Food for Thought
The day I met my husband, he came over to my apartment and invited me out to eat. My response to him was: “I don’t do food.” He said, “Oh, I’m a chef.” We laughed and the rest is history. I really didn’t do food. I was in the habit of fasting regularly, up to a month at a time and rarely had more than an instant breakfast in an entire day. I still live primarily on only an instant breakfast a day with the exception of Sundays.
It’s not that I don’t know how to cook. My parents divorced when I was twelve and I was left home alone with blank checks made out to the local grocery store and cupboards full of cookbooks and recipe boxes. I became so good a cook my sister used to have me come over to her house every time she would have a date come for dinner and prepare the meal before her date arrived so that he would not know she could not cook. My future brother in law was in for a great shock when they finally got married as he was accustomed to my cooking and it was a great effort for my sister to make a box of macaroni and cheese properly. We still tease her mercilessly to this day. Over their 30 year marriage, she has learned to do a little of the cooking but he is still the primary cook in the home.
Being married to a chef is sort of like being married to a brain surgeon in a way. People automatically assume that I am incompetent at my husband’s profession merely because of the status he has acquired. I don’t imagine too many wives of brain surgeons are invited in to help out in the operating room either; however, those who knew me before I married always thought of me as the best cook they had ever known. One doesn’t have to like eating to love cooking.
As a result of my reputation within my family, and the fact that my husband is tired of cooking by the time he finally has a day off, I still remain the primary cook at home; however, food is something we only do on Sundays when my parents come for a large family dinner. 3:00 Sunday dinner has not been missed in uncountable Sundays regardless of external circumstances. Whether I am making an International selection of foods or simply slow roasted au jus sandwiches, my parents bring a giant batch of instant mix coleslaw with sauce and dinner and a movie night begins.
As my parents are British, our meals are missing the typical carbohydrates and casseroles that American’s eat. They consist of a meat entrée, a vegetable dish and…COLE SLAW!!!
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Political Science Summaries 6
Political Science Summaries 6
Howard Zinn Passionate Declarations
Chapter 6: Law and Justice
In Chapter 6 Zinn discusses the difference between law and justice. The chapter offers a quote from a speech made by a student at Harvard Law School during the tumultuous 1960’s Cold War era.
"The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might. And the republic is in danger. Yes! Danger from within and without. We need law and order! Without law and order our nation cannot survive."
After prolonged applause the student quietly informed the audience, “These words were spoken in 1932 by Adolf Hitler” (109). And so Zinn delves us into the deep question of knowing the difference between law and justice and looking at when it becomes time to disobey law for the sake of justice. Will we continue in our Machiavellian realism, allowing our government to be both the lion and the fox, or will will take one more long look back at our Declaration of Independence and remember as in suggests, “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” for all citizens, “these are the ends” and “government is only a means” to these ends (109).
Zinn looks at the purpose of civil disobedience – “the deliberate violation of a law for a social purpose” (107). We are mindlessly taught at such a young age to recite the Pledge of Allegiance “one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all”. There’s that word again: all. Zinn proposes the question: “are rich and poor treated equally? Blacks and whites? Foreign born and native? Conservatives and radicals? Private citizens and government officials?” (113). John Adams, our nations second president, proposed that the ‘rule of law’ was greater than the ‘rule of men’, claiming it to “be impersonal, neutral, apply equally to all, and, therefore, democratic” (110). At what point in our nations history have we ever promoted, let alone enforced “liberty and justice for all”? The wealthy, white, governing officials are not even bound by law. How many of our presidents have broken innumerable laws without consequence, let alone carry out mass murder in innumerable third world countries without repercussion or responsibility. Our current president claims he is not bound by the laws of this nation as we are in a state of war. Who declared this state of war? The people? No, therefore, form whence has this power come? “Historically, the most terrible things – war, genocide, and slavery – have resulted not from disobedience, but from obedience” (129). How long will the masses stand by silently as these crimes against humanity are ‘lawfully’ committed? Zinn refers to the double standard of our government that will treat the burning of pieces of paper (draft cards) as an act of violence, “while dropping 7 million tons of bombs on Southeast Asia (twice as many as were dropped in all theatres of operation in World War II)” (143). He quotes Father Berrigan of the ‘Catonsville Nine’:
“Our apologies, good friends, for the fracture of good order, the burning of paper instead of children…We could not, so help us God, do otherwise…We say: killing is disorder, life and gentleness and community and unselfishness is the only order we recognize. For the sake of that order we risk our liberty, our good name. The time is past when good men can remain silent, when obedience can segregate men from public risk, when the poor can without defense” (120).
Zinn reflects on numerous like examples from the sixties dealing with both civil disobedience acts against the Vietnam War and racial segregation. He presents the right of jury nullification as a great corrective. The Circuit court of Appeals “made a remarkable statement in support of jury nullification:
We recognize…the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence…If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision” (139).
Zinn leaves us with an excellent question to ponder at the end of this very difficult chapter, “What kind of person can we admire, can we ask young people of the next generation to emulate – the strict follower of law or the dissident who struggles, sometimes within, sometimes outside, sometimes against the law, but always for justice?” (148).
Democracy Now
The Global Gag Rule
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/02/1336254
“The Bush administraton’s Mexico City Policy, known as the Global Gag Rule by opponents, denies foreign organizations receiving U.S. family planning assistance the right to use their own non-U.S. funds to perform or counsel on legal abortions or lobby for the legalization of abortion in their country. Nigerian doctor Ejike Oji says this forces foreign NGOs to choose between vital U.S. assistance for essential family planning services and the real needs of women dealing with unwanted pregnancies.
The House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a hearing Wednesday to illustrate the devastating impact of the Reagan-era Mexico City Policy on family planning programs and rates of unsafe abortions around the world. The Mexico City Policy, which is known as the Global Gag Rule by opponents, was rescinded by former President Clinton in 1993 but reinstated by President Bush in 2001. The policy denies foreign organizations receiving U.S. family planning assistance the right to use their own non-U.S. funds to perform or counsel on legal abortions or lobby for the legalization of abortion in their country.
Critics charge that this forces foreign NGOs to choose between vital U.S. assistance for essential family planning services and the real needs of women dealing with unwanted pregnancies. Nigeria has the second highest maternal mortality rate in the world, in large part due to unsafe abortions and lack of access to reproductive healthcare.
Dr. Ejike Oji is a Nigerian doctor and the country director of an international organization called Ipas that promotes women's reproductive rights around the world. He has spent the last 28 years fighting unsafe abortions and testified at the House Committee hearing Wednesday.”
