iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

RJ Eskow

RJ Eskow

Posted January 20, 2009 | 11:58 PM (EST)

"The Lines of Tribe Shall Soon Dissolve"


Of the many noteworthy lines in President Obama's Inaugural speech, here's one that especially struck me: "We cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace."

The President was speaking of America's history as a multicultural nation, laying out our unity as an example for the world. He was offering e pluribus unum as it had originally been intended: not merely as a historical fact, but as a model for future human governance.

As most Americans heard today, he preceded his "lines of tribe" comment with this: "... we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united ..."

For those who think this kind of rhetoric is a platitude, a no-brainer, "Mom and apple pie," think again: The rhetoric of tribe is being used today in every corner of the planet to divide, conquer, and destroy. Tribalism is the curse that can destroy humanity. So far, the 21st Century has been no better than the century before it in terms of our ability to overcome our heritage of tribal division.

Consider this Kenyan commentary, written as Obama won the Democratic nomination in June of last year:

"I am finding it very difficult to join in the jubilation about Senator Barack Obama. Not that I want to deny the man his victory, but my impulse to celebrate keeps deflating on the idea that the best thing that happened to little Barack was not growing up in Kenya ... If he had grown up here, and had he somehow managed to retain most elements of his current self, he would have been another outstanding, intelligent and competent Luo man in our midst:

And he would have been killed.

... after all, when we had that incredibly good-looking and charismatic home-grown hero, Tom Mboya, we shot him to death. And when that austerely intellectual and elegant leader, Robert Ouko, threatened to look overly intelligent to the world, we killed him too. We killed Pio Gama Pinto and we killed JM Kariuki ... When Wangari Maathai is abroad, we feel that her Nobel Prize is partly represented in each of our Kenyan living rooms; when she comes home, she is just another Kikuyu politico ..."

These words come from a bitterly disappointed writer, someone whose heart has been broken by tribal warfare and corruption. That's how Obama, the Obama that would have been had he grown up in Kenya, appeared in his eyes: as just another promising young half-Luo facing violent death.

But tribalism isn't just a Third World problem. For 144 years we've been spared the violence of civil war and received the grace of life in a peaceful civil society. But we're not as different as we like to think. There are tribal ruptures here, too. I've seen it in my own life as the child of two religious heritages. Too often we use belief (and, as the President observes, non-belief) to divide us - whether it's by viewing wars and occupations through sectarian lenses, or by using "Phone Books" that help us to do business only with those of our own faith.

Sure, it's political rhetoric to speak of finding unity and strength in our diversity as "Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus and non-believers." But how often in the past ten years have we used these differences in a tribal way to divide and conquer, electorally and socially? We saw that happen in national politics over the course of many elections, and again this year in California with the passage of Proposition 8.

Constitution-loving Americans have waited years for a President who will say this: "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals .... Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake." But it's the call against tribalism that rings in my ears tonight. If humanity is to survive, those lines of tribalism must dissolve.

It's human nature to have communities of affinity as well as communities as geography. Those communities can be based on common history, shared interests, or a mutual wellspring of dreams, hopes, and faith. There is a complex balance to be struck between respect for cultural differences and devotion to our common destiny. Finding that balance can be the work of lifetimes.

It won't be easy. Tribal divisions have to be recognized, not just dismissed. We've failed to understand and acknowledge tribal issues in making military and foreign policy decisions, to our own detriment and the world's. We'll need to understand these forces better if we are to forge that "hard-earned peace" the President spoke of in Afghanistan.

If we have the national will, however, improved intelligence and improved diplomacy can be put to a higher purpose: the goal of building a common human future by reducing sectarian division.

RJ Eskow blogs when he can at:

A Night Light
The Sentinel Effect: Healthcare Blog

Of the many noteworthy lines in President Obama's Inaugural speech, here's one that especially struck me: "We cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe ...
Of the many noteworthy lines in President Obama's Inaugural speech, here's one that especially struck me: "We cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 45
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:58 AM on 01/22/2009
The collapse of "tribalism", at least its collapse as an effective political force, will come about as further technological advances in communications erode personal isolation. Optimistic? Yes, but then again consider the dialectical (dialogue) exchanges even among those who are here and now commenting upon this subject. I am old enough to remember that such "exchanges" could only occur within an isolated and small community -- in short, the basis of all "tribalism". We have come a long way. I now understand that the point of view that I was taught was just that -- a "point of view" in which intimidation played no small part. iPods, blogs, cellphones, whatever -- these universal, global means of personal communication were non-existent a few decades ago. We no longer compelled by circumstance of place to receive our world-view as mediated by our "tribal" community. We no longer have to look to some edited local newspaper and its pre-edited "Letters to the Editor" to get another "point of view". It is available here and now.
03:58 AM on 01/22/2009
I doubt it; we are in a age of illusion, and cultureless bliss. Americans are poor -- in spite of all the fancy costumes they put on to hide the poverty.

