E-mail 2
From LP
I cannot thank you enough for putting
together such an incredible website. I found it only recently
-- but at such a pivotal time in U.S. politics, that I am overwhelmed
with gratitude to you for assembling such an amazing collection
of resources. I've passed the link onto everyone I care about
-- a million thanks.
***
From TH
In researching for an English paper I
ran across your site. You have managed the most incredible web
site I have ever experienced. I must thank you for the largest
collection
of deeply meaningful quotes and information I have seen on the
web.
***
From BH
While I have not had much time to explore
your site, something I intend to do, I would like to take this
opportunity to express my thanks to you for having the drive to
create "Third World Traveler". This is perhaps
the first time in my life that I have run into such a collective
sense of dissatisfaction with the current system and the way things
are run in the United States. I guess what I'm really trying
to spit out is a genuine thanks for helping me to finally
feel like I am not alone in my quest to know more and my desire
to force change. I can assure you that I will frequent this
site. Please continue your amazing work.
***
From SA
TRIPE. that`s what all your propaganda
is.
___
Steve's reply
tripe
1. The light-colored, rubbery lining of the stomach of cattle
or other ruminants, used as food.
2. Informal. Something of no value; rubbish.
I don't think the information on my website
is rubbish at all, and I don't think it is propaganda. To the
contrary, what we get from our elected leaders, our policy-makers
and our corporate media is propaganda.
propaganda
1. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information
reflecting the views and interests of those people advocating
such a doctrine or cause.
2. Material disseminated by the advocates of a doctrine or cause:
the selected truths, exaggerations, and lies of wartime propaganda.
I think it is vital that those who dissent
from the mainstream view of America have the right to offer a
different perspective about our country and its policies.
Dissent is as American as apple pie. The
Revolutionary War was dissent against Britain; the abolitionist
movement was dissent against slavery; women's sufferage was dissent
against women's disenfranchisement.
So what makes you so sure you are right
and I am wrong
***
From DW
I have been reading some of your email
correspondence and see according to a response by you that you
consider yourself neither communist nor socialist. Considering
the overall focus of your website I am really curious how you
do characterize yourself? You appear to care about social issues
and have a grasp of what the sole purpose of a "corporation"
is and what our government is about. A Populist? That would be
a little light I think.
I'm a few years younger than you and also
retired. I'm taking a couple of courses at our community college
and am struck by the lack of awareness students seem to have compared
to my college days during the 60's. Whether it's because it is
a community college instead of a university, or youth today does
not have the issues of a war to galvanize them, I don't know.
There doesn't seem to be the same passion now as my generation
had for political involvement. Anyway, I enjoyed the visit to
your website. You've worked hard! You quote many of my favorites,
Chomsky, Herman, Parenti, King. There is one I didn't see and
you might want, Will Rogers. Otherwise, keep up the good work.
___
Steve's reply
I am an upper-middle class American progressive
/ liberal capitalist who has come to the conclusion that corporate
capitalism as now practiced must be brought under the control
of democratic institutions that represent not only the will of
the majority of people, but the long-term interests of both the
people and the world in which we live.
As during the period of legal slavery
in this country, the system is rotten to the core, but people
see no other alternative because they are not offered one. The
vast majority of people accept the present state of affairs as
"the end of history" - that this is the way it is, and
it will always be so. Of course this is nonsense.
Slaveholders in the South felt that way,
Roman Emperors felt that way, people who employed children in
sweatshops in New York felt that way. They were all wrong.
When people are not offered commonsense,
intelligent options, they see no alternatives to the unsustainable,
inhumane policies of self-serving, elitist policymakers whose
vision is limited to short-term capital accumulation. Anyone looking
into the future at the long-term result of these policies would
have to conclude that both the policies and the people making
them and carrying them out are just plain insane.
There is a growing world-wide awareness
that our Western capitalist system of converting nature into commodities
and commodities into capital has resulted in the immiseration
of tens-of-millions in the world, and will ultimately result in
the destruction of the earth.
All young people are not the same. Some
have been convinced that the only way to happiness and success
is to embrace the system, think only of themselves and not be
concerned about others or about the world. The young people who
marched in Seattle and Washington DC have a different point of
view. And, they may have started a movement that proves to be
unstoppable. Youth in Europe, Indonesia, China, Burma and Palestine
to name a few places have put their well-being, even their lives
on the line for democracy, freedom, justice and sustainability.
They are challenging their parents, their teachers, and their
peers to act with them, before it is too late.