Dr. Oji explains that 10,000 Nigerian woman die every year from illegal abortions and for every woman that dies another 20 are injured. The Global Gag Rule, originally a Reagan era law, denying any US tax dollars in foreign aid to be spent on abortion, had been abolished by Clinton in 1993, leading to far less maternal and infant mortality rates due to illegal abortions. In 2001, Bush reinstated the Global Gag Rule and any organizations receiving US aid are not even allowed to mention the word abortion or discuss abortion as an option for treating an unwanted pregnancy. As Dr. Oji explains, how can a nation that allows choices for their own citizens, providing American women with safe, medical, legal abortions, treat women of other nations with such a dangerous double standard. His organization, who refused to sign the Global Gag Rule and does not receive US aid as a result. He felt the safety of Nigerian women and children was more important. As a result his organization has recently lost one of their best physicians because he is now receiving US foreign aid money and is unable to assist Dr. Oji any further as his organization is fighting to legalize safe, medical abortions for unwanted pregnancies for the women of Nigeria. The organizations that receive funding from the United States are using the funds to treat HIV and other diseases and lack the facilities to provide contraception. Due to the lack of contraception available to Nigerian women, the rate of unwanted pregnancy is staggering. Nigeria also has the highest rate of infant mortality in the world. This is largely connected to the rate of maternal deaths. When a woman with a baby at home dies, the chance of the survival of that baby are very slim. Dr. Oji must hear the words of Archbishop Tutu when he “chastised the international community for its slow response to the Darfur crisis, saying in a BBC interview, “The harsh truth is that some lives are slightly more important than others. . . If you are swarthy, of a darker hue, almost always you are going to end up at the bottom of the pile.” Which brings us back to our discussion of law and justice and equality for all. When will our country quit pretending that we extend equality to all? Here, we are presented with an enormous amount of preventable deaths and are choosing to allow them. Is that not too a crime against humanity? Is it that I am a staunch supporter of abortion, no; however, I believe, especially, in a third world country like Nigeria, why would we not provide contraception to any woman desiring it? Why would we not provide a choice to Nigerian women that we extend to the women of our own country where starvation and infant mortality are not extreme conditions?
Howard Zinn Passionate Declarations
Chapter 6: Law and Justice
In Chapter 6 Zinn discusses the difference between law and justice. The chapter offers a quote from a speech made by a student at Harvard Law School during the tumultuous 1960’s Cold War era.
"The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might. And the republic is in danger. Yes! Danger from within and without. We need law and order! Without law and order our nation cannot survive."
After prolonged applause the student quietly informed the audience, “These words were spoken in 1932 by Adolf Hitler” (109). And so Zinn delves us into the deep question of knowing the difference between law and justice and looking at when it becomes time to disobey law for the sake of justice. Will we continue in our Machiavellian realism, allowing our government to be both the lion and the fox, or will will take one more long look back at our Declaration of Independence and remember as in suggests, “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” for all citizens, “these are the ends” and “government is only a means” to these ends (109).
Zinn looks at the purpose of civil disobedience – “the deliberate violation of a law for a social purpose” (107). We are mindlessly taught at such a young age to recite the Pledge of Allegiance “one nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all”. There’s that word again: all. Zinn proposes the question: “are rich and poor treated equally? Blacks and whites? Foreign born and native? Conservatives and radicals? Private citizens and government officials?” (113). John Adams, our nations second president, proposed that the ‘rule of law’ was greater than the ‘rule of men’, claiming it to “be impersonal, neutral, apply equally to all, and, therefore, democratic” (110). At what point in our nations history have we ever promoted, let alone enforced “liberty and justice for all”? The wealthy, white, governing officials are not even bound by law. How many of our presidents have broken innumerable laws without consequence, let alone carry out mass murder in innumerable third world countries without repercussion or responsibility. Our current president claims he is not bound by the laws of this nation as we are in a state of war. Who declared this state of war? The people? No, therefore, form whence has this power come? “Historically, the most terrible things – war, genocide, and slavery – have resulted not from disobedience, but from obedience” (129). How long will the masses stand by silently as these crimes against humanity are ‘lawfully’ committed? Zinn refers to the double standard of our government that will treat the burning of pieces of paper (draft cards) as an act of violence, “while dropping 7 million tons of bombs on Southeast Asia (twice as many as were dropped in all theatres of operation in World War II)” (143). He quotes Father Berrigan of the ‘Catonsville Nine’:
“Our apologies, good friends, for the fracture of good order, the burning of paper instead of children…We could not, so help us God, do otherwise…We say: killing is disorder, life and gentleness and community and unselfishness is the only order we recognize. For the sake of that order we risk our liberty, our good name. The time is past when good men can remain silent, when obedience can segregate men from public risk, when the poor can without defense” (120).
Zinn reflects on numerous like examples from the sixties dealing with both civil disobedience acts against the Vietnam War and racial segregation. He presents the right of jury nullification as a great corrective. The Circuit court of Appeals “made a remarkable statement in support of jury nullification:
We recognize…the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence…If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision” (139).
Zinn leaves us with an excellent question to ponder at the end of this very difficult chapter, “What kind of person can we admire, can we ask young people of the next generation to emulate – the strict follower of law or the dissident who struggles, sometimes within, sometimes outside, sometimes against the law, but always for justice?” (148).
Democracy Now
The Global Gag Rule
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/02/1336254
“The Bush administraton’s Mexico City Policy, known as the Global Gag Rule by opponents, denies foreign organizations receiving U.S. family planning assistance the right to use their own non-U.S. funds to perform or counsel on legal abortions or lobby for the legalization of abortion in their country. Nigerian doctor Ejike Oji says this forces foreign NGOs to choose between vital U.S. assistance for essential family planning services and the real needs of women dealing with unwanted pregnancies.
The House Committee on Foreign Affairs held a hearing Wednesday to illustrate the devastating impact of the Reagan-era Mexico City Policy on family planning programs and rates of unsafe abortions around the world. The Mexico City Policy, which is known as the Global Gag Rule by opponents, was rescinded by former President Clinton in 1993 but reinstated by President Bush in 2001. The policy denies foreign organizations receiving U.S. family planning assistance the right to use their own non-U.S. funds to perform or counsel on legal abortions or lobby for the legalization of abortion in their country.
Critics charge that this forces foreign NGOs to choose between vital U.S. assistance for essential family planning services and the real needs of women dealing with unwanted pregnancies. Nigeria has the second highest maternal mortality rate in the world, in large part due to unsafe abortions and lack of access to reproductive healthcare.
Dr. Ejike Oji is a Nigerian doctor and the country director of an international organization called Ipas that promotes women's reproductive rights around the world. He has spent the last 28 years fighting unsafe abortions and testified at the House Committee hearing Wednesday.”
