This evening at a Washington DC fundraiser, in a statement that can best be described as regressive American exceptionalism, former Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich said of himself:
"I am not a citizen of the world. I think the entire concept is intellectual nonsense and stunningly dangerous!"
Witness the video below of Mr. Gingrich's pronouncement that defines in two simple sentences the elitism, racism and egotism that have destroyed his Republican Party:
The question is, how can this protectionist, elitist, and even racist declaration be in the best interests of America, which despite Mr. Gingrich's supremacist notion, is part of the global community?
What's most frightening is the air of superiority with which Gingrich made his statement. Staring straight into the camera before a room of Republicans, this leader of his party defamed any benefit he might derive as a citizen of the world. With George W's arrogance, Dick Cheney's sociopathy, and Donald Rumsfeld's bravado all rolled into one, Gingrich equates a citizen of the world to "intellectual nonsense." He typifies the very characteristics of the Bush years that thrust this nation into its abyss.
Clearly Gingrich's "I'm not a citizen of the world" is a slam on Obama after the President's recent Mid-East & Europe tour. But undermining Obama's global popularity won't alter the fact that Gingrich could never achieve such acceptance. In the ever blending global arena, Gingrich is consistently bland.
Mr. Gingrich, if you are not a citizen of this world, then stay the eff out of it. Go back to where you went ten years ago when you were forced from the House in disgrace.
Follow Linda Milazzo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LindaMilazzo
*crickets*
Gee, I really wonder which one it might be.
Which is why Barack Obama is the true leader of the Republican Party.
Thats right, nobody else would take you!!!
As RRanch points out, even if Newt wanted to become a 'Citizen of the World', who in the world would accept Newt's application to become a 'Citizen of the World'? There is a distinct possibility, if not a certainty, that Newt & America is stuck with Newt being an American Citizen since he was born in the USA. Has anyone established how anyone becomes a 'Citizen of the World'? Must 1 earn the right to become a 'Citizen of the World' or will being born on earth give 1 the birthright to be considered to be a 'Citizen of the World'? OK, that complicates & inserts excreta in the game.
Others may wish to post a comment on HP.
To be a citizen is to be attached to a particular place. Mr. Gingrich is perfectly correct. When you declare yourself a cosmopolitan - a citizen of the world - you declare that your first loyalty is not to your own country. Don't be surprised, then, if people take you at your word, and call into question your loyalty, patriotism, and trustworthiness.
You're a loyal member of the tribe, or you're not. The other alternatives are (1) stranger or (2) enemy. Forever and ever, amen.
Of course you have to engage the world. The Athenians "engaged" Sparta, but that did not make them Spartans. No one is suggesting that we not engage the world, or that we return to "fortress America," or anything like that.
Being a world citizen is not knowing "that you are part of the world in which you live, and know that that things happening in one part of this world can have world wide effect." Every sane person knows that. To be a world citizen is to declare that your loyalties ultimately lie with "the world," and thus to deny the actual sovereignty of your own nation. It is to put yourself under the rule of "the world," and not your own nation.
The US prospered most following WWII - ie, after the world had gone to hell. But, that said, I did not say that the interests of "the world" are always antithetical to those of the USA, or that the USA should not cooperate with other sovereign nations,or take a leadership role. But- when the chips are down, and the inevitable conflicts arise, whose side are you on? A fair question.
/grammar nerd rant over
As a militarist and nationalist, who vigorously opposes progressive ideals and feels that the poor and the middle class need to fend for themselves in a nation with minimal government services and minimal market regulation, what ARE you, Mr. Gingrich? You--and your party--seem to embrace the totalitarian governmental ideal of preserving a ruling elite at home and pursuing war abroad to support them.