History can offer us no successful alternatives
to capitalism. That does not mean that one does not exist. But,
until we are given another system, or find one ourselves, we must
work like heck to try to make this system work better.
We must demythologize and rein-in the
war-makers and find and promote the peacemakers, and make them
our heroes. And, we must educate ourselves and others, find allies,
and act to make the worldwide economic, social and ecologic systems
that now exist, more humane, more just and more sustainable. Corporate
capitalism must be forced to become "kinder and gentler"
or it will condemn tens-of-millions to misery, and the earth to
despoilation and destruction.
Quite a job.
PS I don't have any Will Rogers' quotes
because I have not seen them in the articles and books I have
read. If you find any send them along.
***
From LCS
THO I agree with some of your stances
(re Iraq, for instance), you have chosen to include in your main
homepage some preposterous overstatements that subvert your credibility.
I chanced across your site in looking for an update on the activities
of Joe Clark, former principal of Paterson, NJ's Eastside High
(after I watched the movie _Lean on Me_ on television). I agreed
with much of the critique of poor schools and economic segregation
in the United States that appeared on that page. But when you
quote Fidel Castro saying that every three years, more than the
entire death toll of the Second World War is exceeded in deaths
from starvation and preventable disease, you've gone much too
far. Some 50_million people died in World War II. The toll of
starvation according to www.TheHungerSite.com is on the order
of 7,600,000 a year, which would yield a toll of less than 23_million.
That's appalling, and we draw the attention of visitors to The
Hunger Site. But what is "preventable disease"? That
is so vague as to be meaningless. Some health nuts assert that
all heart disease and adult-onset diabetes, among many other maladies,
are preventable by "lifestyle changes". And of course
the deaths from tobacco are preventable if people stop smoking.
By such reasoning, there are more deaths from "preventable
disease" EACH year than from all of World War II. But that's
not what you presumably intended readers to think. No, you imply
that the mean old United States is starving children and withholding
medical treatment from poor countries. But if we intervened in
starving countries to demand that they feed their people, or into
countries with bad health programs, we'd be denounced for imperialism.
Similarly absurd overstatements as Castro's appear many times
in your main page.
In short, you seem to subscribe to the theory that no sparrow
falls to earth but was shot down by the United States. You thus
turn off any sane progressive who wants to move the U.S. to a
more active involvement in world development for social and economic
equality. And that's a pity.
___
Steve's reply
Castro's quote may be an overstatement.
If it is, it is an error of degree, not of fact.
The United States has not "shot every
sparrow that has fallen to earth", but it has used sophisticated
technology to threaten the sparrows, paid mercenaries to kill
them, sold guns to their hunters, offered bounties on them, destroyed
their trees with herbicides, laid landmines to blow them up, starved
them with free-market food policies, structurally adjusted their
meager lives, and generally made their lives miserable. The sparrows
remaining are left huddling on the bare branches of a few remaining
trees, hungry, unable to take care of their families, in fear
of their lives.
I may have trouble coming to terms with
the cruelty and atrocities perpetrated by my government, or the
mountain of lies and hypocrisy that is called" truth"
by the corporate media. But, my greatest difficulty is trying
to comprehend how these acts could be commited in my name by apparently
sane, intelligent, respected American policy-makers; how "pillars
of our community", without decency, morality, or conscience
could cause so much misery to innocent people; how the men and
women we put in office, mothers and fathers and grandparents,
can have no humanity - a stark example of the banality of evil
in our "civilized society".
Yes, I know that "we" have not
done all of the "bad" things in the world, but we have
done more than our share, and we have supported many of those
who have done much of the rest. So far as I can tell, we have
not done many good things for very many people.
If we, the most powerful country in the
world - the greatest empire of all time - can stand by and allow
the misery of humanity to procede without lifting a finger, then
what the heck is the purpose of all of our wealth and of our power?
If we don't try to make the world a more decent place, then what
is it all about?
If you can explain it to me, I would appreciate
it.
*
LCS reply
YOU have been listening to poisonous propaganda,
not from the "corporate media" but from some other source.
The United States is first and foremost an isolationist Nation,
disinclined to bother with the rest of the world unless some area
or other intrudes upon us. It has been a long time since the U.S.
Government acted abroad for corporate interests, but has indeed
restrained corporations from participating in the way things are
done in most of the world as, for example, forbidding them to
bribe local officials. That
>has put many U.S. businesses at a disadvantage, but if any
U.S.-based official orders or permits bribery abroad, he is subject
to arrest and imprisonment at home.
