The events of 2009 has forced me to take a hard look at my life, my business and my future. 2008 was the year I started teaching, something I’d always talked about doing, but was frankly too scared to put into practice. Somehow I overcame my fear and now, after a full year of giving classes and workshops, I’ve realized that teaching is something that I really enjoy doing. The challenge of explaining my concepts of making music to students of all skill levels gives me a satisfaction that I wasn’t really prepared for. I’m glad I took up the challenge.

2009 was also the year I met two of my musical heroes, jazz keyboard player Jeff Lorber and Jean-Paul “Bluey” Maunick of the legendary UK jazz / soul band Incognito. To watch these two masters at work really helped me put my own musical aspirations back into focus. I also met some extremely talented musicians during not only my regular teaching gig at the Popakademie, but also as a guest instructor at the Academy of Music in Dinkelsbühl, where I had the pleasure of performing with my good friend Alex Auer for the first time in 4 years. I’ve worked with some fantastic musicians, writers and producers in 2009, both on stage and studio.

Less fantastic in 2009 was the saga of my rock band iO; though we started out the year with a kick-ass live concerts in Rabenau and Brno in the Czech Republic, the future of the band was placed in doubt as my bandmates informed me that they were reforming their old band Guano Apes to play a series of european festivals in the summer. When their tour was over, they informed me that they were going to work on a new CD as Guano Apes, which will all but kill the prospects of a future iO CD. That’s really a shame, since iO has such potential. However, we’re hopeful that we can come together some time this year to make music together…

So, what have I learned from 2009?

…which brings me to my list of things that I learned from 2009. I’ve always been a believer in the notion that one can always learn something out of any situation, no matter if it’s positive or negative. So, given all that I’ve experienced in ’09, heres my list of wisdom:

1. The show must indeed go on.

2. NEVER take things for granted.

3. Seeing life through only one lens is never a good thing.

4. If you think you’ve had too much, you probably have.

5. Sometimes, doing stuff you’ve always dreamed of doing is fantastic. Sometimes, it’s not.

6. Get your mind right, and the rest will take care of itself.

7. If it takes more than three days to write a song, something’s wrong with the song. Not always, though.

8. Not everything that tastes good is good.

9. The best thing about new things is that they sometimes help you to appreciate the old things.

10. Kids grow fast.

11. Making a plan and sticking to it are two TOTALLY different things.

12. The phrase “don’t hate the player; hate the game” is just as relevant now as it was in the early ‘90s.

13. Though you may be better than most people at what you do, there is ALWAYS someone who is better than you.

14. When two grown people of completely different viewpoints can’t have a civil conversation about anything, NOTHING will get done.

15. We don’t appreciate what we have until it’s gone.

16. Going to bed angry sucks.

17. Fighting (in a relationship) can be good.

18. Sometimes, it’s better to just shut the f*ck up.

19. We all need balance in our lives.

20. It’s never too late to be the “you” you’ve always wanted to be.

It is this pattern of innuendo and subtle race-baiting followed by wild-eyed confusion and denial that is the essence of guerilla racism. Such hit-and-run tactics are vital to cause of stoking fear and anger within a certain portion of the American population who long for a return to the America of old; a demographic of white, conservative “christians” who have seen there ranks dwindle in what is becoming an ever more culturally diverse country. Being labelled a racist in 21st-century America is in many ways political and cultural suicide, so to engage in such demonization is an effective, more sinister way of fueling racial animosity.

Many on the political right have made the bizarre claim that it is those on the left and members of the so-called “liberal media” who are fanning the flames of racial hatred by associating any and all criticism of President Obama as racism. Such a notion couldn’t be further from the truth, however; the President gets plenty of criticism from the left, the current health care debate and Obama’s refusal to fight for a public option or his refusal to prosecute Bush administration officials regarding torture being an example. The difference is that the current criticism coming from the right is almost completely lacking in rationality, coming only as a means to score political points against Obama. There is also a startling amount of violence in the rhetoric coming from the right, which was recently called attention to by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Her words (which were promptly and expectedly attacked by the right-wing media) made a point that shouldn’t be lost on any American who knows about our turbulent history: When rhetoric coming from the right is this vitriolic, political violence is inevitable. Our flag has more than once been stained by violence caused by a right-winger who took conservative rhetoric a little too seriously.

