1. REFLECTIONS ********************************************************************** I just moved into Georgetown where I'll be for the next ten months. I'm a few short blocks from embassy row. A larger than life ststute of Ghandi stands across from the Indian Embassy. This morning I went for a bike ride along the Potomoc and had the privilege of seeing the Lincoln, Washington, Jefferson and FDR Memorials along my route. I had an extraordinary sense of aliveness as I pushed hard against the wind to make it back in time for an appointment. . Like most people I know, although I have a very full plate right now (in part I think as some from of escapism from the current world situation) today is a day for national rememberance and reflection. Though different in kind, for me it's not much different in quality from Yom Kippur, the the Jewish day of atonement, or At-One-Ment. In the Jewish tradition this is the day to fast and reflect down to the bones of your being. It is the day on which a person's fate is sealed for the coming year. I can remember as a child the readings in which it is acknowledged that some shall live, and some shall die; some shall have health and others illness. I blieve that as a nation this kind of reflection is called for. We live in very exciting times. The pace of change and technological development is extraordinary. One consequence is the shrinking planet we live on. Until this point in history (well, not quite this point, maybe 1975) the earth was an inconsumable resource. Historically, much of human activity was devoted to conquering the natural environment, and making humans comfortable and safe from predators. We have reached another juncture. The challenge, probably more for men than woman, is to conquer our inner selves, learn how to get along and co-habit the planet successfully. That is our common, pressing, quickening frontier in the year 2002. If we are not successful we end up just another layer in the archeological record. In my frame of reference learning to get along is the only path. When other's act out in a way inconsistent we need to understand the cause. Is it a genetic abberation, a belief system, or something we as an individual or part of a collective brought on ourself. I believe it's a time for deep national introspection. about our domestic and international situation. Why, if we are so prosperious and technologically superior do others hold us so low. Although there is no excuse or pardon for the murderous acts of a year ago, what engendered such hatred? More important, what must we do to prevent another such episode? For me, the contrast between today's New York Times editorials highlights and frames the inquiry. Do we look back in history for the answers that provided counsel in a by-gone era, or do we look forward and realize that yesterday's answer's won't solve today's problems. It's time to go where no one has been before because that's where we are. The only enemy we have is not out there, it's inside each one of us in the form of the way we talk to ourselves and the kinds of questions we are asking. That is the territory that needs attention and nurturing. Do you have the heart to live in the 21st Century? Do we ? As I was traveling to visit a friend I listened to noted elder, World Citizen, UNICEF Envoy, entertainer and Kennedy Center Honoree Harry Belafante being interviewed by a national radio station. His concerns echo mine, expressed with a power and a pasion of someone intimately involved with the Civil Rights Movement. He was fearful of the calls for nationalism and patriotism - for him a historic harkening to the potential for demagoguery of another era. He was concerned about any erosion of civil liberties and the guise of the justification that calls for them. He was concerned for using forms of terror to fight terrorism, and thus providing a cure that was worse than the disease. He shared that in trying times like this he personally draws on the wisdom of Dr.King's non-violent approach to guide hm to the other side of his strong emotions. If you get a chance find the speech on the internet (I'm not sure where) and listen. So how do you resolve the strong conflicting forces that may be burning inside you? Ask yourself the right questioins, and feed the voices that speak to your heart and soul. This is what I will be doing for the next few days. With reverence, Stewart PS: Please pass this along to those whose hearts will resonate. ********************************************************************** 2. NEW YORK TIMES I highly recommend going to www.NYTimes.com and checking out the 9/11 op eds pieces of The President, Middle East expert Thomas Friedman and Maureen Dowd. For me one significant highlight worth noting was The President looking back for answers. He said: "Throughout history, freedom has been threatened by war and terror; it has been challenged by the clashing wills of powerful states and the designs of tyrants; and it has been tested by widespread poverty and disease. What has changed since Sept. 11 is our nation's appreciation of the urgency of these issues -- and the new opportunities we have for progress. Today, humanity holds in its hands the opportunity to further freedom's triumph over all its age-old foes. The United States welcomes its responsibility to lead in this great mission."