The bulk of this planet is miserable because the bulk of ruling
classes are horrible, beastly swine who steal from the poor to
line their own pockets. The U.S. did not install these rulers
and cannot unseat them without extraordinary effort. Look at how
firmly entrenched Saddan Hussein is in Iraq, and how one corrupt
prime minister after another rules Pakistan, alternating with
military coups. U.S. law is, for the most part, forbidden
>to extend overseas. Rather, we must accept the right of other
countries to run themselves according to their own traditions.
That means, for example, that in India, a rigid caste system places
some people permanently in power and others permanently at the
bottom of society. The U.S. has essentially no say in how India
(mis)governs itself, how Ethiopia keeps starving itself and redirecting
resources to wars away from feeding its people, developing the
economy, instituting effective population control, etc. No, we
act in Ethiopia only when famine strikes, and do nothing to interfere
with self-government and the miserable culture that gives rise
every decade or so to millions of deaths from starvation.
To stop the abuse of people in the Third World, we would have
to cast aside every reservation about "interfering in the
internal affairs of sovereign nations", "imposing our
culture on people who don't want it", etc., and demand universal
compliance with human rights standards, etc. The instant we do
that, in any part of the world, however, we are accused of "imperialism".
It's the old "damned if you do, damned if you don't phenomenon.
So no, it is NOT the U.S. that is responsible for the miserable
deprivation in the Third World nor the mass murders in Algeria
nor ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, nor ANY of the other horrendous
conditions you rightly feel shocked by. You seem to think that
the U.S. is behind everything bad that happens but none of the
good. That is almost EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of the truth.
The reality is that the widespread democratization of the world
is in large measure the result of U.S. pressure, consistent over
decades, for governments to democratize politically and socially.
The U.S. has expended hundreds of billions of dollars in foreign
aid, fought back totalitarian "wars of national liberation"
to empower people to change their government by ballot rather
than bullet, brought in hundreds of thousands of students to train
in our colleges and universities, and worked to undermine things
like the caste system by promoting equal treatment under law and
open societies in which people can rise as high as their talent
takes them. These are not the things causing misery abroad; they
are the things working to alleviate misery worldwide.
At end, tho, we can IMPOSE fairness and GUARANTEE democracy and
economicdevelopment only to areas we control politically as of
right: territory within our borders. In every other transaction,
we have to deal with local power brokers who are entrenched and
often immovable. We have very little power over them unless we
go to war, which we rarely do. Even then, we can't always achieve
the kinds of change we'd like. Witness Kosovo and shattered Yugoslavia.
Warring ethnic communities strain at the leash, eager to slaughter
each other again as soon as -- or IF -- we withdraw.
In short, your grossly exaggerate the power of the United States,
and slanderously impute evil motives to people who are working
as best they can to promote our version of civilized behavior
in a world that doesn't share it. The existence of people in power
like Fidel Castro, Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic, and the
mullahs of Iran show how little power the U.S. has over events
abroad. Tho this dictator or that corrupt "president"
in some rotten little country might like to exculpate himself
by blaming Uncle Sam, it doesn't wash. We didn't install them
and usually cannot unseat them. If you want to help people in
the Third World, you've got to cut the Communist-propaganda crap
and realize that the power of the U.S. to reform societies abroad
is extremely limited. If you want people in the Third World to
enjoy the privileges we in the U.S. enjoy, you will have to bring
them into the Union.
___
Steve's reply
You may disagree with me, but please don't
try to label me. Just because I am critical of US government policies,
does not mean that I am a communist. Labeling someone a communist
has been a weapon to shut people up for decades. It has been used
to destroy the people who voice the opinion that the Darwinian
capitalism practiced in this country during this century has been
and continues to be exploitative, anti-democratic and immoral.
I am not the only person who disagrees
with your view. All of the authors on my website have a different
point of view than yours. Read William Blum's well-researched
book Killing Hope about US interventions in the Third World since
WWII to learn how "isolationist" the US has been. Michael
Parenti, Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Edward Herman and others have
published numerous books and articles about the reality of US
international policies and activities.
Below is an excerpt from the preface of
a new book about US activities. I did not write these words, but
they are closer to my understanding of the American role in the
world than are your comments.
The Triumph of Evil - a book by Austin
Murphy
Preface
"The Triumph of Evil represents a wake-up call to
the world. Barraged by the most effective propaganda machine in
history, I myself long believed at least partially in the make-believe
world reported by the mainstream press and the USA establishment.
However, having experienced the opening of the Berlin Wall first
hand, I began to learn (as explained in the prelude to this book)
that the stories told in the Western media often greatly distort
the true reality of events. Having subsequently further researched
the facts, I now feel an obligation to cite them for those who
also wish to wake up to The Reality of the USA's Cold War Victory.
