Rebel! Far too much value is placed on peace, stability, and compliance when the surest path to greatness can only be found through rebellion. For rebellion underlies the most directed forces of nature and the most powerful forces for change. Rebel to capture a fraction of the potency and energy that rebellion can set free!
Rebel! The natural world thrives on rebellion. Electrons must rebel against the nuclear forces that hold them back in order to release themselves and the energies of fission and fusion. Snakes must rebel against the very skin that envelops them in order to shed those constrictive prisons and grow. Rebel to break free like the forces of the cosmos!
Rebel! Remember that nations must experience rebellions before they are transformed to the higher states of freedom, democracy, and union. Of course, there are the obvious revolutions - American, French, Russian. Yet, too, there are the internal rebellions that allow the character of a people to rise to a higher moral state - rebellions ignited by Jesus, by Lincoln, by Ghandi, by Dr. King. Rebel to rise from the prisons of the static status quo to levels never before imagined!
Rebel! Each new concept has been a rebellion against an older one. Heliocentrism was a rebellion against geocentrism. Renaissance humanism was a rebellion against medieval stagnation. Laissez-faire economics was a rebellion against constrictive mercantilism. Rebelling against the accepted norm is necessary to enter new universes of discovery!
You may say: “These are grand examples of rebellions - rebellions that have changed the world or followed nature’s greatest laws. How can I rebel - I, in my limited, humble existence? I will be hated; I will get in trouble; I will be shunned. I will not - fill in the blank - get good grades, get into college, get a recommendation, be popular ...” and on and on and on. “After all,” you may say, “is it not better to take the traditional path, do what is expected, reap the rewards of being a cooperative soul, a team player, the person everyone gets along with?”
The answer is, unequivocally ... no!
Authorities do not like rebels. They try to put them down. They use verbal weapons: “You’re so young and inexperienced ... you don’t understand how the world works ... you’re being unrealistic.” These words are deadly to rebels. They stir up fear; they deflate; they undermine; they make you question your motives and your beliefs; they attack your soul!
Rebel! Follow the rules of engagement and respect, but continue to rebel!
Your ideas are vital, even when they question the status quo and the rules that have existed for ages unchanged. When your beliefs and principles well up inside you until you feel about to burst, break free. Rebel! What others think about you is not as important as what you think of yourself. Rebel! You will change a world ... if only your own.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
"One American To Rule Them All"
It seems like we just can't get rid of George W. Bush. He just keeps hanging around like a bad case of herpes. Some of us know of Bush from the 9-11 attacks, the war in Iraq, and his alleged connections with the 527 group SwiftBoat Veterans for Truth. Some of us know Bush from the No Child Left Behind policy, the controversial Patriot Act, and "tax cuts". Honestly, most of us just know him because he is our current president with speaking difficulties. Now I would be lying if I said I was a fan of George W. Bush. I highly expect to get some hateful comments, but meh, not the first time. In my opinion, Bush seems to increase in power and stupidity. Sometimes I wonder if America would be better off with a monkey in charge. George W. Bush is proof anyone in America can become successful. I'm pretty sure alot of you are wondering why I have such a dislike for Bush. Basically, it comes down to personal opinion and the fact that this is my editorial, so I have some freedom in what I say.
His father’s oil money kept him from service in 'Nam. Daddy also must have paid the school system to keep his son out of Special Ed. George W. Bush attended Yale University where he averaged only a 72 average, which is down from the 73 he had in high school. Bush is the reason I debate moving back to Canada.
Under George W. Bush, military spending has exceeded spending on education to such a degree that American children can no longer spell the word "a" correctly. Bush also screwed up by reacting poorly to Hurricane Katrina. Now let's give him the benefit of the doubt, he was on vacation. I'm still amazed on how he won when he froze like a dead dog in a debate against Kerry. I wonder if Bush is tremendously ignorant of reality. I should at least thank George for lowering our nations IQ level. I believe Bush is solely responsible for reviving the anarchy punk and hippie communities. Well my bash on Bush is done...for now.