So, how does Malcolm X’s famous quote apply to racism in 21st century America? Simple: the guerilla racism occurring today can be given an alternate name: cowardice. To be a racist in America today takes courage, and those who would fan the flames of racism through these subtle and dishonest tactics show just how much courage they lack.

The notion that Obama isn’t a natural born citizen of the US is wrong on so many levels,
and is so easy to disprove. As the father of two biracial children born on foreign soil (Germany) to a non-American mother, I can tell you with absolute certainty that even though Obama’s father wasn’t American, Obama has automatic US citizenship because his mother was a US citizen, regardless if she was under 18 when she had him. It also does not matter where he was born; as long as his mother did not renounce her citizenship, he is a natural born American citizen. Period. A child does not automatically lose their US citizenship when they are adopted by a non-US citizen (as was the case when Obama was legally adopted by his Indonesian stepfather), since citizenship and custody are two totally separate issues. The fascinating irony of the whole subject of Obama’s birth certificate is that it was brought about by a woman named Orly Taitz, a laywer and dentist living in California who herself isn’t a natural-born US citizen, but born and raised in the former Soviet republic of Moldova.

In her arguments against Obama she places great emphasis on the fact that his father wasn’t a US citizen, not realizing that in the US, as opposed to other countries, priority is not given to the father’s birth origin over the mother’s; even if Obama was born in Kenya, as the “birthers” believe, he would still be considered a natural-born US citizen because of his mother. I guess she also forgot that even if both of Obamas’ parents were illegal aliens, he’d still be a natural-born citizen because he was born in Hawaii (a fact that has now been confirmed twice by Hawaii state officials).

What makes the “birthers” so fascinating and disturbing is the general makeup of the part of the US population who are believers in the movement: older, white Southerners. Ironically, this is the demographic that makes up much of what is left of modern Republican Party base. Sadly, this movement speaks to a much bigger problem facing the GOP; the changing racial makeup of the US and the inability of many Republicans to deal with it. The “birther” movement is most definitely immersed in racial politics, despite having Alan Keyes as a vocal supporter. Keyes, who is black, was overwhelmingly defeated in his bid for the US Senate representing Illinois in 2004 by – you guessed it – Barack Obama. Shockingly, many Republican leaders are of the belief that this kind of race-based politics will work well for them in the upcoming 2010 and 2012 elections, although the election of 2008 proved that exactly the opposite is true. The most obvious sign of GOP racial politics is the opposition among conservatives of Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor. At face value, the notion that Sotomayor shouldn’t be appointed to the court because she’s a so-called “reverse racist” is just plain silly, especially given that she’s more experienced as a judge than anyone else currently sitting on the court. That coupled with the latest imagined controversy on the right regarding Obama’s comments on the arrest of a black Harvard professor in his own home by a white police officer, with several prominent right-wing media celebrities calling the President a racist because of the remarks, and you can start to see a pattern of racial division being instigated by the right wing. Fortunately, America is changing in its views about race: the 2000’s are definitely not the 1970’s. The GOP has in the “birther” movement and its outdated, failed race-baiting strategy a serious problem going forward, especially given that they need African-Americans and Latinos if they ever want to win elections in a meaningful way in the future.

With only 26% of Americans calling themselves Republicans, The last thing the GOP needs right now is a complete takeover by the lunatic right. They’re circling the bowl, and if they don’t take the right steps to stop the madness coming from the far right of their party, there will be no stopping the flush.