To begin, using a very objective measure
of analysis, the Introduction to this book documents the fact
that the USA is the most evil nation in history. In particular,
the USA has deliberately killed more unarmed innocent civilians
than any other country in the world (including even more than
Nazi Germany). This conclusion is consistent with the main body
of the book, which clearly shows that the "bad guys"
won the Cold War..."
Although the US was isolationist when
it came to involvement in Europe's wars (WWI and WWII), it has
never been isolationist when it came to interventions in the Third
World. No one has ever intruded on us, we are the ones who have
done the intruding - Philippines; Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos; Cuba,
Haiti, Dominican Republic; El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala,
Panama, Granada, and so on.
Our government leaders have an enormous
influence over world events. Our military machine has enormous
power and reach. Our CIA is everywhere, causing all kinds of "mischief".
Our leaders support American business,
period. The interests of big business are their interests. The
policies of big business are their policies. Our government's
global activities have one overriding purpose - to protect and
expand US corporate and financial interests all over the world,
at almost any cost to the rest of the world. To this end, they
will support any despot or tyrant who sides with US economic policies.
It is pure, no-holds-barred capitalism, without a conscience,
without a soul.
I am afraid your understanding of US corporate
practices in the world are rather naive. US corporations enter
a country, buy-off the undemocratic ruling elites and exploit
the country's resources and labor. Their allegence is to their
stockholders, not to the people of the exploited country. They
support some of the most unsavory tyrants in the world, so that
they can make their enourmous profits. For them, bribary is the
name of the game, whether in Nigeria, Indonesia, Brazil, or Mexico.
The ruling classes in these countries
would not survive if our government did not sell them arms, help
train their armies and police forces, and provide counterinsurgency
expertize to defeat social-reformist groups fighting for the freedom
to use their countries' resources for the good of the majority
of their people.
Saddam Hussein is still in power because
it is in the US interest to keep him in power. If he were to go,
our government feels that Iraq would disintegrate, and Iran would
acquire too much power; our leaders are afraid of Iran. We keep
Saddam, but we keep him weak, and in the process we starve and
immiserate millions of innocent Iraqi men, women and children
- a true genocide ( 1 -1.5 million Iraqi civilians dead because
of the US-imposed sanctions).
We also need Saddam so US taxpayers will
allow their hard-earned money to continue to be funneled into
the enormous US military machine and the insatiable weapons industry.
If we had no "enemies" like Saddam, Americans would
demand a much smaller military and many fewer weapons systems.
We might then expect our leaders to spend some of our money on
"unimportant" things like education, health care, environmental
protection, living wages, Social Security, Medicare, child care,
developing a renewable energy industry. Since we no longer have
real enemies that threaten us, we invent make-believe threats
like Saddam or Quadaffi or Milosevic. Saddam and Milosevic are
nasty people, but, we supported them both, before they got on
the wrong side of the US government.
We have supported brutal dictators for
a long time - Marcos in the Philippines, Suharto in Indonesia,
the Duvaliers in Haiti, Somoza in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile,
Batista in Cuba, Rios Montt and others in Guatemala, Stroessner
in Paraguay, Mengistu in Ethiopia, Mobutu in Zaire, Abacha in
Nigeria, the apartheid government of South Africa. The list goes
on. Every right-wing, anti-democratic junta or tyrant that wanted
our help, got it, as long as they supported US economic interests.
There are pleaty of unsavory characters
in the world. Many are evil enough not to need our help to be
more nasty. But, we not only help them to continue their mean-spirited
ways, we also aid them in their fight against national reformist
movements that are trying to force them out of power and replace
them with more democratic governments. The United States would
never have come into being if the British had had a national security
state and CIA to undermine those in the American colonies who
wanted to revolt against Britain.
Before you call me names, look at the
articles and books on my website from scores of different authors,
and keep an open mind.
The United States is the most powerful
empire in the history of the world. There has never been a nation
with our military and economic strength. Our leaders, using our
national security state apparatus, can do just about anything
they want, anywhere. I just wish they would take some of that
power and do some good. I wish the policies of my government would
reflect not only the narrow, selfish, short-term interests of
the business elite, but the decency of the American people.
You and I are very far apart in our understanding
of the role of the US in the world. We will have to agree to disagree.
In my opinion, it will take an informed
American public to finally say "enough" to the present
American agenda in the world. That is my hope and that is the
purpose of my website.
