{1, 2, 3, …, n}
Sat. Feb 10th 2007.
Slate’s daily newspaper overview titled Du Faust Mich provocatively translated by Babel Fish as “You fist me” . (With all fairness, not knowing German and being weary of dangers of literal interlingual translations, I am a little suspicious of the interesting double-entendre, especially since the article mentions another headline about the nomination of Dr. Drew Gilpin Faust as the first female president of Harvard.) Perhaps Faust in the title is intended as last name only.
However, having proceeded to read about the Bushies machinations to draw a link between Al-Qadea and (spinning the roulette… wait.. wait…) ah yes this time - Iran, “you fist me” comes to mind.
The Washington Post leads with a fascinating/frightening story on some al-Qaeda militants that Iran has under house arrest. They’re kept as bargaining chips, but Bush is about to label it cooperation between al-Qaeda and Iran.
Actual Washington Post article, here. More about the humdrum march towards incitement and escalation of the conflict with Iran is wittily written at Empire Burlesque . To those with short memory spans I’d like to remind that this entire exercise is a repeat pattern of setting the goal first ( ex. invading Iraq and toppling Saddam Hussein ) then proceeding to misrepresent the actual events to support that predetermined goal. Think The Downing Street Memo .
What did the young poles at a Warsaw anti war protest in early 2006 know that the American public is not waking up to? The top most line on the sign translates: “No to war with Iran”.
Sat. Jan. 27th 2007.
Anti War rally in San Francisco, supporting the march on Washington . Too many of whom I know did not attend. Among reasons given was the unwillingness to be identified as supporting various radical agendas of extreme left groups, or doubt that anyone at all listens. Ironically, San Francisco and the surrounding Bay Area have grown complacent about their civic responsibilities, precisely because of the area’s famous history as a bastion of liberalism. Maybe, it is a new generation which never had to struggle for work, safety or pay. A new generation which considers the spoils of the middle class lifestyle its birth right.
I sincerely believe that making a presence at a anti-war rally while no visceral consequences of it are felt, is an abstraction to most. A war goes on half way across the globe for which our administration and our tax money are responsible and yet we continue dining out, dancing, drinking, watching football, movies. What good does a protest do anyway? How effective is it in bringing about change? Perhaps not very. Historically strikes and rallies were the means of the poor, the exploited, the uneducated. Their only power - their physical being, their only advantage - that of numbers of their bodies lined shoulder to shoulder and their will and determination to not submit to exploitation any longer.
Today’s affluent and resourceful Americans have created entire organizations, web sites, short films, street art, spoken word, poetry, donated money, bought and wore tshirts, bumper stickers, to voice their disapproval of the Iraq war and the way the Bush administration misled the country. Yet, unless one condones those actions - standing at a protest is the very least one can, and should feel compelled to do. Anything else, like focusing on the minutia of group affiliation or futility of a protest, is grossly missing the large picture.
Here are a couple of reminders from people wiser and greater than myself, whose words will hopefully weigh enough to push through the inertia of the middle class comfort (via quotes.liberty-tree.ca )
“The ordinary man is passive. Within a narrow circle, home life, and perhaps the trade unions or local politics, he feels himself master of his fate. But otherwise he simply lies down and lets things happen to him.”
“The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs, is to be ruled by evil men.”
“You may not be interested in war, but war is very interested in you.”
“Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
“In Germany, the Nazis first came for the communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn’t speak up because I was a protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak for me.”
Please visit:
afterdowningstreet.org