Dr. Oji explains that 10,000 Nigerian woman die every year from illegal abortions and for every woman that dies another 20 are injured. The Global Gag Rule, originally a Reagan era law, denying any US tax dollars in foreign aid to be spent on abortion, had been abolished by Clinton in 1993, leading to far less maternal and infant mortality rates due to illegal abortions. In 2001, Bush reinstated the Global Gag Rule and any organizations receiving US aid are not even allowed to mention the word abortion or discuss abortion as an option for treating an unwanted pregnancy. As Dr. Oji explains, how can a nation that allows choices for their own citizens, providing American women with safe, medical, legal abortions, treat women of other nations with such a dangerous double standard. His organization, who refused to sign the Global Gag Rule and does not receive US aid as a result. He felt the safety of Nigerian women and children was more important. As a result his organization has recently lost one of their best physicians because he is now receiving US foreign aid money and is unable to assist Dr. Oji any further as his organization is fighting to legalize safe, medical abortions for unwanted pregnancies for the women of Nigeria. The organizations that receive funding from the United States are using the funds to treat HIV and other diseases and lack the facilities to provide contraception. Due to the lack of contraception available to Nigerian women, the rate of unwanted pregnancy is staggering. Nigeria also has the highest rate of infant mortality in the world. This is largely connected to the rate of maternal deaths. When a woman with a baby at home dies, the chance of the survival of that baby are very slim. Dr. Oji must hear the words of Archbishop Tutu when he “chastised the international community for its slow response to the Darfur crisis, saying in a BBC interview, “The harsh truth is that some lives are slightly more important than others. . . If you are swarthy, of a darker hue, almost always you are going to end up at the bottom of the pile.” Which brings us back to our discussion of law and justice and equality for all. When will our country quit pretending that we extend equality to all? Here, we are presented with an enormous amount of preventable deaths and are choosing to allow them. Is that not too a crime against humanity? Is it that I am a staunch supporter of abortion, no; however, I believe, especially, in a third world country like Nigeria, why would we not provide contraception to any woman desiring it? Why would we not provide a choice to Nigerian women that we extend to the women of our own country where starvation and infant mortality are not extreme conditions?
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Political Science Summaries 5
Political Science Summaries 5
Passionate Declarations Chapter 5: Just and Unjust War
This chapter is looking at the concept of whether wars can be called just and unjust. Is their any such thing as a just war? In Howard Zinn’s eyes the answer to this question is a definitive NO! Even in WWII, as we were suppose to be fighting for human rights, we were enslaving Japanese American’s in our own country and forcing all our African American troops to perform kitchen and hard labor jobs rather than having the honor of fighting for their country that they desired. Even in this case, the war most commonly agreed upon as a “necessary” war was by no means a just war. We were not treating our own citizens justly during this war. Our country also committed endless unnecessary atrocities like the one Zinn recounts in which he was ordered to drop napalm over a French town at the end of the war for no explainable reason.
“Machiavelli did not ask if making war was right or wrong (Zinn 67).” Any means could be incorporated to achieve the desired end. Unless humanity learns to stop and think, considering the cost on all sides before determining any inhumane act a ‘necessity’, we will remain an inhumane populace. As Zinn relates the common mentality of war, “The bottom line in war and henxe in political warfare is who gets buried and who gets to walk in the sun (Zinn 68).”
There are three camps in looking at war:
· Glorify war
· Consider some just and some unjust
· “War is too evil to ever be just”
Zinn gives us three very good examples of these three camps. He quotes many war heroes who believe that war is a great source of glory and patriotism for the countries involved. He quotes Thomas More as an example of a man that believed that some wars are necessary; however, “try to make the means more moral (Zinn 69).” Erasmus, a monk, described war saying, “There is nothing more wicked, more disastrous, more widely destructive, more deeply tenacious, more loathsome (Zinn 68).” Einstein, arguably the most intelligent man to live in the twentieth century is quoted as stating, “War cannot be humanized. It can only be abolished (Zinn 71).” Helen Keller was another fierce supporter of peace. “Strike against war, for without you no battles can be fought! Strike against manufacturing shrapnel and gas bombs and all other tools of murder. Strike against preparedness that means death and misery to millions of human beings! Be not dumb, obedient slaves in an army of destruction! Be heroes in an army of construction! (Zinn 75).”
With the advancement of technology, war has become “more uncontrolled and more deadly, using more horrible means and killing more noncombatants (this means helpless, unarmed women, children and families) than ever before in the history of mankind (Zinn 69).” War has advanced from poison gas in WWI to atomic bombs in WWII, to excessive use of agent orange and napalm in Vietnam, to chemical warfare of every hideous biological type (nerve gas, etc.) in the Iran-Iraq wars.
How do countries get people to commit such inhumane acts against one another? Often national superiority is used as a means to justify war. “The tendency, especially in time of war, is to exaggerate the difference between oneself and the opponent, to assume the conflict is between total good and total evil (Zinn 71).”
“One certain effect of war is to diminish freedom of expression. Patriotism becomes the order of the day, and those who question the war are seen as traitors, to be silenced and imprisoned (Zinn 73).” Fear and intimidation are used to anesthetize citizens into cooperating.
One of my favorite books of all time is discussed in this chapter. It is entitled Johnny Got His Gun by Dalton Trumbo. As a result of writing this book Trumbo was blacklisted as a communist for decades by our country. He wrote it following WWI. “When the first WW ended, 10 million men of various countries had died on the battle fields of Europe and millions more had been blinded, maimed, gassed, shell shocked, and driven mad. It was hard to find in that war any gain for the human race to justify that suffering, that death (Zinn 75).” In Johnny Got His Gun, Trumbo presents a victim of this war with “no legs, no arms, no face, blind, deaf, unable to speak, but the hart still beating, the brain still functioning (Zinn 76).” He wakes up in the hospital and cannot understand what has happened to him. He can still feel his missing limbs and feels the vibrations of the nurses coming in and out of the room and changing dressings on his body. Finally he learns to communicate, much to their horror, as they had no idea that he was still mentally sound inside that faceless torso. He tells them “Take me into the workplaces, into the schools, show me to the little children and to the college students, let them see what war is like (Zinn 77).”
I do not believe the question is whether war is just or unjust. Though we have certainly seen in the last seven years how war can be used for personal, private gain and not taking into consideration the best interests of either our own country or the countries we are attacking. I believe the question that needs to be asked is how do we prevent war? As Bob Dylan says, “If God’s on our side, He’ll stop the next war.” America alone has over 30,000 nuclear weapons. What could an arsenal like this possibly be for? This planet will not survive the next World War, there is no question about that; therefore, the question we must ask ourselves is what can be done to prevent wars, any wars, all wars, before we start the next war.
