Are some of the soldiers in Iraq there primarily for economic reasons? Sure. Did others sign up for a chance to shoot some “ragheads”? Probably. After factoring out these two relatively small groups and rejecting the illegal, immoral, and reactionary “only following orders” defense, I ask this of anti-war activists: Exactly how are the men and women who willingly signed up to wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan immune from any and all scrutiny and/or blame?
After all, what do you think “our troops” are doing? "We know that 99.9% of our forces conduct themselves in an exemplary manner,” says Donald Rumsfeld. “We also know that in conflicts things that shouldn't happen do happen."
If only 1/10 of 1% of US soldiers make “things happen that shouldn't happen,” what are the rest doing to have us standing and singing "God Bless America" during the 7th inning stretch at Yankee Stadium? How do we define exemplary manner?
By Rumsfeld's reckoning (and the standard company line of most every politician, pundit, and peon) "exemplary" includes (among other things) waterboarding and other forms of torture, the use of Daisy Cutters, cluster bombs, napalm, depleted uranium, white phosphorus, and the launching of cruise missiles into crowded cities.
"Things that shouldn't happen do happen," Rumsfeld explains. But what about all the stuff that this society accepts "should" happen? Why would anyone besides a sadist feel compelled to support that unconditionally?
It should come as no surprise that my take on the “support the troops” mantra is typically greeted with unrestrained hostility from all over the political spectrum. What offends the right wing flag-wavers most is when someone actually makes use of the freedom they claim to adore. Somehow I am ungrateful for my liberty if I have the nerve to exercise it. These so-called patriots claim to celebrate freedom but want to refuse my right to exploit it. These are the same folks who walk around crowing about how they’re “proud to be an American”—as if they had anything to do with it.
The most predictable knee-jerk reaction from the liberals is that I’m too radical and I might hurt the “movement” by alienating soldiers and families. I promise to get back to the word radical later. For now, I’d rather focus on the concept of a movement. This is not semantics but rather, it gets to the heart of our discussion here tonight.
The state of global affairs has long passed the proverbial tipping point and is more likely flirting with the dreaded point of no return. Yet most folks, it seems, have confused the occasional weekend parade, I mean, protest with a full-blown movement.
Here’s a news flash: Anti-Bush bumper stickers and a heartfelt commitment to recycled toilet paper don’t constitute a movement. Neither do candlelight vigils, vegan diets, petitions, voting drives, letters to Congress, monthly donations to Greenpeace, yellow ribbons, red ribbons, pink ribbons, or becoming the change you wish to see in the world.
All you need is love? Yeah…that and a million dollars a minute.
This is not meant to denigrate or mock but rather to point out that there is a huge difference between having a sincere minority of Americans partaking in such gestures and having a tangible, functional, effective movement capable of inciting, inspiring, demanding social change. The rest of the world knows this…why don’t we?
As Arundhati Roy explains: "People from poorer places and poorer countries have to call upon their compassion not to be angry with ordinary people in America." Ward Churchill takes it further...warning us that the same people Roy refers to "have no obligation-moral, ethical, legal or otherwise-to sit on their thumbs while the opposition here (in the US) dithers about doing anything to change the system."
Consider this: If your neighborhood was bombed into the Stone Age—your children buried in the rubble—and taxpayers funding those bombs (in some cases, willingly funding those bombs) walked around saying you were ignorant enough and narrow-minded enough to hate them “because they’re free” and "for what they believe in," how forgiving would you be?
Americans wield more influence and power than any people on the planet but, while an obscene number of humans live in abject poverty, we live our lives in such a manner as to threaten every living thing on Earth. Everything I’ve talked about so far (and much more) is being done in our name. In other words—with few exceptions—there are no innocent bystanders in America.
I have a question: How many of you think the planet is in peril? (Just about everyone raises his or her hand)
A second question: How many think those in power—those most responsible for putting the planet in peril—will relinquish their power voluntarily any time soon? (Everyone raises hand)
So, if most of us think the planet is in peril but the elites are not going to surrender their power, I have yet another question: How much more are we willing to tolerate before we act?
Here is some of what we’re already enduring without any serious fuss:
*Epidemics of preventable diseases: cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.
*Poisoning of our air, water, and food (including mother’s breast milk)
*Global warming, climate change, animal and plant extinctions, disappearing honeybees, destruction of the rain forest, topsoil depletion, etc.
*1/3 of Americans uninsured or underinsured: health care
*More than half of the world’s top 100 economies: corporations
*61% of corporations do not even pay taxes
*Presidential lies, electoral fraud, limited debates, etc.