And, generally, people become more tribal and territorial too survive, regardless of which group they belong to, Democratic, liberal, Republican, etc.

The psychological barriers usually only come down when man gets religion, for personal reasons, not to gain social status in the tribe..
05:44 PM on 01/21/2009
I think a more careful reading of his speech warrants the point that it's the lines of tribe he wishes to see dissolve, not the tribes themselves. The lines of disagreement or dispute that are then couched along tribal arguments to gather political support amongst some would be followers, not necessarily the embracement of each others differences, the two are not mutually exclusive.
05:03 PM on 01/21/2009
For twenty five years or so, I have had the left cram every hyphenation of "American" possible down my throat. I have learned that there really are 7 different genders and countless sexualities. Every admission class has had to have the correct number of each of these different hyphenations/genders/sexualities.

Quite frankley, I am so sick of it all I could scream.

Maybe the left is starting to see just how inane all of this has become.
08:21 AM on 01/22/2009
poor old white guys like you need to let it go. There are other people on this planet and they are more like you than unlike you
10:39 AM on 01/22/2009
Why should we listen to those darn white people anyway.
04:45 PM on 01/21/2009
I thought the Bible said that God doesn't want the world united and that tribes and different languages are the way God wants it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:49 PM on 01/21/2009
Not everyone is Christian. And that wasn't a teaching of Christ.
07:46 PM on 01/21/2009
2 true. There are some Christians who either ignore the Bible &/or know of & use other books of wisdom, secular & religious; they may live by the line from "Porgy & Bess", "...It ain't necessarily so....". Some other religions beside Abrahamic religions tell of a great deluge.
10:29 PM on 01/21/2009
Just a way of explaining why people were different.

Compare and contrast with the Gospel on Pentecost where
the Apostles start speaking in different languages because of
gifts given by The Holy Spirit.
04:10 PM on 01/25/2009
but the bible was written by human beings, and reflects the values of their time.

The argument "but the bible says...." is the ultimate statement of cognitive dissonance - the bible also says you should stone your own mother to death for wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (Lev 24:10-16) and sanctions selling your own daughter into slavery (Exodus 21:7)

The bible also recommends owning slaves yourself as long as they come from a neighboring country (Lev. 25:44). And declares that eating shellfish is a greater abomination than homosexuality (Lev 11:10).

And no, without religion people will not feel free to run amok doing horrific things. People do far more horrific things to each other in the name of their god than not. Organized religion does not create saintly behavior, nor does is quell evil.

There are bad people on this planet just as there are good. Morality and decency is more of a natural evolutionary trait than we know. There is a natural incentive to do good by one another that is not bible-bound.

If raised in a vibrant positive environment by an open strong community, they will exhibit more morality than any bible thumping Ted Haggard - Organized religion is an awful abuse of our shared spiritual reality.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PATina
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
02:49 PM on 01/21/2009
That's one of the problems I have w/ this concept of being "color blind".... to "not" see a person's race. I think that is entirely the wrong approach.

The right approach, in my estimation, is to see the person as they are... including race... but not to prejudge them by what you think you may know about that particular race. I find it insulting that people would deny me my "blackness" or my "womanhood"... it's like they are saying (w/out trying to say) that there is something inherently wrong w/ being black and/or a woman.... so they would rather pretend it's not there.... that I'm some amorphous being. Being Black and a woman has a lot to do w/ my life experiences... those things... along w/ my education and upbringing... that make me me. I admit... it's a fine line to walk... and it probably won't be easy... or done anytime soon.
04:23 PM on 01/21/2009
Maybe you are looking at it the wrong way. Take everything you said about being a black woman and apply it to another situation. Here is an example, what we call the Chinese breakdown into different ethnic populations, such as the Han, the Chin and several others, I'm not an expert.

If a Chinese person took you to task for not recognizing their specfic ethnicity, or in your words what makes me, me. I'm pretty sure you would say well, I didn't know and I meant no offense. However in your defense one could say that you were just seeing them as human beings regardless of their physical features.

