Exile and the prophetic: Remembering George McGovern

This post is part of Marc H. Ellis’s “Exile and the Prophetic” feature for Mondoweiss. To read the entire series visit the archive page.

Chomsky is still in Gaza.  No need to mention his first name.You know who I’m talking about.  His prophetic bookend is Said.  No need to mention his first name either. 

Using Neil Young and Bob Dylan as musical prophetic tropes, one prophetic type primarily provides the nuts and bolts analysis of injustice, the other a literarily expansive exploration of injustice.  Through them we look at ourselves and our lives with in a different light. 

Young and Dylan are quite a prophetic musical duo.  In the political thought realm, so are Chomsky and Said.

Think of what Said’s passing means.  Commentators on Palestine come and go.  There wasn’t – there isn’t – anyone approaching Said’s authority.  Chomsky is the same.  Commentators on Israel come and go.  There wasn’t – there isn’t – anyone approaching Chomsky’s authority.

The loss of Said has been deeply felt by Palestinians.  Have we calculated the importance of Said for Jews?  Likewise with Chomsky.  When Chomsky passes, the loss will be obvious for Jews.  It will be significant for Palestinians, too.

Some feel that the Israel/Palestine predicament has bypassed Said and Chomsky’s analysis.  They are voices from a now irrelevant past.  Tell me, though, do we have more or less clarity in the post-Said, post-Chomsky era?  Or do we flail about, reading and reacting to this and that news item that flickers across our computer screen and disappears?

Said and Chomsky provided a context to see the larger issues at stake in Israel/Palestine.  They weaved a complicated narrative that helped us make sense of the situation.  Through their narrative framework, they called for ethical, moral and political judgments.  Those judgments involved action that was necessary and compelling.Even in their failure, Said and Chomsky provided hope at the end.

Nowadays, critics argue against the importance of particular identities.  As post-moderns we dwell in an assumed universality.  Still, it’s interesting to speculate how Said and Chomsky, a Palestinian and a Jew, were recognized across the globe as the premier intellectuals of the last decades of the twentieth century. Would they have been recognized as such just for their vast knowledge and intellectual production?

That a Jew and a Palestinian would assume this role is unlikely.  It’s like the odds of two Jews, Sigmund Freud and Albert Einstein, being the great explorers of the inner workings of the psyche and the material universe in the twentieth century. I don’t think it happenstance they were both Jews.

Then we have Said identifying as the last cosmopolitan Jew.  With Chomsky, make that two cosmopolitan Jews.  Nonetheless, we know the ‘cosmopolitan’ score.  When I hear cosmopolitan Jew, I place the emphasis on ‘Jew.’ Neither Said nor Chomsky is understandable outside their particular identities.

The Chomsky-Said pairing resonated around the world.  Its meaning:  That the divide between Jews and Palestinians has been crossed.  It has already occurred.  It’s only a matter of time before the great crossing takes placeon the ground.

On a similar generational prophetic trail, George McGovern died yesterday.  A generation of political, intellectual and artistic prophetic leaders is passing – or about to pass – before our eyes. 

While we shouldn’t romanticize the past, the internet driven, fifteen minutes of momentary stardom in entertainment and thought, poses great dangers. Thought and activity takes time and reflection to mature.  Success and failure can’t be measured in postings or tweets.  And, yes, the idea that there are leaders, those who convey a special presence, who embody meaning, is important. 

Leveling down can be enlightening.  Leveling down can be superficial.  When leveling down because a primary objective activism becomes a game.  No one can represent anything and nothing can be represented.  Identity is mistaken for a useless and false construction.  What do we have in their place?  Not much, as far as I can see.    

I met McGovern several times when he was on the Board and then President of the Middle East Policy Council.  The Middle East Policy Council is a non-profit organization that seeks to educate American citizens and policy makers about the political, economic and security issues impacting American national interests in the Middle East. However, its previous organizational name, The American Arab Affairs Council, gives its leanings away.  It was one of the first Washington think tanks that argued from an Arab perspective.

My meetings with McGovern occurred when I gave talks for the Council.  In the late 1980s and early 1990s, I and a few others would be flown to various locations around the country to speak on Israel/Palestine.   This was the early days of touring on the Middle East.  The subject matter was hot, especially during the first Uprising years. 

The tours were all strategically and professionally arranged with good hotels and expensive banquets for invited guests.  Nonetheless, we spoke it as we saw it.  I look back on those years as pioneering ones.  I didn’t know – no one knew – that the years ahead would be so difficult. 

With the Oslo Accords, it all came to a screeching halt.  Except for brief moments of intense international attention, the issues haven’t been presented in their fullness since except before the choir that has already been preached to.  Even the Middle East Policy Institute has “broadened” its scope.  Palestine is now in the background.

McGovern had the politician’s touch.  Whenever I talked with him, he made me feel like I was the only person in the room.  Unlike many politicians, however, McGovern was genuine.  He was a thoroughly decent man who spoke up for what he believed.  He is rightly known for his Presidential candidacy and his opposition to the Vietnam War.  He should be remembered as well for standing up for a two-state settlement and Palestinians rights when he could have remained on the sidelines.

McGovern has something else to be remembered for.  McGovern experienced the dirty tricks of the Nixon years and, with his land-slide loss to Nixon, he became a punching bag in the media.  He was accorded the negative label ‘McGovernite,’ which became synonymous with a ‘too-far-to-the-Left’ liberal.  Nonetheless, McGovern kept on keeping on. 

In person and in public, McGovern never assumed the role of bitter outcast.  Rather, he kept whatever personal feelings he had about the way he was treated by commentators and, even, his own Democratic Party to himself.  He faithfully espoused the values and policies he had dedicated his life to.

What lessons are there to be learned from McGovern’s life?  The first is that principles win out.  McGovern will be remembered as he was, a man of profound decency who proposed policies to make the world a better place to live.  The second is that public life at all levels is important, complicated and often dirty.  You can be done in by opponents who will be remembered for who they were as well.  Finally, McGovern shows those with progressive politics that you can be knocked to the mat and get up again.  You can live to fight another day.

The example of living to fight another day isn’t limited to George McGovern.  It was true of Edward Said or Noam Chomsky, too.  It is an example for all of us.