Friday, September 5, 2008

RNC - Did you think they got carried away?

It’s been an eventful week for social change groups around the country. In the aftermath of the Republican National Convention in St. Paul many are licking wounds and hiring lawyers. If you’d known what it was going to be like, would you like to have gone?

Most clashes protesters had with St. Paul police never appeared on the news anywhere. Beginning on Monday at least six house raids occurred on groups as they met peacefully to plan nonviolent protests. Journalists and those documenting police behavior seemed to be targeted at several points during the convention. Reports of police brutality were common. There were several stories like the one where police wrestled a protester to the ground so they could yank away his protective goggles, and mace him directly in the eyes. Repeated tazerings, and beatings severe enough to cause internal bleeding are recorded. Charges for arrested protesters often included the words “terrorist,” though most charges were dropped.


The stories are grim and well-documented. Unfortunately, almost none of this was reported in the mainstream media. Even on NPR reporters glossed over the officially sanctioned violence to talk about questionable behavior by protesters, and sympathetic coverage of police press conferences.

On Friday the ACLU announced it would take on the case of Amy Goodman, Democracy Now producers, and other journalists who were arrested. It’s possible other arrested protesters could be included. And Amnesty International has expressed concern for disproportionate use of force by St. Paul officials. The concerns arise from independent media reports, and video and photographic images that show police officers excessively using non-lethal weapons on non-violent protesters.

There have also been reports of an agreement between St. Paul officials and the Republican Party, that the party would cover the first $10 million for legal bills coming from ways the sheriff and police dealt with protesters. Clearly the point of this whole exercise was to show they were the tough guys in charge, and to intimidate dissent.

After the past 8 years those who’ve taken exception to Bush policies can’t pretend to be too surprised at the degree to which the party they represent reacts with fear to those who disagree with them. And fear is clearly the core of decisions that were made about this convention. They’re afraid of dissent because they’re afraid of transparency because they’re afraid of being revealed for what they are. And their followers are like unto them. That’s not a comment on Republicans in general. That’s in reference to the particular strain within the party that’s in control nowadays. The violent rules they operate under are intended to keep people from questioning authority. We all know that. The task for us, who take exception to the rulers, is to find our own core of courage, and steel ourselves to the kind of nonviolent discipline that Gandhi carried with him throughout his struggles. The future may call for even more of that.

The other strength we must learn to rely on is the set of bonds we develop with those who share our values. There really are lots of us, and we need each other. To consciously learn how to reach across boundaries of language, creed, race and culture is a skill set that progressives need to study all across the globe. We can do that in Arkansas, and we must. The things we learn from the Republican National Convention are incredibly valuable for observing just how important that is.

Another interesting lesson from the last week is to look at it as a marker on a check-list. Remember the quote from Gandhi that says: “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Well, we’re beyond the laughing stage, aren’t we? Think about what comes next.


Monday, August 11, 2008

Impractical Dreams from a Friend

Margaret says: "Several years ago a friend of mine was living and working in Lesotho on a Fulbright study. While she was there she rescued a little street kid from horrible poverty and abuse. She eventually adopted the little girl, Manko. Manko struggled through high school, graduated, and after a couple of years joined the army. Her Mom was pretty horrified, but all she could do was be there as a Mom. Manko graduated from boot camp a couple of weeks ago. My friend went to her graduation. In many ways boot camp was very good for Manko--she gained confidence and self esteem and for the first time in a long time, feels very proud of herself. She should. She has achieved a lot. Her Mom and I talked about how good the Army is at doing some things--if only they didn't go to war. She wrote this piece which I want to share with all of you. And as a side note 80% of the 1000 soldiers who graduated with Manko are 17 years old. "


And the story continues:

"Attending Manko's graduation from Army boot camp in South Carolina this past weekend was fraught for me. Manko was justifiably proud of her accomplishment, happy to have been a success at something difficult. I celebrated her and her fellow soldiers, and I was outraged that any of them should be considered expendable for oil men's wars. The expertly choreographed display of military propaganda, including the performance of four soldiers in Arab dress being "taken out" by soldiers in camoflage, while the band played the Army Song and the audience of 2000 people cheered, gave me chills. This morning I woke up and wrote down this half-waking dream. I sent it to a friend who asked if she could forward it to some list she belongs to, without my name on it, and I gladly agreed. I know it sounds corny and idealistic, but FDR's CCC was the same kind of idea; in fact just about everything FDR did sounded impractical and idealistic before he made it happen. Sargeant Shriver presided over dreams that became less crazy when they caught on and became other people's dreams. So maybe there is a possibility that this dream could become other people's dream, or could stimulate other dreams. Maybe it isn't as crazy as it seems. I send it, a little embarrassed by it, and yet...it is what I have to offer, my honest response to the performance staged at Ft. Jackson. I decided to share it with my friends. Make of it what you will. Feel no obligation to respond.

What if the job of the U.S. Army were building housing for homeless people, schools for street children; what if the Navy scoured the oceans for plastic, cleaned streams and rivers, disposed of waste; if Marines rescued refugees displaced by earthquakes, fires, and floods, or lanced the pustules of corruption by organizing communities to support themselves; if the Air Force bombed Afghanistan with rice and flew reconnaissance missions to secure the Polar Bears and track illegal whale killers? What if the purpose of boot camp were to strengthen a cadre of thousands of strong young Americans to feed Ethiopia, stop the poaching in Congo, restore fishing villages wiped out by tsunamis? What if the US Military aimed its massive force at reinforcing bridges all over its own country, at distributing clean needles and condoms, at rehabilitating crack babies in the hospitals of large cities? There is work for all these strong young people to do; this work would keep money in circulation, would not rob the captains of industry of their riches: the military would still need uniforms, tools, catering, helicopters, tanks, and trucks. It would require massive administrative structures (as we have now), officers to make decisions, legislators to appropriate funds. All the flag-waving could continue, but the stars and stripes would acquire a new aura of beneficence. What if the whole military structure were maintained and strengthened but its mission became the relief of suffering?"

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

resolution needed

Resolution for 2008: blog more often; write shorter posts.