"My Karma ran over my dogma."
I don't like bumper-sticker philosophy, but that one resonates with me. I've found the world increasingly complicated and my own responses increasingly conflicted over the years. In that mode, I've found the commentaries about the terrorist attacks by Bruce Watson and Michael Greenebaum in the Bulletin thought provoking. The sound of an individual human voice on the radio, expressing personal experience, is healing and invigorating, especially a segment on Ira Glass's "This American Life,"in which survivors of the poison gas attack in the Tokyo subway told us what happened to them. Adin DeLaCour of Northampton, on WFCR, explored her own mixed feelings.
To enhance understanding of the tragedy, the University has scheduled a series of panel discussions by faculty on alternating Thursdays beginning October 11th. Each session is scheduled from 4 pm to 5:30, and the topics are: "The Nature of Terrorism,""Targets of Terrorism,""Liberty vs. Security: Terrorism and Civil Rights,"and "The American Response to Terrorism."The University will broadcast tapes of these sessions on the cable TV that serves UMass on-campus housing; I hope, for the benefit of those of us who can't get to them in person and don't live on campus, that the University will also make the tapes available to other media outlets (I'd prefer WGBY for wider distribution, but at least ACTV).
In the meantime, I have some thoughts of my own.
It seems to me that throughout most of human history since the "rise of civilization"in the form of city states, rulers of countries weren't obliged to consider the thoughts, wishes, feelings or even lives of their subjects. Rarely did anyone even suggest they should. But with the spread of democratic or republican ideas during the 19th and 20th centuries, increasing numbers of people began to think of themselves as citizens of countries in which the leaders ought to listen to the citizens.
But even then, most of those citizens (and their leaders) didn't assume they had to care about the wishes, feelings, lives, etc. the basic humanity - of the people in other countries. Governments had always manipulated weaker countries, waged war for territory or economic advantage as well as for ego and domination, and the basic humanity of the people on the other side was not assumed or given importance.
No more; the rules have changed. During the last half century, people whose ancestors had no expectation of influencing the circumstances of their lives came to believe they should have that power. Because of new technologies they are now able to make themselves heard. Some of these technologies facilitate communication (radio, TV, the Internet, etc.). Others are weapons: cheap, portable, deadly and dramatic. Governments have gotten used to having overwhelming force; now small groups of people who are determined, organized and willing to sacrifice anyone, including sometimes themselves, can wield weapons of incredible power against other people, and governments often can't stop them. These gangs feel perfectly justified in ignoring the claims of other people. Acting anonymously, claiming legitimacy by God's will or historical oppression, they are not restrained by conscience, law or even the best interests and well being of the people they claim to represent.
Most people just want to live their lives in some comfort and security, and to have hopes that things will get better. But our planet is facing immense pressure from increasing human populations and expectation. More people are trying to live better lives even as we reduce fertility by overgrazing and erosion, forests by slashing and cutting, seafood by pollution, over fishing and habitat destruction. Warming temperatures raise the level of the oceans, so there is literally less land, especially for people in some of the world's poorest countries, like Bangladesh. It seems to me to be a situation that is likely to generate more envy, hatred and desperation in coming decades, not less.
So what should we do? I don't know. I'm interested in hearing what others know and think, but not as recitations of formulas or blame. Yes, our country, our government, has often behaved stupidly, and we have often allowed ourselves to be blissfully ignorant of the bad effects of our collective actions. Collectively we use far too much of the world's resources (especially but not only oil) and generate far too much pollution, and over-sized vehicles symbolize those excesses. But no, the people killed and injured in the terrorist attacks did not deserve it, nor did we as a country, even though we have stayed from the straight and narrow as defined by Jerry Falwell and/or the determined internal critics of this country.
We need to bury our dead, heal the survivors, repair what was destroyed, and defend ourselves. We should punish those who did this; I don't believe these specific people honor non-violence as a way of life or social change. But others do, and we need to honor and work with them as well as ourselves. We can start at home. These past few weeks, I have cringed when a huge pickup drives by with an American flag whipping in the wind or a politician I rarely agrees with talks about preserving our "way of life." But I'm also aware that when it comes to actually defending this way of life, it's often the men who at least used to drive the pickups who did the hard work. I want to know what other people value in this country, what they mean by "our way of life."I know for me, as a woman, I wouldn't want to live in most of the world. Where else would I find the rights I take for granted here? Multiply that by factors of 10 or 100 for me as a bisexual. I love my country. I want to help. What other choice do we have?