As we know, our country is again throwing around the old phrase, “Oh, this country has weapons of mass destruction and we must go in there and find them and destroy them.” Did we ever find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Any? Or does our Administration have a personal agenda going on that we are failing, as American citizens, to question.
Democracy Now
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/26/1452259
Iraqi Refugee Crisis
This broadcast is an interview of Kathy Kelly, Executive Director of Voices for Creative Nonviolence and David Smith-Ferri, poet, activist and author of the poem collection entitled Battlefield without Borders. The UN estimates that at least 2000 Iraqi’s are fleeing the country each day. Over 4.4 million Iraqi’s have been displaced since the beginning of the war in Iraq. “It is the largest refugee crisis in the Middle East since the creation of Israel in 1948.”
When looking at the percent of money spent on the Iraqi war, less than 0.01% of the money spent on military actions and bombing has been spent on helping the refugee displacement crisis. Most of the displaced persons are fleeing to Jordan and Syria; however, they are having to leave behind all their worldly possessions, leaving even the originally well off, in severe poverty. These refugees are also scarred mentally and physically. The Unites States has caused this crisis and is totally unwilling to take any responsibility for the damage we are causing.
Battlefield without Borders is a collection of poetry, many biographical, about the humanitarian crisis in Iraq. All but 2% of the proceeds, which will be used to cover the cost of production, will go directly to helping the Iraqi refugees, especially those with pending medical needs.
Personally, I must say that I found Smith-Ferri to be quite the idealist, believing that most American’s have deep feelings of concern for the Iraqi population. While there are certainly many individuals who are deeply concerned for the humanitarian crisis that we have caused and the damage we have done to innocent civilians physically, mentally and financially, I believe that for the most part we still tend to be far to much of an isolationist, self serving nation, to truly care. If their were enough voices of concern, the travesty would stop.
Global Issues
The Great WalMart of China
WalMart has firmly made its mark in China resulting in a 15% annual growth rate and an estimated 860 billion dollars by 2009. This transition was not easily made. WalMart had to learn from its “troubles in places like Germany, South Korea, and Japan where the big retailer has lost 1 billion dollars, its toubles came partly from underestimating the local competition and failing to grasp the local culture (Naughton 94).” WalMart “painstakingly discovered that success in china requires…going native…by adopting their customs and culture (Naughton 94).” The Chinese would not buy dead fish in Styrofoam and cellophane so they “installed fish tanks and began selling live tortoises for turtle soup (Naughton 94).” Walking into a local WalMart in China will look nothing like walking into a WalMart in America, it will look more like walking into a local pet shop. Besides, acclimating themselves to the local culture, WalMart also had to take over their largest local competitor, TrustMart. WalMart has its work cut out for it bringing the 100 TrustMarts up to their standards over the next three years; however, with their market in the U.S. maxed out, every American living within 25 miles of a WalMart, they have to continue their growth world wide.
The most important thing we have to learn from this article is the importance of being flexible to the cultural differences between nations.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Fighting for Human Rights is a Community
Fighting for Human Rights is a Community
- Fighting for those who have no voice, like the woman and children of Darfur and Iraq creates a community because the people involved have a common goal and work together for the good of others. A community is defined as “things that hold people together (Latterell 85)” and working together for such an important cause definitely holds people together. This community is held together by its strong sense of injustice being committed against helpless innocent women and children unable to speak for themselves.
- The interest and values of the people within this community are very similar. They believe that all human beings have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not just rich, white Americans. They have a strong sense of duty to help their fellow man in any way they can, whether it is financially, physically, or just writing letters to Congressman and White House Officials regarding the atrocities being committed against these women and children. The needs of the people within this community are ultimately the needs of the women and children they are trying to help. If a little girl in Iraq needs a wheelchair because our military has blown off her legs then the community’s need is to find a way to raise money to purchase a wheelchair. If No More Victims is bringing a child to America for extensive medical treatment they could not receive in Iraq then the needs of the community become those of that child, finding ways to get that child the means to get well enough to travel, a local community willing to host the child and their family a hospital willing to help that child at little or no cost.
The tensions and differences that work against the cohesion of this community are primarily caused by differences of opinion in the best means to help a specific child; however, the differences in this community are far outweighed by the genuine care for the children and rarely create problems within the community.
I fit into this community by writing letters to as many government representatives, Congressman, the President, etc. for Physicians for Human Rights, No More Victims and other organizations like these. I wish I could be more active in supporting these organizations, which all belong to the same community, but my own disabilities make it impossible. The primary reason why I belong to this community is that I feel it is one of the most important communities on the planet at this point. As Cole Miller, founder of No More Victims says, “How is it after we have hurt this child, we do not help this child?” How can we turn our back as genocides continue to occur and pretend that the bombs we are dropping on Iraq are not killing or injuring anyone but militia?
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Political Science Reviews
The Use and Abuse of History
Passionate Declarations by Howard Zinn Chapter 4
“Anyone reading history should understand from the start that there is no such thing as impartial history (Zinn 51)”. This is a critical point to any study of history. The student must know that history has been interpreted by the writer according to their bias. To suggest that one can be objective about the past “conceals the fact that all history, while recalling the past, serves some present interest (Zinn 62)”. A great example of this phenomenon is the study of Christopher Columbus by every elementary school student across America. He is hailed a hero for discovering our great nation. What they fail to tell you is that his first response upon landing in the America’s, as the Arawak Indians brought him gifts of every kind, is that “They would make fine servants” as he recorded in his journal, and then proceeded to take them by force, committing mass murder, rape and kidnapping. We learn, “In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue.” Not “In 1492 Columbus kidnapped and murdered too”. As Howard Zinn states, speaking for himself, “history could only be a way of understanding and helping to change what was wrong in the world (Zinn 48)”. He “decided early (he) would be biased in the sense of holding fast to certain fundamental values: the equal right of all human beings – whatever race, nationality, sex, religion – to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (Zinn 49)”. What could possibly be more important than the rights of every human being on earth. Zinn gives many examples of the abuse of human rights that have been glossed over by history. The Ludlow Massacre in April of 1914 is a classic example of how the officials that we trust to protect our rights, were more interesting in supporting corporate America and specifically the ultra wealthy John Rockefeller. The townsfolk were so thankful to see the National Guard role into town, waving flags, thinking their troubles were finally over. Instead, the guards went to work imprisoning and beating the miners, even murdering some. “On the morning of April 20, 1914, they began firing machine guns into the tents (the miners and their families were living in as they had been thrown out of their company owned homes). The men crawled away to draw fire and shoot back, while the women and children crouched in pits dug into the tent floors. At dusk, the soldiers came down from the hills with torches, and set fire to the tents…The next morning, a telephone linesman, going through the charred ruins of the Ludlow colony, lifted an iron cot that covered a pit dug in the floor…and found the band, burned bodies of two women and eleven children (Zinn 53).” “Would the Colorado strike not suggest that governors, that perhaps all political leaders, were subject to the power of wealth, and would do the bidding of corporations rather than protect the lives of poor, powerless, workers (Zinn 54-55).” This mindset at work explains why our government so readily intervenes in countries that have extensive natural resources such as oil but are unwilling to intervene in hideous human rights violations in countries such as Rwanda and Darfur. It also explains why we do not see headlines in the news or chapters in our history books about the tragic human rights violations around the globe. “What is important is how closely we look today at what is done to human beings (Zinn 58)”. “The arrogance of national power (Zinn 64)” plays a role in the greatest humanitarian crimes committed by our government throughout history and throughout the world. Does the abuse of history give us an excuse to ignore learning about the past? Absolutely not! “We do need to learn history (that) inspires a new generation to resist the madness of governments trying to carve the world and our minds into their spheres of influence (Zinn 66)”. This brings us back to the necessity to question our government’s motives and decision making processes on every level and reserve our right to abolish any government that does not keep the best interests of their citizens rights above any personal agenda they may have.