His father’s oil money kept him from service in 'Nam. Daddy also must have paid the school system to keep his son out of Special Ed. George W. Bush attended Yale University where he averaged only a 72 average, which is down from the 73 he had in high school. Bush is the reason I debate moving back to Canada.
Under George W. Bush, military spending has exceeded spending on education to such a degree that American children can no longer spell the word "a" correctly. Bush also screwed up by reacting poorly to Hurricane Katrina. Now let's give him the benefit of the doubt, he was on vacation. I'm still amazed on how he won when he froze like a dead dog in a debate against Kerry. I wonder if Bush is tremendously ignorant of reality. I should at least thank George for lowering our nations IQ level. I believe Bush is solely responsible for reviving the anarchy punk and hippie communities. Well my bash on Bush is done...for now.
"Not A Laughing Matter"
Although laughter is the best medicine (which has even been clinically proven), the side effects, especially in terms of political humor, are ignored. Talk shows like “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report,” which seek to impart news in a witty way, will not result in nausea, heart disease, or drowsiness (unless you stay up to watch Conan), but they do create a mockery of current events that only serves to foster political ignorance.
Before the last presidential election, a national survey revealed daunting results about the average American’s lack of political knowledge. Seventy-five percent of citizens (who met the voting requirements) knew almost nothing about the Patriot Act (which had been in existence for over three years at that point) and were unable to name their congressperson. What is even more startling is that a similar percentage of voters could not explain the difference between the three branches of the government. Last August, a follow-up questionnaire had similar disappointing results. For instance, a substantial 46 percent thought Hezbollah was America’s ally.
However, last weekend as I was watching Comedy Central, I began to question my own political knowledge. In the last few weeks, I realized I had spent a great deal of time watching “The Daily Show” (and other satirical news-related comedies), and virtually no time watching the news - without Jon Stewart. I don’t believe I would have done as poorly on the survey, but I am ashamed to admit that I received most of my information from the Comedy Partners LLC.
The problem isn’t that political facts are hard to attain. In fact, the opposite is true. With myriad newspapers and magazines, over 10 C-Span channels, and especially the advent of YouTube (which posts hundreds of clippings daily), it is more improbable not to hear about current events. However, research has confirmed that as accessibility to news has increased, the typical American’s political knowledge has decreased dramatically.
One example of this phenomenon is that indifference to politics has increased. With over 300 million Americans (and each person accounting for only a fraction of a percent of the popular vote even in the most significant election), it can be understood that people would not bother becoming educated about the issues. However, since voting for the president has been a reality since 1789, it’s not likely to be responsible for the widespread political illiteracy.
Instead, what has changed is the number of people who watch political humor. Another off-putting statistic is that 29 percent of Americans under 30 claimed they regularly learned of presidential campaign news on “Saturday Night Live.” In addition, Newsday recently published that among the top 20 people whom readers felt influenced the upcoming campaign most; respondents included Jon Stewart and Sean Hannity.
Since these comedians and their shows are geared toward engaging audiences - unlike straightforward news programs, which are laced with details rather than drollery - they are extremely exaggerated and overwhelmingly vituperative. After all, insults make news interesting! However, as CNN analyst Jeff Greenfield so appropriately stated, “In politics, humor is like nitroglycerin - powerful but dangerous.” Humor can make or break (think Ronald Reagan) a career. But most of all, it is what molds the majority of the public’s opinion, especially with so many Americans acquiring news from comedic programs. Thus, when Jon Stewart pokes fun at Congress or when Stephen Colbert “wags his finger” at President Bush, millions of impressionable viewers begin to disparage the government and regard it as worthless. The transmission of these negative opinions leads to lackadaisical attitudes about politics.
Before the last presidential election, a national survey revealed daunting results about the average American’s lack of political knowledge. Seventy-five percent of citizens (who met the voting requirements) knew almost nothing about the Patriot Act (which had been in existence for over three years at that point) and were unable to name their congressperson. What is even more startling is that a similar percentage of voters could not explain the difference between the three branches of the government. Last August, a follow-up questionnaire had similar disappointing results. For instance, a substantial 46 percent thought Hezbollah was America’s ally.
