Dear Editor,
Politically, the world is in for severe upheaval and transformation, with the most powerful nation leading the way.
Folk within my circle think I’m a cynic: I say I’m a practising realist. It was nice to see Bill Clinton sharing a platform with Barack Obama and asserting: “This man should be our president.” I would have preferred the use of a word more emphatic than ‘should,’ and see Mr Clinton’s appearance as a reminder that the Clintons are still around and interested.
John McCain’s parallel rally carried two placards. One read: “Barack Obama lacks experience…” the other read, “OBAMA lacks experience…” In the first placard, the word ‘lacks’ is placed on a line below the B (in Barack), one space to the right. In the second placard, the word ‘lacks’ is placed in the same line position as the first, with the ‘O’ (in OBAMA) a shade darker.
I see the word ‘blacks’ emerging − as a subliminal message. I recall, in the lead-up to the 1991 invasion of Iraq, there was a briefing scroll on American TV with the words ‘Responsibility In Our Territory,’ written vertically, a word per line, the capital initials in a brighter colour than the rest of the word. Reading down, the initials spelt ‘riot.’ I saw it as an instruction, and said so. After the first few screenings, the initials were shifted off the screen. Perhaps the message had been received.
Maybe I am being fashionably paranoid; or, again, perhaps others might see what I see. The world of politics is not for the squeamish.
Yours faithfully,
G Dennison