No More Victims
http://www.nomorevictims.org/
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/19/144201
A Look at Civilian Casualties in Iraq
Cole Miller set up a foundation called No More Victims to help the children whom our military has injured during the Iraqi war. His primary goal is to encourage people to take “direct independent action to help victims of this war.” His endeavors are threefold. He helps people in Iraq who have been injured and displaced financially. He connects advocacy groups such as high school groups, college groups and community groups up with children in Iraq who have been severely injured to give each child a group working directly on their behalf to raise money for them and discover resources that can help them. Finally, he brings Iraqi children who can benefit from medical care in the United States that they cannot get in Iraq to the States to get the necessary care to assist them. His primary question to the nation is “How is it after we have hurt this child, we do not help this child?” A ten year old girl named Salee is interviewed in the broadcast that was brought to the States to receive new prosthetic legs after her legs were blown off in an air raid in Iraq earlier this year. In the same blast her brother and best friend were blown to bits and died and her sister was left critically injured. During the interview Salee is asked if there were any soldiers or Iraqi militia anywhere near her. If she had any idea what the bombs were meant for. She states the only people around were her, Rasul, Tabarak, and Hassan and they were playing hopscotch. There was no one anywhere else around. Amy Goldman asks her father Hussein how he feels about Americans. He admits that originally in Iraq he believed all Americans to be cruel as the soldiers in Iraq always treated them cruelly; however, after he came to the United States and saw all the hospitality and kindness that was granted his daughter he has changed his mind. He is very thankful that there are so many good Americans willing to help people like his daughter. He said bringing her to the States and getting her legs again was like having her reborn. He considers Cole Miller his dear brother and begs the American people to help Cole and his organization: No More Victims, in every possible way. For more information on how to help this organization please go to his website at www.nomorevictims.org
The Use and Abuse of History
Passionate Declarations by Howard Zinn Chapter 4
“Anyone reading history should understand from the start that there is no such thing as impartial history (Zinn 51)”. This is a critical point to any study of history. The student must know that history has been interpreted by the writer according to their bias. To suggest that one can be objective about the past “conceals the fact that all history, while recalling the past, serves some present interest (Zinn 62)”. A great example of this phenomenon is the study of Christopher Columbus by every elementary school student across America. He is hailed a hero for discovering our great nation. What they fail to tell you is that his first response upon landing in the America’s, as the Arawak Indians brought him gifts of every kind, is that “They would make fine servants” as he recorded in his journal, and then proceeded to take them by force, committing mass murder, rape and kidnapping. We learn, “In 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue.” Not “In 1492 Columbus kidnapped and murdered too”. As Howard Zinn states, speaking for himself, “history could only be a way of understanding and helping to change what was wrong in the world (Zinn 48)”. He “decided early (he) would be biased in the sense of holding fast to certain fundamental values: the equal right of all human beings – whatever race, nationality, sex, religion – to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (Zinn 49)”. What could possibly be more important than the rights of every human being on earth. Zinn gives many examples of the abuse of human rights that have been glossed over by history. The Ludlow Massacre in April of 1914 is a classic example of how the officials that we trust to protect our rights, were more interesting in supporting corporate America and specifically the ultra wealthy John Rockefeller. The townsfolk were so thankful to see the National Guard role into town, waving flags, thinking their troubles were finally over. Instead, the guards went to work imprisoning and beating the miners, even murdering some. “On the morning of April 20, 1914, they began firing machine guns into the tents (the miners and their families were living in as they had been thrown out of their company owned homes). The men crawled away to draw fire and shoot back, while the women and children crouched in pits dug into the tent floors. At dusk, the soldiers came down from the hills with torches, and set fire to the tents…The next morning, a telephone linesman, going through the charred ruins of the Ludlow colony, lifted an iron cot that covered a pit dug in the floor…and found the band, burned bodies of two women and eleven children (Zinn 53).” “Would the Colorado strike not suggest that governors, that perhaps all political leaders, were subject to the power of wealth, and would do the bidding of corporations rather than protect the lives of poor, powerless, workers (Zinn 54-55).” This mindset at work explains why our government so readily intervenes in countries that have extensive natural resources such as oil but are unwilling to intervene in hideous human rights violations in countries such as Rwanda and Darfur. It also explains why we do not see headlines in the news or chapters in our history books about the tragic human rights violations around the globe. “What is important is how closely we look today at what is done to human beings (Zinn 58)”. “The arrogance of national power (Zinn 64)” plays a role in the greatest humanitarian crimes committed by our government throughout history and throughout the world. Does the abuse of history give us an excuse to ignore learning about the past? Absolutely not! “We do need to learn history (that) inspires a new generation to resist the madness of governments trying to carve the world and our minds into their spheres of influence (Zinn 66)”. This brings us back to the necessity to question our government’s motives and decision making processes on every level and reserve our right to abolish any government that does not keep the best interests of their citizens rights above any personal agenda they may have.