However, last weekend as I was watching Comedy Central, I began to question my own political knowledge. In the last few weeks, I realized I had spent a great deal of time watching “The Daily Show” (and other satirical news-related comedies), and virtually no time watching the news - without Jon Stewart. I don’t believe I would have done as poorly on the survey, but I am ashamed to admit that I received most of my information from the Comedy Partners LLC.
The problem isn’t that political facts are hard to attain. In fact, the opposite is true. With myriad newspapers and magazines, over 10 C-Span channels, and especially the advent of YouTube (which posts hundreds of clippings daily), it is more improbable not to hear about current events. However, research has confirmed that as accessibility to news has increased, the typical American’s political knowledge has decreased dramatically.
One example of this phenomenon is that indifference to politics has increased. With over 300 million Americans (and each person accounting for only a fraction of a percent of the popular vote even in the most significant election), it can be understood that people would not bother becoming educated about the issues. However, since voting for the president has been a reality since 1789, it’s not likely to be responsible for the widespread political illiteracy.
Instead, what has changed is the number of people who watch political humor. Another off-putting statistic is that 29 percent of Americans under 30 claimed they regularly learned of presidential campaign news on “Saturday Night Live.” In addition, Newsday recently published that among the top 20 people whom readers felt influenced the upcoming campaign most; respondents included Jon Stewart and Sean Hannity.
Since these comedians and their shows are geared toward engaging audiences - unlike straightforward news programs, which are laced with details rather than drollery - they are extremely exaggerated and overwhelmingly vituperative. After all, insults make news interesting! However, as CNN analyst Jeff Greenfield so appropriately stated, “In politics, humor is like nitroglycerin - powerful but dangerous.” Humor can make or break (think Ronald Reagan) a career. But most of all, it is what molds the majority of the public’s opinion, especially with so many Americans acquiring news from comedic programs. Thus, when Jon Stewart pokes fun at Congress or when Stephen Colbert “wags his finger” at President Bush, millions of impressionable viewers begin to disparage the government and regard it as worthless. The transmission of these negative opinions leads to lackadaisical attitudes about politics.
"New Age Of Politics"
Generally, politicians are seen as suit-and-tie, press-conference-on-CNN type people. However, now politicians are trying to be more current with our American culture by using none other than … the Internet. Is this new strategy good, or is it completely ineffective? The reality is that advertising and media sources are beginning to shift from print and television to the Internet. Therefore, a politician’s use of the World Wide Web is not only the most effective way to reach voters; it is the method of the future.
With the 2008 presidential election, alternative media sources are becoming more popular in politics. Candidates were using blogs, YouTube, and online chats to try to persuade voters. There are, of course, the official campaign websites, which usually provide information about the candidates’ views, right at the voter’s fingertips. Additionally, candidates including Barack Obama were creating informational pages on social networking websites like MySpace. Obama’s page includes his views on campaign issues, videos of his speeches, and a listing of his 314,000 “friends.”
There are many other ways that candidates are trying to connect to voters. Last summer, CNN and YouTube hosted an unprecedented Democratic debate. The candidates answered questions posted by people from all over the world through YouTube. In November, the Republican candidates had a similar debate.
Using the Internet, as these candidates have been, creates a more approachable and personal environment. Since the majority of Americans have access to the Internet, why pay the extra $1.25 to buy the print version of The New York Times? Learning from these political candidate-endorsed websites is cheaper – for you and the politicians. This is also creating a personal environment, because the politicians can connect to a greater number of voters than they might at a rally in Iowa. Voters who ask questions and then watch the response via video message can gauge the candidate’s concern.
Although politicians are trying to use the Internet as a way to connect to more citizens, some skepticism exists about how influential and persuasive these websites actually are. According to the Current Population Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2004, 72 percent of people 55 and older voted, while a mere 47 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted. Generally, the typical Internet user is not between 65 and 74 years old since studies show that only 41 percent of this age group uses the Internet. Therefore, many think that politicians cannot target their most reliable voters via the Internet. Although this may seem true, 82 percent of young voters use the Internet, so politicians are essentially targeting this age group through a very familiar media source. Because of this, politicians’ new market strategy should increase voter turnout.