*The largest prison population on the planet
*Corporate control of public land, airwaves, & pensions
*Overt infringement of our civil liberties
*Bloated defense budget, unilateral military interventions, war crimes committed in our name, legalization of torture, blah, blah, blah...
After all, what do you think “our troops” are doing? "We know that 99.9% of our forces conduct themselves in an exemplary manner,” says Donald Rumsfeld. “We also know that in conflicts things that shouldn't happen do happen."
If only 1/10 of 1% of US soldiers make “things happen that shouldn't happen,” what are the rest doing to have us standing and singing "God Bless America" during the 7th inning stretch at Yankee Stadium? How do we define exemplary manner?
By Rumsfeld's reckoning (and the standard company line of most every politician, pundit, and peon) "exemplary" includes (among other things) waterboarding and other forms of torture, the use of Daisy Cutters, cluster bombs, napalm, depleted uranium, white phosphorus, and the launching of cruise missiles into crowded cities.
It should come as no surprise that my take on the “support the troops” mantra is typically greeted with unrestrained hostility from all over the political spectrum. What offends the right wing flag-wavers most is when someone actually makes use of the freedom they claim to adore. Somehow I am ungrateful for my liberty if I have the nerve to exercise it. These so-called patriots claim to celebrate freedom but want to refuse my right to exploit it. These are the same folks who walk around crowing about how they’re “proud to be an American”—as if they had anything to do with it.
The most predictable knee-jerk reaction from the liberals is that I’m too radical and I might hurt the “movement” by alienating soldiers and families. I promise to get back to the word radical later. For now, I’d rather focus on the concept of a movement. This is not semantics but rather, it gets to the heart of our discussion here tonight.
The state of global affairs has long passed the proverbial tipping point and is more likely flirting with the dreaded point of no return. Yet most folks, it seems, have confused the occasional weekend parade, I mean, protest with a full-blown movement.
Here’s a news flash: Anti-Bush bumper stickers and a heartfelt commitment to recycled toilet paper don’t constitute a movement. Neither do candlelight vigils, vegan diets, petitions, voting drives, letters to Congress, monthly donations to Greenpeace, yellow ribbons, red ribbons, pink ribbons, or becoming the change you wish to see in the world.
All you need is love? Yeah…that and a million dollars a minute.
This is not meant to denigrate or mock but rather to point out that there is a huge difference between having a sincere minority of Americans partaking in such gestures and having a tangible, functional, effective movement capable of inciting, inspiring, demanding social change. The rest of the world knows this…why don’t we?
As Arundhati Roy explains: "People from poorer places and poorer countries have to call upon their compassion not to be angry with ordinary people in America." Ward Churchill takes it further...warning us that the same people Roy refers to "have no obligation-moral, ethical, legal or otherwise-to sit on their thumbs while the opposition here (in the US) dithers about doing anything to change the system."
Consider this: If your neighborhood was bombed into the Stone Age—your children buried in the rubble—and taxpayers funding those bombs (in some cases, willingly funding those bombs) walked around saying you were ignorant enough and narrow-minded enough to hate them “because they’re free” and "for what they believe in," how forgiving would you be?
Americans wield more influence and power than any people on the planet but, while an obscene number of humans live in abject poverty, we live our lives in such a manner as to threaten every living thing on Earth. Everything I’ve talked about so far (and much more) is being done in our name. In other words—with few exceptions—there are no innocent bystanders in America.
I have a question: How many of you think the planet is in peril? (Just about everyone raises his or her hand)
A second question: How many think those in power—those most responsible for putting the planet in peril—will relinquish their power voluntarily any time soon? (Everyone raises hand)
So, if most of us think the planet is in peril but the elites are not going to surrender their power, I have yet another question: How much more are we willing to tolerate before we act?
Here is some of what we’re already enduring without any serious fuss:
*Epidemics of preventable diseases: cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.
*Poisoning of our air, water, and food (including mother’s breast milk)
*Global warming, climate change, animal and plant extinctions, disappearing honeybees, destruction of the rain forest, topsoil depletion, etc.
*1/3 of Americans uninsured or underinsured: health care
*More than half of the world’s top 100 economies: corporations
*61% of corporations do not even pay taxes
*Presidential lies, electoral fraud, limited debates, etc.
*The largest prison population on the planet
*Corporate control of public land, airwaves, & pensions
*Overt infringement of our civil liberties
*Bloated defense budget, unilateral military interventions, war crimes committed in our name, legalization of torture, blah, blah, blah...
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
