Friday, October 03, 2003
Conflicted
A message from a reader: "I'm confused. Where do you stand? In one issue you defend the US against accusations of imperialism in another you talk of our oil politics. You defend the attack on Iraq but complain of lack of thinking and exit strategy. Kindly explain." Let us explore, or populate our matrix.
In the immortal words of Robert DeNiro, as he removed the barrel of his gun from Billy Crystal's left nostril, I am deeply conflicted. Note, though, that mine is a common condition these days. Anyone who can retain clear vision and unwavering consistency today is frozen in his tracks. As Heraclitus recognized 2,500 years ago, the law of nature is that everything changes, and so do we, and our opinions.
Having been registered at the polls for three parties at various times, and being an issue-oriented line-crossing voter over the last half-century, I recognize all this in myself and others. More importantly, there is a broad zone between contrary ideas that allows for compromises. Moreover, this homogenized middle-of-the-road “unprincipled” voter, becried equally by the Greens, the religious radicals and deep conservatives, is the salvation of the country, if not the world. Are we unprincipled, in the words of the Old Curmudgeon, a strict constructionist Constitutional lawyer? An anti-death penalty rabbi willing to make the concession in the case of Bundy, Senator Goodman admitting the need for the ultimate penalty for those already under life imprisonment sentences who murder guards and inmates with impunity – are they unprincipled? I think not.
Homeland defense? Even the ACLU lawyers who point out arrests and long imprisonment of suspected terrorists admit need for some defenses that transgress the law, while decrying Ashcroft's Patriot Act extremes. Stereotyping? All police work involves matching current crimes to comparables. Note Justice Jackson's dictum: "Defense of the Bill of Rights is no excuse for national suicide."
Instant democracy for Iraq, and US withdrawal? Yeah, that'll bring on the rule of the Shiite majority, a rule by sharia law, and revolt of the Kurds and Sunnis, a recipe for bloody new wars and unrest throughout the MidEast. Is the peace solution for the MidEast to deport Arafat the terrorist supporter and pacify the Palestinians? Remember the words of Prince Bandar , the Saudi ambassador, who aided Clinton in the 1999 Camp David negotiations, when Barak gave away 92 % of the Green zone and East Jerusalem? Arafat walked around the camp, holding his head and crying: "I cannot, I cannot, they will kill me and my family!" There may still be room for compromise.
Now the big one - can we condone the neocons and the Bush administration attacking Iraq, using spurious WMD and nuclear threat scenarios and references to 9/11 to justify their actions? Not really? But what about the Baathist tortures of their Iraqi opponents, the genocide of their own non-Sunni groups, Saddam's unabashed paymaster role in Palestinian terrorist financing, the continued threat to our ally Israel? What about need to show our muscle to Iran and North Korea, the incipient nuclear weapon powers on the track of blackmailing the world? What about the majority of Iraqis, exemplified by Salaam Pax, the pre-war Baghdad blogger, who wants us out but states than in 10 years Iraq will be a model country, thanks to our incursion?
The defining domestic knife edge issues are ambivalent too. Abortion, women's rights to their own bodies? Feminists do not condone unfettered abortion rights, and some right-to-lifers permit abortions for certain life and death and rape situations, and the rest of us have our own zones of compromise.
Gun control? Under certain conditions guns in the house are acceptable for all parties (hunting); again, the demilitarized zone of compromise is indefinite. Root for the caribou but neglect the spotted owl? Quelle contradiction, but I can defend. The size of the Alaskan oil reserve and the cost of exploration do not make economic sense.
Globalism? The world cannot exist without it, we have become totally interdependent. Yet, should the US firms export manual jobs to Mexico and China and Cambodia, and outsource high technology jobs to India, Russia and Pakistan, losing incomes for both middle class and laboring class Americans? There is a Chicago economist who claims that while we lost 10M jobs, we added 40M in the past 10 years. I don't think so. More power to the NJ senator who passed the law taking jobs from IT contractors who go offshore. Ethnicity vs assimilation? Retain your ethnicity, but ethnic politics and history interpretations are divisive.
Tax cuts for those who invest in business expansion, and can create jobs? Nah, I don't think it computes. So far there are no results for the needy.
If you detect a yearning for compromise. I’ll gladly accept the opprobrium of the ideologues and fanatics, I'll be glad to be the lukewarm, to be spit out by the fussy, and will always see the half-full vessel, even if only the bottom of the cup is wet. As to Heraclitus and the laws of change, I offer the words of Rabbi Daniel Alder, that the love of God, love of your neighbors, decency and humanity are the immutables that must remain constant in this world of changes that we have been condemned to.
