This interesting translated book was given by a best friend of mine who insisted that this was one of his inspiring books. It was edited from its original title and chapters to attract Indonesian reader; thus, the supposed to be title Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream is changed to From Jakarta to White House (Dari Jakarta Menuju Gedung Putih). An intrigued title indeed so that Indonesian readers have a basic unconscious assumption of sympathy with Obama’s book. The publisher has done a good job on marketing it, though they may not be aware of the effect of the reader’s sympathy.
The first chapter is about the world from Obama’s point of view. He described himself as a person born in a multicultural family yet having a firm heart for religion. He elaborates his arguments of USA role in the world and its connection especially with developing countries in Indonesia. He argues that US will certainly interfere with those countries policy since USA depends economically from others (a pretty courageous statement since there are many negative opinions on USA dominance). Nevertheless, he also stated that though USA will always interfere in world’s issue, USA should have interfere in giving the right (appropriate) help and not forcing a country to use the same formula as USA. One of the cases that he explore is USA expansion of Latin American country with different ideology. The regret of forcing them to use USA ideology that made many rebellions against USA is deeply implied in his writings. Accordingly, he argues that USA need stable allies that have the same objective of freedom, democracy, and law based government of that having the same voice of market economy. This type of ally militarily and economically will be absolutely lasts in a longer term than a group of colonialized countries (e.g. The Philipines) of USA imperialism.
In Iraq’s war in another case, he affirmed that he supports war, yet a war with a realistic and comprehensive planning, a very normative and political statement I say. He supported the argument that there was misleading information of 9/11 association with Iraq that guide to this war. His explicit statement is very aggravating because for me, I only believe in war for freedom and truth that only Muhammad did for jihad, and still Mahatma taught us to do peace demonstration or strike.
Despite our disagreement, several activities and experiences that he wrote made me evaluate him as an open-minded man with the bravery to be honest (a quality that not every politician has, especially in America). The writing style also corresponds the fact that he also embraced others differences and the world’s humanism.
He is a great man for sure, yet I never know how does a politician feel and thinks, since I always thought that politician is a profession that pleases everyone so that to have their disguised interest. Obviously, Obama has created hope to the world’s citizen of a ‘new’ America.
I’m craving for the opportunity to read Hillary’s autobiography, yet I have no intention reading Bush’s.
A note to me: How can you read about Obama while you haven’t read Muhammad and Soekarno?
I’m very a shame…Can anyone borrow me those books?
The first chapter is about the world from Obama’s point of view. He described himself as a person born in a multicultural family yet having a firm heart for religion. He elaborates his arguments of USA role in the world and its connection especially with developing countries in Indonesia. He argues that US will certainly interfere with those countries policy since USA depends economically from others (a pretty courageous statement since there are many negative opinions on USA dominance). Nevertheless, he also stated that though USA will always interfere in world’s issue, USA should have interfere in giving the right (appropriate) help and not forcing a country to use the same formula as USA. One of the cases that he explore is USA expansion of Latin American country with different ideology. The regret of forcing them to use USA ideology that made many rebellions against USA is deeply implied in his writings. Accordingly, he argues that USA need stable allies that have the same objective of freedom, democracy, and law based government of that having the same voice of market economy. This type of ally militarily and economically will be absolutely lasts in a longer term than a group of colonialized countries (e.g. The Philipines) of USA imperialism.
In Iraq’s war in another case, he affirmed that he supports war, yet a war with a realistic and comprehensive planning, a very normative and political statement I say. He supported the argument that there was misleading information of 9/11 association with Iraq that guide to this war. His explicit statement is very aggravating because for me, I only believe in war for freedom and truth that only Muhammad did for jihad, and still Mahatma taught us to do peace demonstration or strike.
Despite our disagreement, several activities and experiences that he wrote made me evaluate him as an open-minded man with the bravery to be honest (a quality that not every politician has, especially in America). The writing style also corresponds the fact that he also embraced others differences and the world’s humanism.
He is a great man for sure, yet I never know how does a politician feel and thinks, since I always thought that politician is a profession that pleases everyone so that to have their disguised interest. Obviously, Obama has created hope to the world’s citizen of a ‘new’ America.
I’m craving for the opportunity to read Hillary’s autobiography, yet I have no intention reading Bush’s.
A note to me: How can you read about Obama while you haven’t read Muhammad and Soekarno?
I’m very a shame…Can anyone borrow me those books?
