There are a lot of other wishes out there that make the world go round, though, and mine is not decisive. I have to accept that.
Be that as it may. It doesn't make my little wish for a new American president - who is actually worthy of the job - any less precious.
I hope I am just a bitter old fanatic left-wing academic has-been who has no clue. I hope the obsessive media coverage of terror will not have the slightest effect on deranged peoples' choice to use terror.
They've been droning all morning in the radio about Manchester. The scores of children elsewhere in the world who were killed last week in similar bombings barely gets a notice ... We should think very, very carefully about how much news junk we let into our minds - especially if we get our news from the 24 hour channels that show endless reruns.
It affects us, more than we know. It is NOT an objective view of the world.
And now I will say a prayer for the poor families of Manchester. I feel now more than ever how horrible it could be to lose a child and I hope I will never experience it.
But I need to remember that despite the horror this is just the news going bananas, zooming in on the most scary thing right now.
It is not all.
Whatever the exact percentage, the majority of news from the old media (papers, TV, radio) IS concerned with something negative, one way or the other.
And it is concerned with US. 110 per cent. Not very much everybody else.
And these stories from the seemingly 'objective news media' subtly affect your mind.
They make you by default have a more negative outlook on the world and feel that it is more dangerous - 'closer to home' - by over-reporting deaths caused by such a horrible attack compared to the thousands of people killed every year by smoking, including children. Or compared to deaths in other parts of the world.
I don't think the times are worse, though, than in 1919. I don't think they are better either.
I think you can always find something 'better' or 'worse' depending on what you look at. And that's what's important.
I want to see that mosaic. Or swirl of colors. Or whatever the right metaphor for Life is.
There's a scale on which I believe you have to go back and forth all life. If somebody behaves in a way that is unacceptable to you, and you don't have to please them because you fear them, should you then try to understand and please them because you have a moral obligation? Because their behaviour, like anger, is a veiled disguise for a positive intent, like wanting to be respected?
Or should you demand that people also live up to a minimum standard to gain that respect. A standard of behaviour you set.
The answer, as with everything else in life, is blowing in the wind and will differ from time to time.
It is not always right to try to respect people no matter how outrageously you think they behave. It is not always right to not care about them.
The the question in politics, and in life.
In spite of Char’s job at a charity and my intention to create a business with a social purpose, we are both so deeply occupied with our day-to-day-routines that we rarely talk about this kind of Big Hope that a charity or social business actually stands for. What it looks like, what it feels like. No wonder that we sometimes feel like even the most meaningful work in the world doesn't matter any more. Purpose has to be felt. And feelings have to be kindled, like a hearth that need attention in order to continue giving off heat.
What do I tell my son when he gets old enough to understand a bit about war and injustice of the world? Problems too big to be changed in his lifetime. So big that most give up in advance. Perhaps I tell him that all that matters is that you still try. That you do Something. Never nothing.