No More Victims
http://www.nomorevictims.org/
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/19/144201
A Look at Civilian Casualties in Iraq
Cole Miller set up a foundation called No More Victims to help the children whom our military has injured during the Iraqi war. His primary goal is to encourage people to take “direct independent action to help victims of this war.” His endeavors are threefold. He helps people in Iraq who have been injured and displaced financially. He connects advocacy groups such as high school groups, college groups and community groups up with children in Iraq who have been severely injured to give each child a group working directly on their behalf to raise money for them and discover resources that can help them. Finally, he brings Iraqi children who can benefit from medical care in the United States that they cannot get in Iraq to the States to get the necessary care to assist them. His primary question to the nation is “How is it after we have hurt this child, we do not help this child?” A ten year old girl named Salee is interviewed in the broadcast that was brought to the States to receive new prosthetic legs after her legs were blown off in an air raid in Iraq earlier this year. In the same blast her brother and best friend were blown to bits and died and her sister was left critically injured. During the interview Salee is asked if there were any soldiers or Iraqi militia anywhere near her. If she had any idea what the bombs were meant for. She states the only people around were her, Rasul, Tabarak, and Hassan and they were playing hopscotch. There was no one anywhere else around. Amy Goldman asks her father Hussein how he feels about Americans. He admits that originally in Iraq he believed all Americans to be cruel as the soldiers in Iraq always treated them cruelly; however, after he came to the United States and saw all the hospitality and kindness that was granted his daughter he has changed his mind. He is very thankful that there are so many good Americans willing to help people like his daughter. He said bringing her to the States and getting her legs again was like having her reborn. He considers Cole Miller his dear brother and begs the American people to help Cole and his organization: No More Victims, in every possible way. For more information on how to help this organization please go to his website at www.nomorevictims.org
Monday, October 15, 2007
Greenpeace and the Protection of the World's Endangered Species
I have had the personal experience of working for Greenpeace as a young woman and going on a trip with members from Greenpeace on a trip to the Baja Penninsula to watch the Gray whales make and have babies. I must admit it is one of the most memorable experiences of my life. I believe that the support of environmental agencies is critical in this day and age at the rate in which both the environment and amazing animal species within those environments are being destroyed. It is tragic to think that my grandchildren will never have the opportunity to touch a Gray whale or at this rate even see a Panda bear, Mountain gorilla or Blue Whale. If we do not "wake up" as Melissa Etheridge calls us to do in her song "Inconvenient Truth" there will be little left for the generations coming after us.
Passionate Declarations, The Five Wars of Globalization and The Return of the Imperial Presidency
Political Science Summaries
Howard Zinn’s Passionate Declarations, Chapter Three
Violence and Human Nature
The question this chapter is considering is whether or not violence is a “result of some natural instinct” (Zinn 32), whether, as Machiavelli would have us believe “human beings tend to be bad” (Zinn (33) or if perhaps as the scientists who met in Seville Spain state: “It is incorrect to say that war is caused by ‘instinct’ or any single motivation” (Zinn 36) and that we are capable of “some strong feeling(s) of natural empathy” (Zinn 37) as Stanley Milgram’s experiment showed. One of the clearest answers to this question comes from anthropologist Colin Turnbull who lived and studied two different native tribes in Africa. He found the Pygmies of the Ituri rain forest to be “wonderfully gentle and peaceful people” (Zinn 38) yet while staying with the Ik people of East Africa he describes them as “ferocious and selfish” (Zinn 39). His findings are critical to understanding the interactions and reactions of people of all people throughout the world. He concluded that the differences had nothing to do with genetics or instinctive behavior, but rather, the circumstances in which they were living. “The relatively easy life of the forest people fostered goodwill and generosity. The Ik on the other hand had been driven from their natural hunting grounds by the creation of a national game reserve into an isolated life of starvation in barren mountains. Their desperate attempt to survive brought out the aggressive destructiveness that Turnbull saw” (Zinn 39). This suggests that when placed in desperate situations, people will resort to desperate measures, not that they were innately wicked. Psychologist Erik Erickson explains the problem considering the diversification and divisions of the human race by culture, religion, nationality, tribes, etc. as creating what he calls “pseudospecies” and therefore detracting from the natural compassion one human should have for another member of humanity. (I ran into a situation exactly like this on the internet the other day. My computer is flagged to send me all news articles on the conflict in Darfur. When opening a recent article in the “Gameduck” news written by a political science student on the problems in Darfur, he bluntly stated that it is none of our affair and as long as it does not affect us, individually, as Americans we have no business, let alone responsibility to get involved. I found this so shocking to my basic sense of human decency. It is this type of isolationism view that led to and allowed the Holocaust and Rwandan genocides to occur. Perhaps someone needs to rape his infant daughter to wake him up to the responsibility of being a member of humanity.) Zinn states, “We can always select facts from history to prove almost anything about human behavior” (Zinn 41). Therefore, using history to “prove” anything comes with a great responsibility to look at every and all sides of an assertion. He makes a powerful point about why he dropped bombs and napalm over Europe in WWII. “We had been brought up to believe that our political leaders had good motives and could be trusted to do right in the world; we had learned that the world had good guys and bad guys, good countries and bad countries, and ours was good” (Zinn 42). (This is why we, as responsible citizens must learn to question our government’s motives as we have seen so clearly in the war in Iraq. I hope by now we have all learned that American’s are not innately good and therefore more worthy of basic human rights than the rest of the world. Just as I hope there will come a day when no white individual believes they are superior and therefore their rights are more important than anyone else’s with a darker colored skin.) The wars of the 20th century should prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that humans are not innately, instinctively wicked and anxious to kill, torture, rape and mame. If this were the case we would not have seen the massive anti war protests of every major war of the 20th century besides WWII. Men and women gallantly responded to the call of duty in the Second World War both to avenge their country men lost in Pearl Harbor. These individuals were not bloodthirsty killers, merely dutifully citizens protecting and avenging their fellow countrymen.
Global Issues/Annual Edition 2007-2008
The Five Wars of Globalization
The five wars of Globalization are drugs, arms, intellectual property, people, and money. While these are the largest commodities being sold illegally throughout the world they “are not the only commodities traded illegally for huge profits by international networks. They also trade human organs, endangered species, stolen art, and toxic waste” (Naim 67). “The promise of enormous financial gain motivates those who battle the government in these five wars” (Naim 65) and numerous smaller ones. The illicit drug trade alone is approximately $400 billion dollars a year, nearly ten percent of all world trade. “Globalization, especially the information revolution has allowed these criminals/terrorists far more freedom, access, and success than ever at reaching their goals” (Naim 65). “The world’s governments are fighting a qualitatively new phenomenon with obsolete tools, inadequate laws, inefficient bureaucratic arrangements, and ineffective strategies. Not surprisingly…governments are losing.” One of the greatest disadvantages that the authorities have in fighting these crimes is that the perpetrators are in essence ‘stateless’. “Their allegiance is to their cause, not to any nation” (Naim 69). This is not true of the authorities trying to fight them which gives them a “crippling disadvantage” (Naim 69). The major international crime fighting organization, Interpol, has a total staff of only 384 individuals and the average single boat or plane used by these criminal organizations. So why is organized crime so successful? Because it is exactly that: organized. Mistrust amongst the nations fighting these wars undermines any effective international police network.