Race is a social concept based on mysticism
10:18 PM on 01/21/2009
My Mother works with a lady who is Chinese, she's an immigrant. And I've never heard Mom mention what specific ethnicity she is.

I rather think it may not be important.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PATina
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
10:04 AM on 01/22/2009
If a Chinese person took you to task for not recognizing their specfic ethnicity, or in your words what makes me, me. I'm pretty sure you would say well, I didn't know and I meant no offense.

And then I would try to find out what it is that I didn't know and possibly learn how to recognize what I missed so that I didn't do it again. But that's just me.

But I think you're getting too specific. You don't have to know what part of Africa I'm from to see that I'm black. Just like I wouldn't have to know what part (or tribe) of China person came from to know they are Chinese. I don't even have to know what specific country a person is from to know they are Asian (which would be the proper equivalent to African). My point is I (and others) should respect a person and still see their race/ethnicity. I shouldn't have to disregard their race in order to see them equally.
04:42 PM on 01/21/2009
Is that the most important thing about you ... your woman hood ... your race.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
PATina
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
09:56 AM on 01/22/2009
Not the most important things... but they are parts of me that make me me. Maybe the best way to put it is I am a sum of all my parts. By taking away any one part of me takes away from all of me.
02:31 PM on 01/21/2009
I think Obama's election allows America to let go many of the injuries and burdens that our racial history has plagued us with. The damages done were not only towards blacks and minorities through discrimination, but also to whites who when put into hostile situations of crime, poverty and living circumstances were compelled to take up unwanted alliances and adopt attitudes of small-minded bigots for their own self-preservation. Everyone of all colors has been hurt, forced into battling tribes we never wanted to join. We can now close that past chapter and begin writing a newer, better one on fresh new paper. One that embraces all of us.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:15 PM on 01/21/2009
Obama nails it. Even reading these posts, it is clear to see that Obama has a grasp of the situation, over and beyond what "tribe" means to each of us. Obama does not deny indentity, he wants to overcome the divisions identity has brought to humanity.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
AnnfromCA
02:08 PM on 01/21/2009
I think a lot of resentments were finally put to rest with this election, and for that reason alone, it's good for the country.
12:12 PM on 01/21/2009
Lately, I've begun to think that all this talk about diversity is really not a great idea.
People can say, I'm a Black or African American, White American, Hispanic American Irish American and even Gay American.

Sure, I understand what that means...but....

I wonder if it doesn't fragment us?

I believe that we have our own "Tribe"

We are, AMERICANS Right?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:09 PM on 01/21/2009
This word "tribal" is very incorrect here. Otherwise a good posting. American Indian "tribalism" is based upon a concept of honesty, unity, harmony and integrity that you scarcely imagined when you chose this word to make your point. Obama has been adopted by a "tribal" family and is part "tribal" in his ancestry, both on the African and American Indian side. Language is very important. American Indians in this administration hope to see some sort of change for the better. It would be nice if the commentators and writers would pick up on this and use their words more carefully and more respectfully. What you have described is the opposite of "tribal", at least as the actual tribal human beings understand the term. . The old use of this word to describe a negative comes from the days when American Indian people were considered savage and stupid. It is very similar to the "n" word for African Americans. Best regards. An American Indian.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
RJ Eskow
12:47 PM on 01/21/2009
I'm sensitive to this issue, and to your concern. That's why I included these words:

"It's human nature to have communities of affinity as well as communities as geography. Those communities can be based on common history, shared interests, or a mutual wellspring of dreams, hopes, and faith. There is a complex balance to be struck between respect for cultural differences and devotion to our common destiny. Finding that balance can be the work of lifetimes."

