Thursday, April 29, 2010

Noam Chomsky 101






According to Chris Hedges at truthdig, Noam Chomsky has “Never seen anything like this.” and warns we have very little time to save our democracy. Comparing the current political climate to Weimer Germany, the Conservative and Liberal parties were hated and diminished leaving a vacuum that the Nazis managed to take over. “The United States are extremely lucky that no charismatic figure has arisen.”


“The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers, immigrants and aliens, the more you control all the people.” Noam Chomsky


If this seems like an extreme statement then take a look around. Arizona’s Immigration law makes it a state crime for illegal immigrants to be in Arizona, requires police to check for evidence of legal status and bars people from hiring or soliciting work on the streets. SB1070 states that if any official or agency has “reasonable suspicion” that someone is unlawfully in the U.S. they can be asked to provide federal verification they are here legally. It also allows that any person may sue any official or agency that does not enforce the law to the full extent. Immigration advocates are scrutinizing the law for weaknesses to challenge it’s constitutionality before the law goes into effect this summer. The wording “reasonably suspicious” is vague and easily manipulated as depicted in this Daily Show Law & Border story. But at the heart of this law is hate and anger. The Arizona law’s sponsor, Russell Pearce, who describes himself as gun loving mormon who only cares about his family, his country and the law, claims as his main passion, illegal immigrants whom he calls “invaders”. Pearce says the new law empowers the police to do their job but to many others it legalizes racial profiling.


“If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.” Noam Chomsky


Then we have Repent Amarillo, a Christian group lead by David Grisham, a security guard at a nuclear-bomb facility. On it’s militaristic website, Repent calls it’s self the Army of God (yep, just like Hezbollah). They target gay pride events, Earth Worship events like earth day, breast cancer events, spring break, Halloween and “any other events that the ministry feels called upon to confront”. The site features a warfare map literally pinpointing businesses and “compromised churches”, a call for Christian soldiers and youtube videos of group members outing targets on the local news. They claim freedom of religion and freedom of speech are justification for their actions, yet they have no problem terrorizing anyone they feel, in their own words “called upon to confront”. Repent Amarillo doesn’t even worry about changing the laws like Arizona. As reported by Salam-News, they’ve violated the privacy of members of a local swingers club, stalking them, taking videos, copying their license plates, digging through their trash and revealing the member’s private activities to neighbors and coworkers. Repent shut down “Bent” a play about the persecution of gays by Nazis by falsely calling the fire marshal regarding the theater permit. They also clashed with the staff at a nature preserve calling them witches.


“I have often thought that if a rational Fascist dictatorship were to exist, then it would choose the American system.” Noam Chomsky


And of course I must mention the Tea Party. Their motto is “A community committed to standing together, shoulder to shoulder, to protect our country and the Constitution upon which we were founded.” But for what? Their members sport t-shirts saying “One Country Under God” but the constitution was founded on freedom of religion. Their slide show has photos of lots and lots of white people, horses, puppies, Sarah Palin firing a machine gun, the words Liberal and Evil intertwined, a little white girl flipping off President Obama and Obama on a poster with Hitler and Stalin all calling for change. Most of the Tea Party members have health insurance, have not lost their jobs and are wealthier and better educated than the general public. Tea Partiers, when interviewed by Michel Martin, said they aren’t racists however they also feel that too much attention is paid to the problems of black people and that the Obama administration is too worried about black people and the poor. They feel the country is headed in the wrong direction and they are angry about it.


“Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while maintaining privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists.” Noam Chomsky


Yet, Chomsky feels liberals, in his words “serve as a smoke screen for the cruelty of unchecked capitalism and imperial war”. He feels the liberal intellectual tradition is “one of servility to power” and that it only sets limits to far right aggression only to increase their own power. Labeling these groups as white, dogmatic Christian bigots simply feeds the liberal illusion of superiority.


“Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like it’s from Neptune.” Noam Chomsky


So what do we do now? Chomsky challenges each of us to think for ourselves, to not fall under the pressure of propaganda, not to allow censorship and to detest the attempt to impose American hegemony. This is not accomplished by marching lock step to Christian authority or Capitalism. Chomsky asserts that “power is illegitimate and the burden of proof is on those in authority to demonstrate why their position is justified.”


Thursday, April 15, 2010

I Choose Choice



Fellow class mate’s blog Pro-life or Pro-Choice? Brooke posses the Pro-Life argument. She feels abortion is wrong and that our government should not allow it to be legal. I doubt anyone would disagree with Brooke that abortion is bad however I feel she is not fully informed regarding the Pro-Choice stance.


As defined on Wikipedia, Pro-Choice is the political and ethical view that a woman should have control over her fertility and the choice to continue or terminate a pregnancy. This encompasses reproductive rights, sexual education, access to safe and legal abortion, contraception and fertility treatments as well as legal protection from forced abortion. Indeed many Pro-Choice advocates do not consider themselves “pro-abortion” and are anti-abortion but feel abortion bans actually endanger women’s health. Prior to Roe v. Wade, many sought back-alley abortions with catastrophic results.