In the immortal words of Robert DeNiro, as he removed the barrel of his gun from Billy Crystal's left nostril, I am deeply conflicted. Note, though, that mine is a common condition these days. Anyone who can retain clear vision and unwavering consistency today is frozen in his tracks. As Heraclitus recognized 2,500 years ago, the law of nature is that everything changes, and so do we, and our opinions.
Having been registered at the polls for three parties at various times, and being an issue-oriented line-crossing voter over the last half-century, I recognize all this in myself and others. More importantly, there is a broad zone between contrary ideas that allows for compromises. Moreover, this homogenized middle-of-the-road “unprincipled” voter, becried equally by the Greens, the religious radicals and deep conservatives, is the salvation of the country, if not the world. Are we unprincipled, in the words of the Old Curmudgeon, a strict constructionist Constitutional lawyer? An anti-death penalty rabbi willing to make the concession in the case of Bundy, Senator Goodman admitting the need for the ultimate penalty for those already under life imprisonment sentences who murder guards and inmates with impunity – are they unprincipled? I think not.
Homeland defense? Even the ACLU lawyers who point out arrests and long imprisonment of suspected terrorists admit need for some defenses that transgress the law, while decrying Ashcroft's Patriot Act extremes. Stereotyping? All police work involves matching current crimes to comparables. Note Justice Jackson's dictum: "Defense of the Bill of Rights is no excuse for national suicide."
Instant democracy for Iraq, and US withdrawal? Yeah, that'll bring on the rule of the Shiite majority, a rule by sharia law, and revolt of the Kurds and Sunnis, a recipe for bloody new wars and unrest throughout the MidEast. Is the peace solution for the MidEast to deport Arafat the terrorist supporter and pacify the Palestinians? Remember the words of Prince Bandar , the Saudi ambassador, who aided Clinton in the 1999 Camp David negotiations, when Barak gave away 92 % of the Green zone and East Jerusalem? Arafat walked around the camp, holding his head and crying: "I cannot, I cannot, they will kill me and my family!" There may still be room for compromise.
Now the big one - can we condone the neocons and the Bush administration attacking Iraq, using spurious WMD and nuclear threat scenarios and references to 9/11 to justify their actions? Not really? But what about the Baathist tortures of their Iraqi opponents, the genocide of their own non-Sunni groups, Saddam's unabashed paymaster role in Palestinian terrorist financing, the continued threat to our ally Israel? What about need to show our muscle to Iran and North Korea, the incipient nuclear weapon powers on the track of blackmailing the world? What about the majority of Iraqis, exemplified by Salaam Pax, the pre-war Baghdad blogger, who wants us out but states than in 10 years Iraq will be a model country, thanks to our incursion?
The defining domestic knife edge issues are ambivalent too. Abortion, women's rights to their own bodies? Feminists do not condone unfettered abortion rights, and some right-to-lifers permit abortions for certain life and death and rape situations, and the rest of us have our own zones of compromise.
Gun control? Under certain conditions guns in the house are acceptable for all parties (hunting); again, the demilitarized zone of compromise is indefinite. Root for the caribou but neglect the spotted owl? Quelle contradiction, but I can defend. The size of the Alaskan oil reserve and the cost of exploration do not make economic sense.
Globalism? The world cannot exist without it, we have become totally interdependent. Yet, should the US firms export manual jobs to Mexico and China and Cambodia, and outsource high technology jobs to India, Russia and Pakistan, losing incomes for both middle class and laboring class Americans? There is a Chicago economist who claims that while we lost 10M jobs, we added 40M in the past 10 years. I don't think so. More power to the NJ senator who passed the law taking jobs from IT contractors who go offshore. Ethnicity vs assimilation? Retain your ethnicity, but ethnic politics and history interpretations are divisive.
Tax cuts for those who invest in business expansion, and can create jobs? Nah, I don't think it computes. So far there are no results for the needy.
If you detect a yearning for compromise. I’ll gladly accept the opprobrium of the ideologues and fanatics, I'll be glad to be the lukewarm, to be spit out by the fussy, and will always see the half-full vessel, even if only the bottom of the cup is wet. As to Heraclitus and the laws of change, I offer the words of Rabbi Daniel Alder, that the love of God, love of your neighbors, decency and humanity are the immutables that must remain constant in this world of changes that we have been condemned to.
# posted by Wally Dobelis @ 3:08 PM 