*
LCS reply
I SAID you listen to Communist propaganda,
which you plainly do. I did say you were a Communist yourself.
Communists have always been few in number -- for keeping out those
they regard as incompetent for their purposes or likely to rethink
and expose the organization to infiltration and destruction --
but they have done enormous harm by manipulating foolish, credulous
people. Yes, that does include you. Anyone who believes that the
United States is the most evil country in history is psychotically
deluded. Please do not waste my time again with your poisonous
nonsense. Cheers.
*****
From KB
I am an engineer in the aerospace/defense
industry, but unlike many of my colleagues, I agree with the general
sort of picture you painted on your website. I do believe working
in the defense industry is an honorable profession; It is also
very interesting and challenging. However, defense budgets for
procurement have been falling off due to our reduced role in the
world. I believe this will be the trend from now on, since the
West is a civilization in relative decline, and our economic base
vis-a-vis the rest of the world will continue to decline.
But what I wanted to share with you are
my observations from working in this industry and having lived
in 12 different locales throughout this country over my lifetime.
The defense industry, like large corporations in general, strived
to be "socially responsible" in the 1970s, with many
of the managers possessing somewhat moderate-to-liberal views.
Top executives, many of whom had humble beginnings seemed to possess
a "live-and-let-live" attitude toward their workforce.
This view was also shared by my engineering professors at the
time (I was in college during the late 70s). This attitude in
both industry and academia expierenced an abrupt turnabout soon
after Reagan got elected, perhaps after his decertification of
the PATCO union in 1981 (I believe it was Reagan and his advisers
who were the architects of the current society).
The management attitude changed to one
of condescending arrogance and mendacity toward the employees.
Policies toward the employees soon took a "get tough"
approach. This intensified in the layoffs of the late 1980s and
early 1990s, where people became viewed as more expendible. Age
discrimination is now the norm and is part of most of the industry
culture. The 1990s also saw the emergence of a new type of manager,
whom would best be described as an "enforcer", but this
type now seems to be in decline since their methods were not as
delicate as the middle and upper management felt comfortable,
perhaps out of fear of lawsuits. However, this arrogant attitude
still persists among upper management in the industry. If people
don't hop, skip, and jump at he slightest comment by a VP, their
careers will suffer. There is no allowance for assertiveness,
honesty, or principle here.
Another component is the growth of authoritarian
attitudes in the workforce. These attitudes were rare in the industry
when I first started, but have become mainstream. These attitudes
consist of opportunism, deference, desire to outrank others around
them, to be part of the elite, to prove loyalty by being hostile
to those in the out group, to be conformist, and to closely adhere
to the party line. They seem to be largely puritan, fundamantalist,
and even royalist in flavor. I believe these attitudes were fostered
by upper management and are enthusiastically practiced by the
conservative Generation-X, which now ranges from approximately
31 to 42 years of age. Most managers in the industry are now in
this age group.
Academia is closely tied to industry in
enginnering. Universities have traditionally catered to sponsors
since Galileo solicited the financial support of Cosimo de Medici.
However, an authoritarian attitude has taken hold and has grown
steadily stronger during the past 20 years. This attitude has
been one of insisting on deference and in being harsh and morally
arrogant with subordinates. This attitude is shared by part of
the management in industry as well.
What seems to be happening now is the
use of information services firms like ChoicePoint, where a prospective
employer can pull up a dossier on you with all sorts of personal
information in it. There is also the appearance of agreements
to submit to company-chosen arbitration fims as opposed to the
courts for addressing disputes. Both offer lots of potential for
abuse, and reflect a lust for greater power over the employee.
My concern is when the next shoe will drop.
____
Steve's reply
Thank you for your thoughtful comments.
I think there is a consensus among progressives
that the Reagan presidency was a revolution which proceded to
rollback most of the social advances achieved over the decades
since the Great Depression. He was extraordinarily effective in
altering, what Michael Lerner in his book "The Poliltics
of Meaning" calls society's dominant discourse. (You should
read the book.)
According to Lerner -- "Society's
dominant discourse shapes not only its politics but the way people
think about their personal lives and choices. Just as John F.
Kennedy helped legitimize a discourse of idealism that gave impetus
to the social movements of the 1960s, so Ronald Reagan managed
to legitimize a discourse of selfishness and insensitivity that
has had profound social consequences ... Shifting society's discourse
- from one of selfishness and cynicism to one of idealism and
caring - is the first and most important political goal ... in
the next several decades."