Democracy Now (http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/12/1455210)
Take Over:
The Return of The Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy
When addressing the look at “The Protect American Act” by Congress in hopes to restore some checks and balances to the Executive Branch of the government, Bush says “It must grant liability protection to companies who are facing multi billion dollar law suits only because they are believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend our nation following the 9/11 attacks.” I can’t help but immediately think of Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine and how such disasters grant government officials such carte blanche ability to do things such as warrantless wiretapping of private American citizens and breaking laws without repercussion, things that could have never happened in a pre 9/11 environment in this country. He goes onto to say, “Terrorist in far away lands are plotting and planning new ways to kill Americans.” Once again feeding on the fears of Americans to create a state of shock and fear to gain imperialistic freedoms that would never have been granted to a democratic leader prior to the 9/11 attacks. The checks and balances of the “executive branch secrecy and unchecked power” need restored immediately if we are to remain a democratic society. Charlie Savage, a Pulitzer Prize winning author of the book Take Over: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy discusses this problem in depth. Cheney’s political agenda upon entering the White House was to return the imperialistic power to the Executive Branch of the government. This goes all the way back to his time as the Chief of Staff for Gerald Ford at a time when Congress was reimposing checks and balances on the Executive Branch of the government after a long lapse as a result of the Cold War. “Finally, as Vice President, the most experienced Vice President in history dealing with one of the least experienced Presidents in history he was in a position to shape this administrations practices and tactics as it went forward.” A shocking example of this came on 9/11 itself when Cheney, from the White House bunker, ordered the military to shoot United 93 out of the sky (killing Americans on American soil without even a Presidential order). During the 9/11 commission Cheney stated that Bush had given him prior authority to make such a call. Cheney and Bush insisted during the commissions inquiry that they would not give any sworn testimony and that Cheney would be sitting directly next to Bush throughout the proceedings as well as preventing any recording of their testimony. This administration has been more aggressive than any presidential administration in the history of our country. “President Bush has challenged more laws of restraint than all previous Presidents in American history combined.” Bush asserted that he has the power as commander in chief to “bypass laws at his own discretion.” He proceeded to disregard a 1978 law requiring all wiretappings to have warrants. To worsen matters there was no resistance by Congress. The democrats allowed this to happen without question as a result of the atmosphere of crisis that the country was in following 9/11 (again bringing into play the very important issue of Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine showing how individuals, even government authorities and in this case Congress itself will follow a leader blindly when in a state of shock as occurred following the 9/11 attacks). “Congress is again unwilling to push back against the White House’s assertion that it needs ever more authority and checks and balances will result in bloodshed.” Since the President has asserted that he can bypass, disregard, or break laws, however one might like to look at it and this assertion remained unquestioned, any President from this moment forward can follow Bush’s example, leading our country farther and farther away from a well balanced Democracy which once had three equally powerful branches of government. Bush is also seeking to close off all means of accountability in providing retroactive immunity to the companies who assisted him in breaking the 1978 law against unwarranted wiretapping. Bush has expanded the secrecy, power, privilege and so on of the Executive branch far beyond any President in America’s history. He has made the Executive branch like a “black box” so that neither Congress nor the voters have any idea what the officials are doing with these powers. Civil Rights Law enforcement is another area in which this power is clearly obvious. Prior to 2002 whenever the Civil Rights Division was in need of filling a position they hired career veterans to decide who should fill the position in the Civil Rights Division, “that meant that they were still hiring people who had demonstrated commitment to enforcing Civil Rights laws.” In 2002 the Bush Administration changed that by appointing the position to members of the federalist society, to the extent of giving positions to people who had fought against Civil Rights in the past. This has allowed the Bush Administration to seize control over this division. Rather than protecting African American rights, as this division was formed to protect, it has instead now focused its cases on reverse discrimination against whites, Christians, etc., whatever fits the bill of Bush’s agenda. If this crisis is not brought under control in our government we will soon find ourselves in a nation that is no longer free or democratic but rather closer to resembling a dictatorship. We should be at this point forced to fall back on the possibility left open to us in the Declaration of Independence “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government).
Howard Zinn’s Passionate Declarations, Chapter Three
Violence and Human Nature
The question this chapter is considering is whether or not violence is a “result of some natural instinct” (Zinn 32), whether, as Machiavelli would have us believe “human beings tend to be bad” (Zinn (33) or if perhaps as the scientists who met in Seville Spain state: “It is incorrect to say that war is caused by ‘instinct’ or any single motivation” (Zinn 36) and that we are capable of “some strong feeling(s) of natural empathy” (Zinn 37) as Stanley Milgram’s experiment showed. One of the clearest answers to this question comes from anthropologist Colin Turnbull who lived and studied two different native tribes in Africa. He found the Pygmies of the Ituri rain forest to be “wonderfully gentle and peaceful people” (Zinn 38) yet while staying with the Ik people of East Africa he describes them as “ferocious and selfish” (Zinn 39). His findings are critical to understanding the interactions and reactions of people of all people throughout the world. He concluded that the differences had nothing to do with genetics or instinctive behavior, but rather, the circumstances in which they were living. “The relatively easy life of the forest people fostered goodwill and generosity. The Ik on the other hand had been driven from their natural hunting grounds by the creation of a national game reserve into an isolated life of starvation in barren mountains. Their desperate attempt to survive brought out the aggressive destructiveness that Turnbull saw” (Zinn 39). This suggests that when placed in desperate situations, people will resort to desperate measures, not that they were innately wicked. Psychologist Erik Erickson explains the problem considering the diversification and divisions of the human race by culture, religion, nationality, tribes, etc. as creating what he calls “pseudospecies” and therefore detracting from the natural compassion one human should have for another member of humanity. (I ran into a situation exactly like this on the internet the other day. My computer is flagged to send me all news articles on the conflict in Darfur. When opening a recent article in the “Gameduck” news written by a political science student on the problems in Darfur, he bluntly stated that it is none of our affair and as long as it does not affect us, individually, as Americans we have no business, let alone responsibility to get involved. I found this so shocking to my basic sense of human decency. It is this type of isolationism view that led to and allowed the Holocaust and Rwandan genocides to occur. Perhaps someone needs to rape his infant daughter to wake him up to the responsibility of being a member of humanity.) Zinn states, “We can always select facts from history to prove almost anything about human behavior” (Zinn 41). Therefore, using history to “prove” anything comes with a great responsibility to look at every and all sides of an assertion. He makes a powerful point about why he dropped bombs and napalm over Europe in WWII. “We had been brought up to believe that our political leaders had good motives and could be trusted to do right in the world; we had learned that the world had good guys and bad guys, good countries and bad countries, and ours was good” (Zinn 42). (This is why we, as responsible citizens must learn to question our government’s motives as we have seen so clearly in the war in Iraq. I hope by now we have all learned that American’s are not innately good and therefore more worthy of basic human rights than the rest of the world. Just as I hope there will come a day when no white individual believes they are superior and therefore their rights are more important than anyone else’s with a darker colored skin.) The wars of the 20th century should prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that humans are not innately, instinctively wicked and anxious to kill, torture, rape and mame. If this were the case we would not have seen the massive anti war protests of every major war of the 20th century besides WWII. Men and women gallantly responded to the call of duty in the Second World War both to avenge their country men lost in Pearl Harbor. These individuals were not bloodthirsty killers, merely dutifully citizens protecting and avenging their fellow countrymen.