Especially on the issues of national security – long seen to be an area dominated by Republicans – once rational arguments have given way to sheer paranoia, denial and outright fear. Take the conservative talking point that if Gitmo is closed and terror suspects are brought to the US, the american people will somehow be in grave danger. Forget the fact that the US houses some of the worlds most dangerous criminals like Charles Manson, the Unabomber and domestic terrorists Eric Rudolph and Timothy McVeigh and numerous foreign terrorists; America has some of the worlds most well fortified maximum security prisons, facilities that no one to date has escaped from. The notion that these places cannot hold suspected terrorists is not only ridiculous, it’s an insult to the thousands of men and women who work for the US prison system, as it says they’re not capable of doing their jobs. Even more than that, such sentiment reeks of cowardice.

You cannot, in my opinion, boast about how pro-America, “we kick ass”, shoot-first-ask-questions-later you are, but at the same time be afraid of the gay or lesbian couple who wants to marry, the person who hasn’t even been convicted of a crime going to a Supermax prison, or the state legislature who wants to ban the sale of weapons that were solely designed to kill people. You cannot be pro military, but at the same time support a war that was unnecessary and morally wrong, thus putting the lives and livelihoods of our military and their families at constant risk.

Granted, not all conservatives are cowards; recently, a conservative radio personality named Erich “Mancow” Muller subjected himself to waterboarding in order to “prove” that is wasn’t torture. Not only did he change his stance on the issue after going through it himself, saying that it was “absolutely torture”, he said that if he were waterboarded under interrogation he would have said anything to make the torture stop. The courage he showed by being waterboarded in order to back up his claim and his ability to admit he was wrong are traits that, sadly, the average American conservative are sorely lacking these days.

I guess having a spine doesn’t generally belong to conservative ideology.

What bothers me the most that these people are totally willing to deny facts and the historical record regarding torture in order to push their belief that torture is OK if the US does it. The facts are clear; we prosecuted Japanese soldiers after World War II for waterboarding US war prisoners. We prosecuted and convicted our own soldiers during the Vietnam War for waterboarding captive enemy soldiers. As recently as the 1980s we prosecuted and convicted a US sheriff in Texas for waterboarding prisoners. Waterboarding is categorized as torture since the 1890s and is considered a war crime by the Geneva Conventions, a document the US not only signed, but helped to draft. And yet, so many on the political right believe that because of what happened to the United States on 9 / 11, we are totally justified using torture techniques to extract information from our enemies, in the name of “protecting America”, an argument that totally contradicts what should define American society: the rule of law. According to the law, waterboarding and other forms of torture is a crime, and should not be done under any circumstances.

Regarding this issue, it has been those on the left who are so far on the correct side of the debate. Even those like Senator John McCain, who himself was subjected to waterboarding and other forms of torture during his captivity in Vietnam, has come out with the position that the US government should just sweep the issue under the rug, let bygones be bygones, and move forward, without at least an investigation of those who committed war crimes in the name of the United States. Based not only on this example of how conservatives in the US embrace this belief, and how progressives / liberals for the most part are for upholding the rule of law (there are certainly those who want prosecutions as some sort of political payback, but that’s a subject for another article), but on a host of other issues where conservatives are in my opinion on the wrong side of history, that I find my own political beliefs shifting even more to the left. Their current stance on torture makes them no different than those whom they claim we should be defending America against.

It could also be that I’ve been a straight-up liberal all along, but just didn’t want to admit it. However, when I think back on my time here in Europe and my political thinking in regard to German, British, Spanish and French politics, it’s been clear that I more often than not have supported left-leaning politicians and policies. It has to do with the fact that many aspects of liberal political philosophy just makes more sense to me. In America, for example, it’s common conservative wisdom nowadays that government cannot ever be that answer to society’s problems, because government is the problem. Given that a democratically elected government is chosen by the people and that we have the power to correct the so-called problem through the election process (which is, ironically, exactly what happened with the election of Barack Obama), this notion is fundamentally flawed. One could argue that, at least in the US, the government is now trying to clean up the problems we as citizens created, but that’s also the topic of another article.

At the end of the day, people should be interested in what’s true, right, and fair. The conservative movement in America represent neither of these values right now. The question is; when will the conservatives come back around to those principles that are supposed to define what their movement, let alone America, should be all about?