The advantages of adapting to the ever-changing American culture outweigh the disadvantages. The use of the Internet by politicians is not just about being hip or up-to-date. It is about supporting advances in society and being able to take advantage of the choices technology offers us. Due to a decreasing level of attention to TV commercials, politicians need to adapt and create a healthy transition to the Internet, which will inevitably influence our society.
With the 2008 presidential election, alternative media sources are becoming more popular in politics. Candidates were using blogs, YouTube, and online chats to try to persuade voters. There are, of course, the official campaign websites, which usually provide information about the candidates’ views, right at the voter’s fingertips. Additionally, candidates including Barack Obama were creating informational pages on social networking websites like MySpace. Obama’s page includes his views on campaign issues, videos of his speeches, and a listing of his 314,000 “friends.”
There are many other ways that candidates are trying to connect to voters. Last summer, CNN and YouTube hosted an unprecedented Democratic debate. The candidates answered questions posted by people from all over the world through YouTube. In November, the Republican candidates had a similar debate.
Using the Internet, as these candidates have been, creates a more approachable and personal environment. Since the majority of Americans have access to the Internet, why pay the extra $1.25 to buy the print version of The New York Times? Learning from these political candidate-endorsed websites is cheaper – for you and the politicians. This is also creating a personal environment, because the politicians can connect to a greater number of voters than they might at a rally in Iowa. Voters who ask questions and then watch the response via video message can gauge the candidate’s concern.
Although politicians are trying to use the Internet as a way to connect to more citizens, some skepticism exists about how influential and persuasive these websites actually are. According to the Current Population Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2004, 72 percent of people 55 and older voted, while a mere 47 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds voted. Generally, the typical Internet user is not between 65 and 74 years old since studies show that only 41 percent of this age group uses the Internet. Therefore, many think that politicians cannot target their most reliable voters via the Internet. Although this may seem true, 82 percent of young voters use the Internet, so politicians are essentially targeting this age group through a very familiar media source. Because of this, politicians’ new market strategy should increase voter turnout.
The advantages of adapting to the ever-changing American culture outweigh the disadvantages. The use of the Internet by politicians is not just about being hip or up-to-date. It is about supporting advances in society and being able to take advantage of the choices technology offers us. Due to a decreasing level of attention to TV commercials, politicians need to adapt and create a healthy transition to the Internet, which will inevitably influence our society.
"Keep It Real"
Music is a powerful thing. It evokes feelings and has the power to bring people together. Music is also a way for people to express themselves and share ideas, whether through poetic lyrics or throbbing anthems. But today, artists are not known for their music, but for how extravagant their outfits are and how many times their wealthy relatives can get them out of jail. And thus music is lost.
Pop and rap music has evolved into a shallow, image-obsessed industry that conforms to what the public wants to hear and see, eliminating the focus on the actual music. Mainstream music is no longer composed of emotion, but instead themes of money, sex, and fame. Pop and rap performers are notorious for their run-ins with police, their latest diet, or their most recent affair. Photos and rumors fly while the music is ignored.
Not all musical groups or soloists begin like this. Many of these artists are original and talented, but they may feel the stress of being underappreciated and turn to the money side for support. Often their songs are written by experts who know what is appealing to a certain age group, and the musicians’ faces are plastered on as many magazine covers as possible. Soon their supposedly new and improved songs can be heard blasting out of car windows. But these songs are empty shells, devoid of creativity and the original thirst of the artist to make an impact or convey a message.
Countless pop and rap songs today fit into a very slim mold – not just the music, but those who perform it. Some female musicians struggle with eating disorders because of the increased attention of the media and the public on their looks instead of their musical talent. Most popular songs follow the same pattern – singable, with a catchy beat and a flashy band.
These songs teach listeners that what’s on the outside is important, and money matters. These messages are also shown through music videos containing sexual themes, as well as people wearing “grills” and other decorations meant to show their wealth. Many rap videos promote the “gangsta” image, encouraging people to act tough, embrace violence, and swear. These videos can propagate false views of African-Americans.
