My Personal Credo
LaLiberte
It has always amazed me that in this country of freedom to speak one’s mind the first casualty in times of crisis is dissent. Whether the impetus comes from the flag waving citizen who hopes to thus define patriotism or from self imposed quiescence under the call to unity, the opposition to official American policy is shunted.
When the bombs begin to fall on Red Cross food distribution facilities, or U.N. workers become collateral damage, a stirring begins and a voice or two questions if there might not be a better method of conflict resolution. As you should know, aerial bombing of cities first began during the Spanish Civil
War, 1938 or 1939, and was considered at the time to be the most barbaric action ever undertaken by “State” for the solution of political conflict. It seems rather routine nowadays, just another indication of how much like the enemy we really are. Violence begets violence, even when it doesn’t prove effective in solving the big problems we all face.
I consider dissent to be the highest responsibility of citizenship, much more important than mere voting, an opportunity to inform debate, clarify issues and proffer alternative solutions. It is not that dissent is consent denied to those that govern, it is quite the contrary the ordinary citizen’s primary avenue for engaging those that make policy, to reconnect with them and their ideas and ideals. Waving a flag may be the most visible way of saying yes to policy, burning it the most visible way of saying no. Neither of those actions goes very deeply into the gist of political issues and the degree of correctness of policy. Only words can do that, the tool that Horace Greeley considered a fundamental tool of citizenship. We can see from local events that one must summon courage to speak or write an opinion contrary to the majority opinion in a period of crisis. We can see the toll it takes on personal freedom, the cornerstone of American Democracy.
I feel that the conflict we are engaged in has spun wildly out of control. Carpet bombing is indiscriminate. Stop the carnage. Kill not in my name. Place me on the side of law, and justice delivered through Courts, with the accused confronted with evidence, a transparent process of hearing and review.
Take my name out of the column that says I approve of the current policy. Count my vote now, chad or no chad, as being fundamentally opposed to a violent response to this crisis.
The ideals that we consider so fundamental to America are not served by this policy. These actions are seen around the world as Imperial actions, as if The Empire is striking back. We cannot undo evil in this way. We must avoid stimulating additional acts of violence through our military reprisals for violent acts. We are not absolutely certain where the original acts originated, it is fairly obvious that the people of Afghanistan are not mailing us Anthrax.
The United Nations and the World Court are the two bodies that we would turn to if other nations were subjected to crimes such as the ones being committed here today. We have a special responsibility to strengthen those institutions now. That policy would not only serve us now, it would serve the world for the future.
This is not an ism. It is shoring up a World system for delivering Justice across borders. We are not living in the wild west. There is no sports metaphor for winning this one. This is about process, with rules, procedure, and obligation. These are the ideals we ascribe to in America. We must act out those ideals now and be a beacon in this our time of crisis.
In this way we can do the important work of making the World a better World.
Bob Rivard