Intelligent Stupidity

Mark Twain said Patriotism is supporting your country all the time and your government when it deserves it. I love America. America is a fantastically wonderful idea. America is a place where that idea is made tangible every time we speak freely and live securely. I love my country. I love America. But when my government tells me that bombing another country is how we make the world safe for democracy, I’ve cannot sit idly by.

No one disputes the fact that there are those who wish to do America harm. But is the best way to prevent America from that harm actually to humiliate an entire region and to pepper a country with bombs-bombs whose blasts destroy indiscriminately? I don’t think so.

Let us say for a moment that you’re a male Iraqi teenager living in Baghdad. You’re life has its ups and downs. Sometimes you get to play a game like soccer only you ride horses and score with a dead goat. You have some laughs-impress the ladies. You don’t really care about global politics. Then, all of a sudden, the place where you live gets bombed-your parents are killed and then written off by the aggressors as “collateral damage”. Your environment shifts pretty quickly. Now there are scores of people shouting from the rooftops that America did this to you-that they did this to you because they hate your god-because they hate everything you stand for.

That boy has no viable independent media or easy access to unbiased books. Who is there to tell him that America was just trying to “make the world safe for democracy”? and if anyone told him that, would it change the fact that America just wrecked his life? Can we really be surprised if that boy makes his new life with a welcoming community of extremists who tell him that the only good American is a dead one? Can we really be surprised if that boy straps dynamite to his chest for his parents-for his country-for all that he has known?

Now, I hope you’ll excuse the fact that this is a decidedly sensational tale that I’ve merely conjured up, but that does not mean that it is not a particularly poignant and realistic story. I tell it in an attempt to illustrate a point: Only a profoundly vehement hate can drive terrorists to commit atrocities. Terrorists aren’t born terrorists. They aren’t born wanting to hurt people. Even those who harbor a general animosity towards the United States won’t be driven to extremism unless somehow triggered. I don’t want it thought for a second that I’m justifying their actions-just trying to understand them-understand that there are reasons why terrorists do what they do.

So, how do we best deal with terrorism? How do we reconcile the fact that terrorists have proven themselves capable of committing massive atrocities with the fact that terrorists are individual people who don’t all act for the same irrational reasons? I’d like to say that I had a solution-that anyone had an acceptable solution-that any solution could ever be acceptable. I’d like to be able to say that we hade some way to eradicate every person who has committed or conspired to commit terrorist acts without harming the innocent. But I can’t say that. No one can say that.

I can say that the best way remains to minimize factors that lead to terrorism-to never validate-to keep a wary eye-to gather intelligence and to act on that intelligence covertly. I can say that launching massive preemptive wars for questionable reasons doesn’t minimize factors that lead to terrorism. I can say that the victims of collateral damage have mothers and fathers; sisters and brothers; sons and daughters; who will likely not excuse the country who did this to them for any reason. I can say that at best any justice we seek to impose will be imperfect and at worst it will only serve to exacerbate the problem.

Dr. King said, “Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness.” It is a cycle that ends only when one party, in what would otherwise be a never ending conflagration, takes the high road and says “Not anymore.” The high road is seldom the easy one, but who, in a conflict between the United States and the forces of terror, will take that higher road? It has got to be us. We must once again stand as an example of civility and understanding to a world that constantly challenges those ideas. We must for goodness’s sake.

Do you have time on November 30th?

The
United Nations Association of the National Capital Area (UNA-NCA)

Young Professionals for International Cooperation (YPIC)

would
like to invite you to our upcoming event entitled,

Income
Inequality and Democracy in Latin America

November 30, 2005

Latin America and the Caribbean is one of the regions in the world with extensive inequalities. According to studies by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), poverty affects 222 million people, of which 96 million are indigents, and there are serious problems with employment and the distribution of wealth. Nonetheless, this region is expected to complete three straight years of economic growth in 2005, which could open up new opportunities or further widen the income disparity gap. There are severe ethnic tensions in many of these countries such as in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela, due to the marginalization of the indigenous populations for hundreds of years. From the recent widespread protests in these countries, it is evident that we are witnessing a unique evolution of democracy in the Americas.

Panelists will address the various social, historical, and economic implications derived from inequalities and how these affect democracies throughout the region. Panelists include: Wanda Engel, Inter-American Development Bank; Doug Hellinger, The Development GAP; and Margaret Sarles, USAID.

The program will take place on November 30, 2005 from
6:30-8:30 pm at the National Council of La Raza (1126 16th St. NW, Washington DC). The closest metros are Farragut North and Farragut West. The panel discussion will be followed by a Q&A session. Following the event, there will be light refreshments, which will provide an opportunity for guests to interact informally with speakers and network among themselves.

Space is limited so please RSVP to [email protected] with "Income Equality and Democracy in Latin America" in the Subject line. For more information please call the UNA office at 202-518-0471.

November 20, 2005

syncretic – adj. Uniting and blending together different systems, as of philosophy, morals, or religion.

Syncretic is the adjective form of syncretism, from Greek synkretismos, “federation of Cretan cities,” from sunkretizein, “to unite against a common enemy, in the manner of the Cretan cities,” from syn-, “with, together” + Kres, Kret-, “Cretan.

bad karma, mannn.

An email received for failing to pick up a black table purchased off of Craigs List:

I think u are a real jerk for not calling me to let me
know earlier. not only did i wait around for you but I
had tons of people interested and turned them down
since you wanted. bad karma.

Dear Resident Drone:

Thank you for informing me that they sell jackets at stores now. In case you didn’t notice (and saying that you, a government drone, could have a discerning eye, is highly unlikely), I was wearing a cashmere sweater.

I know that after years of solitude in your cube have left you bored and bitter. How does it feel to know that I, a 22 year old, make as much as your stiff, antiquated ass? Have fun living the rest of your life living by 2.5 percent pay raises the rest of your life. Lord knows you’ll need the excitement.