I think we are moving very quickly down
a slippery slope in which trust in government and business institutions
is being lost, and the mass of people may begin to make demands
on a system that will have lost its ability to respond to human
needs, a system in which human beings are expendible, and increasingly
superfluous to the needs of the corporation.
When the system gives people, who were
raised to believe that they have rights in a democratic society,
no option but to take to the streets, I think we will see more
of Seattle and Washington DC - type demonstrations and increasing
police brutality - a third world model of repression of dissent.
Those who see the ominous direction in
which we are going will need to tell others, and work to try to
prevent the loss of idealism, and of our democracy.
____
Reply from KB
I have pondered many of the things that
you talk about on your website. My approach is different, in that
I'm an empiricist, starting with the little things that impact
my own life and working outward. This has proved very effective
in developing a theory of how society works. It's taken me in
different directions than yourself, although we agree on the broad
conclusions.
I think our current situation is the result
of how children are taught about society in school, especially
at the lower grades. Although they are taught that the US is a
democracy, the real message that gets across is that we are an
authoritarian society for the benefit of the elite. That was my
experience as a young kid back in the early 1960s (I'm 43 years
old). Those that I grew up with now still hold those views and
tend to support authoritarian candidates, usually conservative
Republicans. These are not the kinds of people that will stand
up for their rights, like those who protested the WTO in Seattle.
We had just recently moved to Connecticut
from Tucson, but when we lived there my wife and I had to fight
innumerable small battles with the Tucson Unified School District
(TUSD) over their restrictive system of rules. Their response
was to the effect that they had to make the children obedient
and productive in order to serve their future employers. My response
was that their education was for their benefit and not for that
of any future
employer. Nonetheless, TUSD receives much gift money from corporations
(many of their schools now sport Taco Bell logos).
The principals of their schools usually
came from the professional-managerial class (the new class that
broke off form the middle class), and seemed to be mostly concerned
with finding prospective members for their elite. The remainder
they could care less about. Since Tucson is essentially a new
city, having grown from a small town to a large city in the last
30 years, it has a geography that more closely resembles our society
as it is in this day-and-age, with elites segregated in their
own suburbs and gated communities.
Moreover, German social scientists have
found that it was family life and upbringing in the early grades
that created Nazi Germany. Erich Fromm in "The Anatomy of
Human Destructiveness" described how the social environment
created personalities like Adolph Hitler. More recently, Alice
Miller in "For Your Own Good" was even more on target
by identifying the effect of "poisonous pedagogy" on
attitudes toward society. I think they basically identified what
is going on and both have warnings for us about our own society.
In connection with this is a recent work by Bob Altemeyer (professor
of Psychology at University of Manitoba) in "The Authoritarian
Specter." Here Altemeyer explores the connection between
the authoritarian (or Erich Fromm's sadomasochistic and sadistic)
personality and the conservative movement in the US today.
Another core origin of our current situation
are authoritarian historical attitudes, primarily those found
in the South and around Boston. You may have had the experience
of knowing someone from the South who is socially over-conscious,
wants to put on airs and be above their neighbors, is nosy and
on the lookout for the lowdown on someone, wants everybody to
conform to the social rules, and is slavishly deferential to authority.
I have lived in Baltimore, Jacksonville, St. Louis, Kansas, and
Houston, and have encountered many such people there. The origin
of this is probably the reign of Henvy VIII, who as a bully and
founder of the Church of England basically called the tune and
expected everyone to tow the line. The South was originally settled
by Royalists from England and I suspect that theseare old royalist
attitudes: "A place for everyone and everyone in their place."
Boston and the South reflect their Puritan/Baptist
heritage, which traces its mentality back to the time of Cromwell.
The Baptists were closeto the Puritans in religious belief to
the Puritans and were allied with them under Cromwell during the
English Civil War. They ruled as a theocracy while Cromwell was
alive, but the British rejected their social model. Their rule
was harsh and cruel, outlawing drinking, dancing, and the celebration
of Christmas. Many members of these factions emigrated to New
England either out of disgust for their society or because their
factions ultimately lost out in the struggle for power. The Baptist
faith was essentially found only in New England until it spread
to the South in the 1700s and 1800s. It is this style of harshness
and moral arrogance which has persisted in the Christian Right
and in academia today (the first universities were started by
Puritans and other Calvinists).
I think that such things like the WTO
protests are helpful, but I am left to conclude that the center
of gravity today are our school systems and the need to protect
our kids from being inculcated with authoritarian attitudes.
___
Reply from Steve
KB
I agree with you that family is one of
the keys, and that we are educated not to challenge or dissent,
but to accept the mainstream view of things - to accept authority.