I’m not going to debate when life begins. As a Buddhist, I strive to value all life from the unborn fetus to the death row inmate. I’m also not going to discuss why someone in their “right mind” would have an abortion. Obviously no one chooses to get pregnant only to end with an abortion. The core issue is how to prevent abortions. Even in the Silent Scream, they pose the challenge to find a non-violent answer. Many Pro-Life groups include in their argument against abortion the argument against birth control, sex education and premarital sex and want no government support of any organization that provides these services or information. How is this giving young women tools to make educated controlled decisions regarding their future and the future of their children? Pro-Life groups often provide as their only solution abstinence. Ironically the newest poster child for abstinence is teen mom Bristol Palin shown in this PSA for Candie’s Foundation. Bristol, in my opinion, arrogantly shows how it’s just fine for her to be a teen mom since she comes from a “famous family” but if she didn’t it would be unglamorous.


What are some options supported by Pro-Choice? Pro-Choice groups like NARL and Planned Parenthood provide information about and access to reproductive health care. Yes this means abortion but it also includes birth control, sex education, treatment for stds, spiritual support, prenatal treatment and adoption assistance. Their services are not limited to women but encompass male issues and provide male contraceptives such as condoms and even information regarding vasectomies. I’ve yet to find a Pro-Life group that even considers vasectomies. Let’s face it. That would prevent countless unplanned pregnancies.


With out government support of Roe v Wade, women's rights are greatly restricted. I challenge those who support Pro-Life to recognize that people are sexual and that denying it limits this simple facet of being human. Provide solutions rather than shame. Advocate education rather than ignorance. Acknowledge there are many layers to this issue not just Life or Not.

Sunday, April 4, 2010

Don't Ask, Just Repeal


President Obama stated on October 11, 2009 “We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve this country. I’m working with the Pentagon, its leadership and the members of the House and Senate on ending this policy, legislation that has been introduced in the House to make this happen, I will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’(DADT) That’s my commitment to you.”


Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced new measures on March 25, 2010, that would make it difficult to discharge openly gay men and lesbians. New guidelines for the dismissal of an enlisted person who violates the ban must be approved by an officer that is a one-star general or higher and testimony provided by third parties are given under oath. The goal is to make the law more fair and consistent. “These changes reflect some of the insights we have gained over 17 years of implementing the current law, including a need for consistent oversight and clear standards,” Gates said.


Even Dick Cheney in an interview on This Week said “I’m reluctant to second-guess the military in this regard. When the chiefs come forward and say, ‘We think we can do it,’ then it strikes me that it’s - it’s time to reconsider the policy.”


So I wonder if President Barack Hussein Obama (craaaaazy radical liberal) to Dick Cheney (ehem) are saying repeal this law, what’s the problem? What are the arguments against allowing openly gay men and women serve in the military?


One concern I’ve found has to do with what proponents for DADT call Logistics citing imagined scenarios between bunk mates. Marine Corps Commandant General James Conway stated “I would not ask our Marines to live with someone that’s homosexual if we can possibly avoid it.” This argument does not follow logic. Gay men and women are currently sharing rooms with straight service people. No one gets to request a room change now just because they aren’t getting along with their bunk mate.


Another fear in conservative military groups is that gays will make unwelcome advances towards their peers. That their behavior is unpredictable and promiscuous. However this argument is unfounded as well. Sexual harassment is not allowed regardless of gender.


There is also concern that allowing gays to serve openly will undermine the military, making them weak.The tension and anxiety would be detrimental to teamwork. But this was the same argument against integration. Columnist David Wood writes it’s been 16 years since he has even heard and argument about homosexuals serving. One Marine quoted “If you’re a woman or a gay or a Martian, you gotta meet the standards. Otherwise go do something else.”


A legitimate argument is aggression against homosexuals within the military, whether it is a case of retaliation as in the discharge of Lacye Presley and Holly Thompson profiled on CBS News or simple violence against those even suspected of homosexual conduct. Each of the arguments against repealing DADT stems from fear. Homophobia is a serious issue in the military and should be address through education and discipline.


We can even look to other countries to see that allowing homosexuals in the military is not detrimental. Of the twenty-six nations that are included in the NATO military, more than twenty allow homosexuals to serve. Countries that allow homosexuals to serve in the military include Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Romania, Russia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. All nations I think we would want to count as allies. Countries that disallow homosexuals to serve include Cuba, China, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Serbia and Syria, all countries that have questionable human rights issues.


It is widely accepted that people have few basic needs, food, shelter, safety and affection. I feel it is not only fair but a right that the people that choose to protect our basic needs should be able to pursue them as well. There is no factual reason to maintain Don't Ask, Don't Tell. There are currently about 66,000 gays serving in our armed forces. Allowing them to serve openly is the first step of many to begin treating them with the honor they deserve.