After the deluge of 9/11 we have two choices: We can numb ourselves to the world, and plug our ears, or we can try to repair that jagged hole in the wall of civilization by insisting, more firmly and loudly than ever, on rules and norms -- both for ourselves and for others. God, after the flood, refused to let Noah and his offspring indulge themselves in escapism," said Tzvi, "but he also refused to give them license to live without moral boundaries, just because humankind up to that point had failed." The same applies to us. Yes, we must kill the murderers of 9/11, but without becoming murderers and without simply indulging ourselves. We must defend ourselves -- without throwing out civil liberties at home, without barring every Muslim student from this country, without forgetting what a huge shadow a powerful America casts over the world and how it can leave people feeling powerless, and without telling the world we're going to do whatever we want because there has been a flood and now all bets are off. Because imposing norms and rules on ourselves gives us the credibility to demand them from others. It gives us the credibility to demand the rule of law, religious tolerance, consensual government, self-criticism, pluralism, women's rights and respect for the notion that my grievance, however deep, does not entitle me to do anything to anyone anywhere. It gives us the credibility to say to the Muslim world: Where have you been since 9/11? Where are your voices of reason? You humbly open all your prayers in the name of a God of mercy and compassion. But when members of your faith, acting in the name of Islam, murdered Americans or committed suicide against "infidels," your press extolled them as martyrs and your spiritual leaders were largely silent. Other than a few ritual condemnations, they offered no outcry in their mosques; they drew no new moral red lines in their schools. That's a problem, because if there isn't a struggle within Islam -- over norms and values -- there is going to be a struggle between Islam and us. In short, numbing ourselves to the post-9/11 realities will not work. Military operations, while necessary, are not sufficient. Building higher walls may feel comforting, but in today's interconnected world they're an illusion. Our only hope is that people will be restrained by internal walls -- norms and values. Visibly imposing them on ourselves, and loudly demanding them from others, is the only viable survival strategy for our shrinking planet. Otherwise, start building an ark. ********************************************************************* 3. NOAM CHOMSKY From Dr. Rick Ingrasci: DRAIN THE SWAMP AND THERE WILL BE NO MORE MOSQUITOES September 11 shocked many Americans into an awareness that they had better pay much closer attention to what the US government does in the world and how it is perceived. Many issues have been opened for discussion that were not on the agenda before. That's all to the good. It is also the merest sanity, if we hope to reduce the likelihood of future atrocities. It may be comforting to pretend that our enemies "hate our freedoms," as President Bush stated, but it is hardly wise to ignore the real world, which conveys different lessons. The president is not the first to ask: "Why do they hate us?" In a staff discussion 44 years ago, President Eisenhower described "the campaign of hatred against us [in the Arab world], not by the governments but by the people". His National Security Council outlined the basic reasons: the US supports corrupt and oppressive governments and is "opposing political or economic progress" because of its interest in controlling the oil resources of the region. Post-September 11 surveys in the Arab world reveal that the same reasons hold today, compounded with resentment over specific policies. Strikingly, that is even true of privileged, western-oriented sectors in the region. To cite just one recent example: in the August 1 issue of Far Eastern Today we do ourselves few favours by choosing to believe that "they hate us" and "hate our freedoms". On the contrary, these are attitudes of people who like Americans and admire much about the US, including its freedoms. What they hate is official policies that deny them the freedoms to which they too aspire. For such reasons, the post-September 11 rantings of Osama bin Laden --for example, about US support for corrupt and brutal regimes, or about the US "invasion" of Saudi Arabia -- have a certain resonance, even among those who despise and fear him. From resentment, anger and frustration, terrorist bands hope to draw support and recruits. We should also be aware that much of the world regards Washington as a In the most sober establishment journal, Foreign Affairs, Samuel Huntington wrote in 1999: "While the US regularly denounces various countries as 'rogue states,' in the eyes of many countries it is becoming the rogue superpower ... the single greatest external threat to their societies." Such perceptions are not changed by the fact that, on September 11, for the first time, a western country was subjected on home soil to a horrendous terrorist attack of a kind all too familiar to victims of western power. The attack goes far beyond what's sometimes called the "retail terror" of the IRA, FLN or Red Brigades. The September 11 terrorism elicited harsh condemnation throughout the world and an outpouring of sympathy for the innocent victims. But with The current "campaign of hatred" in the Arab world is, of course, also One way for the US to lessen Israeli-Palestinian tensions would be to stop refusing to join the long-standing international consensus that calls for recognition of the right of all states in the region to live in peace and security, including a Palestinian state in the currently occupied territories (perhaps with minor and mutual border adjustments). In Iraq, a decade of harsh sanctions under US pressure has strengthened Saddam Hussein while leading to the death of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis -- perhaps more people "than have been slain by all so-called weapons of mass destruction throughout history", military analysts John and Karl Mueller wrote in Foreign Affairs in 1999. Washington's present justifications to attack Iraq have far less credibility than when President Bush Sr was welcoming Saddam as an ally and a trading partner after he had committed his worst brutalities -- as in Halabja, where Iraq attacked Kurds with poison gas in 1988. At the time, the murderer Saddam was more dangerous than he is today. As for a US attack against Iraq, no one, including Donald Rumsfeld, can realistically guess the possible costs and consequences. Radical Islamist extremists surely hope that an attack on Iraq will kill many people and destroy much of the country, providing recruits for terrorist actions. They presumably also welcome the "Bush doctrine" that proclaims the right of attack against potential threats, which are virtually limitless. The president has announced: "There's no telling how many wars it will take to secure freedom in the homeland." That's true. Threats are everywhere, even at home. The prescription