I was raised by a single mother (widow)
who taught me to think for myself, to be independent, not to just
accept what is told to me by those in authority. The key is critical
thinking - thinking "out-of-the-box", thinking for yourself.
If kids are not taught this at home, or if they are not exposed
to this way of thinking sometime, I think it will be difficult
for them to discover this" radical" way of looking at
the world on their own.
In authoritarian countries like Germany
- pre-WWII - where people were conditioned to accept what they
were told by authority figures - family, teachers, leaders - without
question, an abomination like the Third Reich could happen. Could
it happen here? Who knows.
Americans are too comfortable and we are
too lazy. We accept that we are number 1 and that no other country
or system can teach us anything. We are confident in our democracy.
Herein lies the problem. We are so sure we will ever lose our
democracy that we expend little effort to ensure its continued
existence.
If we can't depend on our schools to teach
critical thinking, and if many have been raised to be unaware
of the need for critical thinking, then the only thing left is
for those who recognize its importance to teach others. That is
what I try to do with my website.
***
From AG
Hi, I am a UNESCO-Disney-Millenniun Dreamer
Ambassador. I read an article in your publication by Danielle
Knight entitled "United MacNations?"
I totally understand what your writter
was saying and in some ways I do agree. However, since your writer
did not interview any of the 2,000 Dreamers, I think that she
has made less of case than she could have.
Though I was not at the Seattle WTO conference,
I would have been if I could have been. Having lived most of my
life in Zimbabwe, I have seen first hand what types of things
occur when the WTO/WB/IMF inforces it policy on developing countries.
I am also well aware of the social problems
that beset my country and I have been doing what I have been able
to to try to at least address the issues of racism, poverty and
AIDS. All of which I have felt first. I have made a significant
and positive impact on my communitiy, as have many other Dreamers,
and we should be respected for such, not dehumanized by Ms Knight
for trying to make a difference.
I feel like Ms Knight has demeaned my
efforts and that of all the other Dreamers. This makes me very
sad. If Ms Knight wants to demean big corporations that exploit
others, please she should say all she likes. However, we Dreamers
have given our heart and soul to helping others and being involved
socialclly and politically in our communities. Our efforts should
not be underminded. I would have told this to Ms Knight herself,
except that when I tried her link on your site, it did not work.
I am hoping that you would pass this on to her.
___
Steve's reply
Thank you for your comments. I am sorry
you took offense at Danielle Knight's article about the corporatization
of the U. N.. I'm sure your experience with UNESCO / Disney has
been a good one, but you must understand that there are people
who have a different perspective than you on the impact of transnational
corporations, not only on the U.N., but on the world.
I don't think you were Danielle's primary
audience. The people she was speaking to, like me, are probably
convinced based on our experience and research that corporations
are more of a threat to democracy, freedom and the environment
than they are saviors and mentors.
Corporations have enormous wealth and
power. They also run large and effect public relations compaigns
to clean up their image. While the oil companies pollute and disenfranchise
locals who protest the exploitation of their lands and waters,
these same corporations also run "green" campaigns to
convince Americans that they are environmentalists and friends
of the earth.
But, you certainly should not believe
what either Danielle or I say. As you grow and get more experience,
you will make your own judgements. All I ask is that you keep
your mind open, see not only what corporations say but what they
do, and read opposing opinions about their role in the world.
Then, come to your own conclusions.
Corporations are here to stay. They will
continue to have an enormous impact on the earth and on American
democracy. My job is to make sure that they do what they do well
(make things) while at the same time are held accountable for
the things they should not be doing (like controlling American
democracy and unfairly exploiting the resources and labor of poor
countries).
PS Keep dreaming.
***
From MAC
Steve, I love your homepage and the powerful
message it is delivering.
When I was still growing up, I believed
that what the US was doing is the RIGHT thing but then I found
myself to be deceived. I questioned myself as I watched the series
'Nam: Tour of Duty and wonder why was the US involved in rescuing
Vietnam. But then when the VC overran the whole place, they ran
away like a coyote with a burning tail! Then came Iraq in which
they pounded the place to ruins and the sanctions. I'm one of
the very few people who oppose the sanctions because it is killing
all the kids. It is like going after the children when you can't
face their parents! Then came Kosovo and how terrified the US
lead NATO to commit themselves to a ground combat is completely
appalling. The US boasted that they were far more superior to
China and the Russian army but were dragging their feet when it
came to stepping on the mud. They claim the smart bomb is accurate
yet it killed as much people as Slobodan henchmen did! Clinton
himself was so proud that they would come to the aid of any human
right abuses yet swept under the rug East Timor, Sudan, Albania,
Cambodia (I still don't believe that Pol Pot is dead anyway),
and to name a few. They bombed a Chinese Embassy and downplayed
the issue and did the same to the Seattle demonstration. The US
government and media branded that any protest in another country
is correct yet lambasted the demonstrators in Seattle. When the
FBI Director (I think it was Freeh) downloaded classified materials
from his unsecured pc back at home, he was okay but when Wen Ho
Lee downloaded data for backup, he got a heavy handed treatment.
