| Number 125 | September 21, 2001 |
|
This Week:
|
|
Greetings, In the last issue of Nygaard Notes I promised that this issue would contain some comments on health care and on The State of Working Minnesota 2001. Those'll have to wait until next week, as I am just like everyone else and want to devote my space to the recent terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. Usually I try to refrain from commenting so soon on the "big news" of the day, but this is unusual. Don't you think? I have a lot more to say about September 11th and the War on Terror, but I chose to include more nuts-and-bolts tips on taking action this week. More of my thoughts next week. In case anyone is wondering, no I did not get all caught up during my week off last week. I'm simply a little less far behind. That's just the kind of year this seems to be. Please bear with me. For peace and justice, Nygaard |
|
|
My first response to the events of September 11th was fear for the safety of my loved ones who live quite close to the World Trade Center. Once I found out that they were fine, my second response was an even greater fear. I was not afraid for myself or my loved ones. Rather, I was afraid of what might happen next. In my lifetime I have observed numerous occasions where my government has responded to a perceived crisis with unbelievably harsh and extreme violence. The ongoing attack on Iraq is perhaps the best and most recent example, although certainly not the only one. So, I began preparing myself for my government's expected military response, as I have so many times in my 47 years. In reading the papers and talking to people over the past 10 days, however, I started to get a feeling of hope as I noticed something quite unexpected. It is this message of hope that I wish to pass on with this issue of Nygaard Notes. Fifteen Thoughtful Letters The St. Paul daily paper of September 15th was when I first noticed it: All 19 letters to the editor that day dealt with the terror attacks, as one might expect. Of those 19, one expressed pure grief and sadness, and one expressed a desire for the nation's rich people (Bill Gates, athletes, rock stars, etc) to chip in to help pay for the reconstruction. An additional two letters called for violence: one for "dropping our deadly hammer hard" on the perpetrators, and the other calling for "the forces of darkness" to be "wiped off the Earth." But it was the other fifteen letters—from Minneapolis and St. Paul, but also from numerous suburbs in the area—that struck me as I read down the page. While condemnation of the attacks was unanimous, as I think it should be, one after another writer went beyond that condemnation to express thoughts far more complex and thoughtful. Several writers cautioned their fellow Americans against scapegoating Arabs or Muslims. Several urged restraint in our national response, for a variety of reasons. Some warned of the danger to our civil liberties from a possible overreaction on the part of authorities. Some even pointed out that the United States government itself has a history of carrying out terror, and that we may wish to consider our own behavior in the world if our true wish is to "eliminate" terrorism. I hadn't really been looking for such responses from middle America, but there they were. The daily papers gave, and continue to give, the impression that the United States is on an irreversible path to war and that there is unanimous agreement with that approach. Page one banner headlines are screaming "Bush Weighing Military Options," "A Quiet Anger," "Bush Readies for War," and "War Plans Stepped Up." One headline in the Star Tribune (Newspaper of the Twin Cities!) read simply: "Indivisible." But after seeing the Fifteen Thoughtful Letters, I started to watch the papers more closely, looking to see if there was any other evidence to counter the message that the citizens of the United States were unanimous in their support for a military response. From the Schools and the Churches As the days go on, such evidence is growing. In a September 18th article in the Star Trib ("St Paul High School Students Voice Fears, Views") a ninth-grader spoke up at an assembly attended by U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone, saying "I don't think America should bomb anyone until we're absolutely sure they did it. We need to find out why they would bomb us because the whole world looks to us for leadership." At this, according to the report, "Her fellow students erupted in applause." Not bad for a bunch of 13-year-olds. The next day's Star Trib reported a guess from the Reverend Peg Chamberlain, executive director of the Minnesota Council of Churches, that "messages rejecting vengeance were being delivered from pulpits across the state Sunday." Included were the comments of one pastor who delivered such a message to his congregation in a Methodist church in a small northern Wisconsin town called Spooner. He stated,
Upon preaching this sermon, the Reverend received a response he's never received before: The people at the little Methodist church applauded. Some people might respond that such a message of reconciliation is easy for those safely ensconced in rural Wisconsin, 1,000 miles away from the death and destruction. But on the very same day as the good pastor was uttering his words of peace, the New York Times ("All the News That's Fit to Print") published the following letter, which I reprint here word-for-word:
I consider such comments to be evidence neither of a lack of will nor a lack of "patriotism," but rather of a surprising sophistication and moral maturity on the part of the average American. As it goes about manufacturing public consent for war, the leadership of history's mightiest military power is attempting to cynically manipulate the genuine emotions experienced by Americans in the wake of the shameful attacks of September 11th. These letters—and there are many more of them, far more than I have room to quote—along with the comments that I am hearing out on the street, tell me that a surprisingly large number of Americans are still free enough in their hearts and minds to resist this massive movement toward a pointless and tragic war. I think there has long been a much larger number of dissenters to the National Security State than popularly believed. The fact that we are now hearing their voices in the corporate press suggests a number of things. I think there may be an unusual lack of consensus among the elites during this crisis. Perhaps a significant number of them realize that the likely targets of the backlash against U.S. military strikes will be U.S. corporate interests around the world. Or, maybe the increasing inequality in our country has emboldened some previously-quiet dissenters to at last find their voices. It could be that it's simply that this crisis is so different from previous crises that there will be a bit more of an actual discussion allowed as we deal with it. Whatever is behind these voices of peace and compassion, I am happy to hear them. They give me great hope. |
|
To condemn actions that are out of one's control may be satisfying in some abstract way, but the first responsibility of a person of conscience must be to attempt to affect the things over which one has some control. We have no direct control over the actions of terrorists. We do have some potential to influence our own government, and possibly reduce the level of needless death and destruction upon which it seems likely to soon embark. To that end, I encourage you to do one or all of the following, in addition to whatever you are already doing:
|
|
Of the many petitions I have seen urging a turn away from war, here is what I think is the best one. Some 300,000 people have already signed it. Readers may wish to use parts of this well-written piece when you contact your elected officials. If you wish to sign the petition, go to: http://www.9-11peace.org/petition.php3.
|