Global Constituents

Endless arguing, daily unsolicited phone calls, angry divisions between family and friends, endless spiteful commercials – all this fun and more during autumn of an election year.

I have been very fortunate to have been overseas for this election and the last. This geographic distance has given me respite from the ads, calls, and awkward/tense discussions, but there is nowhere on earth that is unaware of the US election.  Observing the election process from an international perspective has been fascinating – the entire world is watching the US and the average person in Taiwan is aware of the latest poll numbers, the debate performances, and each candidate’s policy proposals.  All the international channels, and even the local news stations, carry updates on the campaigning.  Do we get updates on local news about elections in Taiwan?  Of course not - maybe it would get 10 seconds of an international news segment on CNN during off-peak viewing. That would be about it.

Why does the US election gets daily coverage in Taiwan, yet we in the US are not even aware when there is an election in Taiwan? Simple -the US election is an event that has huge import to the entire world.  Most interesting to me is that although everyone in the world is a stakeholder in the US election, most of the world’s people have absolutely no input or voice in the process.  The US is the undisputed world military and economic leader and the decisions made by the next President of the United States will have an impact that is felt in a very tangible way by citizens of every country in the world.    The President is elected exclusively by the US citizens, but has power over people in every country. 

This gross geopolitical imbalance could be defused if the issues of global concern featured more prominently in the presidential election. There is no legal or electoral imperative to shift the debate towards international welfare, but I feel that there is a moral one.  Both candidates make strong claims to be caring Christian men, but the suffering of millions of humans around the world is virtually ignored because they are not voting constituents. This issue is ignored despite the fact that caring for one’s less-fortunate neighbors is a Christian, perhaps even universal, religious tenet.  I doubt that valuing American comfort to the detriment of those in the rest of the world could be defended by any verse in the Bible.  Unfortunately, a political candidate who vows to fight poverty on a global scale doesn't stand a chance to win an election.  Americans are so worried about unemployment and taxes that anyone who would admit to sacrificing a single job or raise taxes by a fraction of a percent to help alleviate suffering in another country would be blown out of the water in a national election. Ironically, with all the haranguing about the “1%” not paying its fair share, there has been no mention that the entire US population is the top 1% globally, and we surely don’t pay our fair share to help the billion people struggling to survive on less than $1 a day. Perhaps I’m being cynical – elections tend to have that effect on me.

I just hope that when voters go to the polls, or when questions are asked of the candidates, a little thought is given to the billions who will be affected by the election but have not impact on its outcome. Yes - it is our country, our election, and our choice.  Is it too much to hope that America will use its wealth and power to be a world leader in eradicating global injustice rather than a global bully in promoting its self-interest? Is this really such a radical thought? No matter who wins in November, my hope is that he uses his power and influence to benefit not just the people of the United States, but help to improve conditions for humanity irrespective of national borders.