I saw the CNN Time and was quite surprised to hear Wen Ho's daughter
saying that this is (the arrest) supposed to happen inChina and
not the US.
How about the Gonzalez incident? The agent
may claim that the GUN was not pointed at the kid but a GUN is
still a GUN. Anyone would be agitated or terrified when a group
of people bursts into your house with an automatic rifle, pointed
at you or otherwise. The Waco incident is even more saddening.
The government adopted the Pontius Pilate stance and how about
the innocents (those child and unarmed) who were killed? The US
criticized China for human right but how about that black fellow
(I forgot his name) who was gunned downed 41 times (how many bullets
do you need to kill a man - a shot to the legs could cause excessive
bleeding and slow death)?
How about Indonesia, I read in Newsweek
that US would not rescue East Timor because it would sacrifice
Indonesia that is slowly going into democracy. How so very funny!
I find it funny that how come CNN is the only global news presenter
and there is no other news agency from Russia, China, Asia or
Japan? Frankly, I find that Americans are okay but it is just
that the foreign policy that sucks. It is true why the US keeps
Saddam alive because they need him for the excuse in increasing
the military budget.
I find you a critically intelligent fellow
with an adept sense of humility, tolerance and perception. The
US is screaming about Islamist terrorist (whatever they call it)
but how about the McVeigh and the Alfred Murray devastation? Doesn't
that sounds "Red Alert" or "to your battle stations,
everyone!" Clinton claims that India is one dangerous place
but have he tried to visit the school in which some gun-toting
kids try to emulate the Wild West? I heard about the flight to
Baghdad and I hope that every country would the same as the French
and Russian did in helping the innocent and abused. I wonder why
no US peacekeepers in East Timor and all they do is talk and talk.
I was quite overwhelmed that US did not intervene in Jeffrey Shiling's
kidnapping or send some military forces but trusted blindly that
Estrada would "bomb" the right target. Don't they care
about their own citizens anymore despite of what Shilling did
to get himself into trouble?
I don't know about the rest but the US
intention of being the GLOBOCOP is one very bad title. China is
not that bad and I wish that the Chinese could say something to
defend themselves about all those crazy allegations. I find is
amusing that the US Senate said aye to weapons sale to Taiwan
but panicked when China tried to acquire some sophisticated surveillance
equipment from Israel. They say it will create instability but
isn't selling weapons to Taiwan also does the effect? Is the US
trying to start an arms race among the Asean countries? If they
claim that China violates human rights, why did they try to get
them into WTO? If you call a guy a killer, would you give him
a shotgun's license?
I could go on Steve and I agree in what
you wish to achieve. Change the system for the better of the people.
What the elite are doing is making the whole system stink (it
is like they douse an elephant's corpse with gallons of Chanel
No 5, covers it with oil painted canvass and tells everyone it
smells good). I just wish that everything would change for the
better this millennium but then, it seems to be the same. But,
I heard that anti-globalization drive is gaining strength and
hope that this will bring some change. I hope that the minorities
like us will be stronger and more influential. Thank the internet
for this. Could you imagine what it was 30 years ago without this
distribution of information?
Regards, bravo and kudos to you!
___
Steve's reply
MAC
Thank you for your thoughtful email. What
can I say? I agree with most of your thoughts.
The list of inconsistancies and outright
lies gets longer every day, but forces are at work as they have
been throughout history to oppose the ruling elites as they short-sightedly
careen toward destruction, taking most of us with them. The protests
against the abuses of globalization, the destruction of the environment,
the pollution of our food, the undermining of American democracy,
the corruption of our political system, etc. gives me hope. Although
it will be (and has always been) a long fight against powerful,
selfish foes, eventually, if total destruction does not claim
us all, gains will be made, the architects of insane and unjust
policies will look around for scapegoats, some reforms will be
made and the process will start again.
But, I hope next time those of us on the
left (progressives / liberals) will get our act together and offer
practical, common sense alternatives toward a more just, fair
and sane world.
Email Page
Home Page