Global Issues/Annual Edition 2007-2008
The Five Wars of Globalization
The five wars of Globalization are drugs, arms, intellectual property, people, and money. While these are the largest commodities being sold illegally throughout the world they “are not the only commodities traded illegally for huge profits by international networks. They also trade human organs, endangered species, stolen art, and toxic waste” (Naim 67). “The promise of enormous financial gain motivates those who battle the government in these five wars” (Naim 65) and numerous smaller ones. The illicit drug trade alone is approximately $400 billion dollars a year, nearly ten percent of all world trade. “Globalization, especially the information revolution has allowed these criminals/terrorists far more freedom, access, and success than ever at reaching their goals” (Naim 65). “The world’s governments are fighting a qualitatively new phenomenon with obsolete tools, inadequate laws, inefficient bureaucratic arrangements, and ineffective strategies. Not surprisingly…governments are losing.” One of the greatest disadvantages that the authorities have in fighting these crimes is that the perpetrators are in essence ‘stateless’. “Their allegiance is to their cause, not to any nation” (Naim 69). This is not true of the authorities trying to fight them which gives them a “crippling disadvantage” (Naim 69). The major international crime fighting organization, Interpol, has a total staff of only 384 individuals and the average single boat or plane used by these criminal organizations. So why is organized crime so successful? Because it is exactly that: organized. Mistrust amongst the nations fighting these wars undermines any effective international police network.
Democracy Now (http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/10/12/1455210)
Take Over:
The Return of The Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy
When addressing the look at “The Protect American Act” by Congress in hopes to restore some checks and balances to the Executive Branch of the government, Bush says “It must grant liability protection to companies who are facing multi billion dollar law suits only because they are believed to have assisted in the efforts to defend our nation following the 9/11 attacks.” I can’t help but immediately think of Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine and how such disasters grant government officials such carte blanche ability to do things such as warrantless wiretapping of private American citizens and breaking laws without repercussion, things that could have never happened in a pre 9/11 environment in this country. He goes onto to say, “Terrorist in far away lands are plotting and planning new ways to kill Americans.” Once again feeding on the fears of Americans to create a state of shock and fear to gain imperialistic freedoms that would never have been granted to a democratic leader prior to the 9/11 attacks. The checks and balances of the “executive branch secrecy and unchecked power” need restored immediately if we are to remain a democratic society. Charlie Savage, a Pulitzer Prize winning author of the book Take Over: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy discusses this problem in depth. Cheney’s political agenda upon entering the White House was to return the imperialistic power to the Executive Branch of the government. This goes all the way back to his time as the Chief of Staff for Gerald Ford at a time when Congress was reimposing checks and balances on the Executive Branch of the government after a long lapse as a result of the Cold War. “Finally, as Vice President, the most experienced Vice President in history dealing with one of the least experienced Presidents in history he was in a position to shape this administrations practices and tactics as it went forward.” A shocking example of this came on 9/11 itself when Cheney, from the White House bunker, ordered the military to shoot United 93 out of the sky (killing Americans on American soil without even a Presidential order). During the 9/11 commission Cheney stated that Bush had given him prior authority to make such a call. Cheney and Bush insisted during the commissions inquiry that they would not give any sworn testimony and that Cheney would be sitting directly next to Bush throughout the proceedings as well as preventing any recording of their testimony. This administration has been more aggressive than any presidential administration in the history of our country. “President Bush has challenged more laws of restraint than all previous Presidents in American history combined.” Bush asserted that he has the power as commander in chief to “bypass laws at his own discretion.” He proceeded to disregard a 1978 law requiring all wiretappings to have warrants. To worsen matters there was no resistance by Congress. The democrats allowed this to happen without question as a result of the atmosphere of crisis that the country was in following 9/11 (again bringing into play the very important issue of Naomi Klein’s book The Shock Doctrine showing how individuals, even government authorities and in this case Congress itself will follow a leader blindly when in a state of shock as occurred following the 9/11 attacks). “Congress is again unwilling to push back against the White House’s assertion that it needs ever more authority and checks and balances will result in bloodshed.” Since the President has asserted that he can bypass, disregard, or break laws, however one might like to look at it and this assertion remained unquestioned, any President from this moment forward can follow Bush’s example, leading our country farther and farther away from a well balanced Democracy which once had three equally powerful branches of government. Bush is also seeking to close off all means of accountability in providing retroactive immunity to the companies who assisted him in breaking the 1978 law against unwarranted wiretapping. Bush has expanded the secrecy, power, privilege and so on of the Executive branch far beyond any President in America’s history. He has made the Executive branch like a “black box” so that neither Congress nor the voters have any idea what the officials are doing with these powers. Civil Rights Law enforcement is another area in which this power is clearly obvious. Prior to 2002 whenever the Civil Rights Division was in need of filling a position they hired career veterans to decide who should fill the position in the Civil Rights Division, “that meant that they were still hiring people who had demonstrated commitment to enforcing Civil Rights laws.” In 2002 the Bush Administration changed that by appointing the position to members of the federalist society, to the extent of giving positions to people who had fought against Civil Rights in the past. This has allowed the Bush Administration to seize control over this division. Rather than protecting African American rights, as this division was formed to protect, it has instead now focused its cases on reverse discrimination against whites, Christians, etc., whatever fits the bill of Bush’s agenda. If this crisis is not brought under control in our government we will soon find ourselves in a nation that is no longer free or democratic but rather closer to resembling a dictatorship. We should be at this point forced to fall back on the possibility left open to us in the Declaration of Independence “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