It's worth noting here that Native Americans were forming the Iroquois Confederacy and other democratic multi-state initiatives while Europeans were still firing blunderbusses at one another. They had learned to work together - while respecting tribal differences - centuries before the League of Nations or the UN. We have much to learn from this experience.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:42 PM on 01/21/2009
My old tribal teachers taught me to be impeccable with the words coming out of my mouth, among other things. I appreciate what you said. I accept the connotation of the "tribal" reference was not intended to convey disrespect...but it is in the fine subtleties where the truth is either protected and shines, or shifts into hidden meanings. the "tribal" nature of many Islamic countries has a similar negative meaning, but "triabalism" is not the problem, in their case, it is the extreme views of the leadership imposed upon tribal life, for example, that is the problem. Also to ed_alexander, we cannot fall down because of one word and Obama has been adopted and accepted by some tribal elders and we just have to wait and see. I am glad Obama has "tribe" in his "vibe", as this may help us understand our own English language better...and polish our souls a little in the learning. best regards RJ.
02:19 PM on 01/21/2009
Indeed, I was greatly troubled by Obama's remarks. Especially considering the fact that I have voted for him. As a Native American I am all too aware of the continued effort to extinguish tribes. My father was relocated during the 50's in the termination effort. At that time people considered tribes to be the problem too, and were bent on destroying the Indian to save the man. Tribal people across this nation have the greatest record of military and social service. We often are the first to volunteer when our nation is at war. When the president elect stated that Tribe's shall soon dissolve, I feel compelled to say "we shall overcome". Why should my heritage communities be the ones that need to dissolve? The extermination policy of Native Americans inspired the holocaust, it was effective enough that Hitler thought it was one of the finest things America had ever done. I thought that line was a definite low point of the inauguration for me. I prefered the benediction when the pastor said "when the redman can get ahead man"!
09:28 PM on 01/21/2009
I am sure that a great many of your fellow Americans, like I am, are troubled by our history of atrocities that were commited by our country against the very first Americans
12:00 PM on 01/21/2009
And what party created "identity politics"?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:53 PM on 01/21/2009
Both.
05:55 PM on 01/21/2009
Identity politics were born out of a desire for recognition that not everybody in the US is white, middle-class, and Protestant. Before the era of identity politics, the non-white, non-middle class, and non-Protestant (and non-Christian) were mostly excluded from power. The white, middle-class, and Protestant were wrong to act as though their interests were naturally everyone's interests, when in fact they just worked to maintain the status quo and keep anyone unlike them from getting too uppity. To everything there is a season. There was a time when identity politics were necessary to make positive change. The importance of cultural, socioeconomic, religious, gender, and other types of diversity have been recognized. With that established, it will be much more productive and fair to everyone as we seek common ground and pursue mutual interests that transcend identity politics.
09:41 PM on 01/21/2009
Well said:)
11:50 AM on 01/21/2009
"The President was speaking of America's history as a multicultural nation..."

Here's a hell of a thing: When I saw the words "the President" I cringed inwardly. I felt a purely Pavlovian revulsion, and it was an almost visceral sensation. Then the higher centers of my brain kicked in, and I remembered that those words refer to Barack Obama now. I believe I've mostly read the phrase "President Obama" since yesterday. Those are two beautiful words, in part because there is only one man they can refer to.

"The President" for a fraction of a second made me feel ill. I bet I'm not alone. But what a strange feeling. What a curious realization on a Wednesday morning. The corruption Bush and Cheney brought to everything they touched extends to the most casual description of our highest office. Not the worst of their offenses, certainly. But one hell of an indication of... something.
11:42 AM on 01/21/2009
The message of unity over tribe was just a tad undermined by the honor Obama bestowed upon Rick Warren. He's an excellent example of those who divide one from the other, both in his bigotry toward gay people and his proclaimed desire to impose evangelical Christianity on all people throughout the world. Obama's call for inclusivity is laudable but when the intolerant are included in the name of tolerance then tolerance becomes self defeating.
12:34 PM on 01/21/2009
Obama made a choice, he chose Christian Fundamentalists over Feminists and the LGBT community. I have ZERO desire to give up my tribe to make peace with the worthless. If we destroy ourselves, we destroy ourselves...at least we didn't just give everything away like our so-called leaders.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JWheels
03:16 PM on 01/21/2009
This utterly misses the point of everything Obama said. Warren is clearly a divisive and controversial figure, but he is unfortunately one that many evangelicals respect and admire as well. My feeling is that the President was not reaching out to Warren himself, or those that support his bigotry, but rather those who look up to Warren, in hopes that will open their ears to Obama's message. Abandoning tribalism is abandoning dangerous rhetoric that divides people along ideological and cultural lines. Calling them "the worthless" says THEY don't think like US, therefore they are not valid. That is the essence of tribalism.
05:11 PM on 01/21/2009
So those that disagree with you are "worthless." If you believe that, it makes you just as bigoted (if not more so) than any fundamentalist Christian I have ever met.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Saidas
09:45 AM on 01/21/2009
I think you are missing the point. Our country needs to heal and feel better about itself and his words are serving that purpose. Look at the response. Do you remember any such from the Bush inauguration? Think about it.

Obama will come up with specifics. He has only been President for less than 24 hrs!!! Obama faces problems far greater than anything Bush had to. Obama also walks the walk.