has a responsibility to listen and learn, to think, to act and speak with courage and integrity. We may honestly disagree about what that means at any given moment, but our lives actually depend on trying.

We cannot be lazy thinkers or wait for others to do the job of liberating us. We have been passively drifting for a while in this country perhaps waiting for a savior and look where we are ... The best thing about this election is that it has gotten lots of people interested. Now let's use the moment to improve the level of critical thought of these new enthusiasts and keep in touch for the follow-up after our inevitable disappointment.