for endless war poses a far greater danger to Americans than perceived enemies do, for reasons the terrorist organisations understand very well. Twenty years ago, the former head of Israeli military intelligence, At the time, Israel enjoyed the virtual immunity from retaliation within the occupied territories that lasted until very recently. But Harkabi's warning was apt, and the lesson applies more generally. Well before September 11 it was understood that with modern technology, the rich and powerful will lose their near monopoly of the means of violence and can expect to suffer atrocities on home soil. If we insist on creating more swamps, there will be more mosquitoes, with awesome capacity for destruction. If we devote our resources to draining the swamps, addressing the roots of the "campaigns of hatred", we can not only reduce the threats we face but also live up to ideals that we profess and that are not beyond reach if we choose to take them seriously. ******************************************************************* 4. GHANDI From: The Loka Institute, Loka Alert 9:5 (September 10, 2002) Dear Friends and Colleagues, At this time of national reflection, we share these words from Mahatma Gandhi. Gandhi (1869-1948) has been an inspiration to the Loka Institute, as to so many others. He developed the basic techniques of non-violent social action and led some of its most effective applications ever, first in South Africa and then in India. He also was one of the first to promote critical thinking about Western technologies, and the concept of appropriate technology. Gandhi's commitment to non-violent social transformation - his "experiments with truth" as he called it - demonstrated new ways to resolve conflict creatively, while honoring the humanity of all: ********************************************************************* We must either let the Law of Love rule us through and through or not . . . Non-violence is a weapon of the strong. With the weak, it might Whether mankind will consciously follow the law of love I do not The person who discovered for us the law of love was a far greater --Mahatma Gandhi Essential Writings of Mahatma Gandhi,Oxford University Press, 1996 ******************************************************************* 5. DALAI LAMA HIS HOLINESS THE DALAI LAMA ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 The September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were deeply shocking and very sad. I regard such terrible destructive actions as acts of hatred, for violence is the result of destructive emotions. Events of this kind make clear that if we allow our human intelligence to be guided and controlled by negative emotions like hatred, the consequences are disastrous. How to respond to such an attack is a very difficult question to answer. Of course, those who are dealing with the problem may know better, but I feel that careful consideration is necessary and that it is appropriate to respond to an act of violence by employing the principles of non-violence. This is of great importance. The attacks on the United States were shocking, but retaliation that involves the use of further violence may not be the best solution in the long run. We must continue to develop a wider perspective, to think rationally and work to avert future disasters in a non-violent way. These issues concern the whole of humanity, not just one country. We should explore the use of non-violence as a long-term measure to control terrorism of every kind. We need a well-thought-out, coordinated long-term strategy. I believe there will always be conflicts and clash of ideas as long as human beings exist. This is natural. Therefore, we need an active method or approach to overcome such contradictions. In today's reality the only way of resolving differences is through dialogue and compromise, through human understanding and humility. We need to appreciate that genuine peace comes about through mutual understanding, respect and trust. Problems within human society should be solved in a humanitarian way, for which non-violence provides the proper approach. Terrorism cannot be overcome by the use of force because it does not address the complex underlying problems. In fact the use of force may not only fail to solve the problems, it may exacerbate them and frequently leaves destruction and suffering in its wake. Likewise, acts of terrorism, especially involving violence, only make matters worse. We must condemn terrorism not only because it involves violence but also because innocent people fall victims to senseless acts of terrorism such as what the world witnessed on September 11th. Human conflicts do not arise out of the blue. They occur as a result of causes and conditions, many of which are within the protagonists' control. This is where leadership is important. It is the responsibility of leaders to decide when to act and when to practice restraint. In the case of a conflict it is important to take necessary preventative measures before the situation gets out of hand. Once the causes and conditions that lead to violent clashes have fully ripened and erupted, it is very difficult to control them and restore peace. Violence undoubtedly breeds more violence. In today's world expectations of war have changed. It is no longer realistic to expect that our enemy will be completely destroyed, or that victory will be total for us. Or, for that matter, can an enemy be considered absolute. We have seen many times that today's enemies are often tomorrow's allies, a clear indication that things are relative and very inter-related and inter-dependent. Our survival, our success, our progress, are very much related to others' well being. Therefore, we as well as our enemies are still very much interdependent. Whether we regard them as economic, Similarly, as the global economy evolves, ever nation becomes to a greater or lesser extent dependent on every other nation. The modern economy, like the environment, knows no boundaries. Even those countries openly hostile to one another must cooperate in their use of the world's resources. Often, for example, they will be dependent on the same rivers or other natural resources. And the more interdependent our economic relationships, the more interdependent must our political relationships become. What we need today is education among individuals and nations, from small children up to political leaders to inculcate the idea that violence is counterproductive, that it is not a realistic way to solve problems, and that dialogue and understanding are the only realistic ways to resolve our difficulties. The anniversary of the tragic events of September 11, 2001 provides us with a very good opportunity. There is a worldwide will to oppose terrorism. We can use this consensus to implement long-term preventative measures. This will ultimately be much more effective than taking dramatic and violent steps based on anger and other destructive emotions. The temptation to respond with violence is understandable but a more cautious approach will be more fruitful.
|
||
 
To subscribe to this list, please send an e-mail message to:
|