MTV is not helping. It has become increasingly racy and plays only what the public wants to hear. And unfortunately, the majority seems interested in sickly sweet, generic pop or stereotypical bleeped-out rap. Kids and teens everywhere are swimming in these songs, which are often degrading to women and minorities, and inappropriate.
None of this is to say that all pop and rap music today fits this mold. Artists like Sublime and Jurassic 5 produce rap without the silly extras – just great rhythm and pulsing lyrics. A lot of high-quality pop music exists as well. Although some talented musicians thrive, the entire music industry has devolved into something that’s almost unrecognizable.
Music is no longer just for pleasure, but instead is a huge part of the economy. It is valued for its power to influence people everywhere. Not only does the music business make money from songs, but lots of useless products carry rap and pop stars’ names and faces.
Why do most teenagers and young adults exclusively listen to pop and rap music when so many other genres exist? Maybe it’s because everywhere we look, we are bombarded with the same music: on the radio, on TV, on the computer. At school, pop and rap are discussed religiously. Perhaps they have never listened to anything else. Or maybe peer pressure is part of it. Another reason some people listen to popular music is because it is easy listening, with no abnormalities, since anything unique is considered weird.
There is no solution to the “pop problem.” It’s called popular for a reason – many people enjoy it. People who like pop and rap music are the same as people who like rock and punk music – they are just fond of a particular genre of music. It’s not a heinous crime, and there’s no easy way to sway their views.
Still, many artists are ruined because of the increased focus on money and image. My suggestion is not to buy into music like this when you can explore something new. Expand your horizons. Dig up your parents’ old records and CDs. You never know what you might find.
Pop and rap music has evolved into a shallow, image-obsessed industry that conforms to what the public wants to hear and see, eliminating the focus on the actual music. Mainstream music is no longer composed of emotion, but instead themes of money, sex, and fame. Pop and rap performers are notorious for their run-ins with police, their latest diet, or their most recent affair. Photos and rumors fly while the music is ignored.
Not all musical groups or soloists begin like this. Many of these artists are original and talented, but they may feel the stress of being underappreciated and turn to the money side for support. Often their songs are written by experts who know what is appealing to a certain age group, and the musicians’ faces are plastered on as many magazine covers as possible. Soon their supposedly new and improved songs can be heard blasting out of car windows. But these songs are empty shells, devoid of creativity and the original thirst of the artist to make an impact or convey a message.
Countless pop and rap songs today fit into a very slim mold – not just the music, but those who perform it. Some female musicians struggle with eating disorders because of the increased attention of the media and the public on their looks instead of their musical talent. Most popular songs follow the same pattern – singable, with a catchy beat and a flashy band.
These songs teach listeners that what’s on the outside is important, and money matters. These messages are also shown through music videos containing sexual themes, as well as people wearing “grills” and other decorations meant to show their wealth. Many rap videos promote the “gangsta” image, encouraging people to act tough, embrace violence, and swear. These videos can propagate false views of African-Americans.
MTV is not helping. It has become increasingly racy and plays only what the public wants to hear. And unfortunately, the majority seems interested in sickly sweet, generic pop or stereotypical bleeped-out rap. Kids and teens everywhere are swimming in these songs, which are often degrading to women and minorities, and inappropriate.
None of this is to say that all pop and rap music today fits this mold. Artists like Sublime and Jurassic 5 produce rap without the silly extras – just great rhythm and pulsing lyrics. A lot of high-quality pop music exists as well. Although some talented musicians thrive, the entire music industry has devolved into something that’s almost unrecognizable.
Music is no longer just for pleasure, but instead is a huge part of the economy. It is valued for its power to influence people everywhere. Not only does the music business make money from songs, but lots of useless products carry rap and pop stars’ names and faces.
Why do most teenagers and young adults exclusively listen to pop and rap music when so many other genres exist? Maybe it’s because everywhere we look, we are bombarded with the same music: on the radio, on TV, on the computer. At school, pop and rap are discussed religiously. Perhaps they have never listened to anything else. Or maybe peer pressure is part of it. Another reason some people listen to popular music is because it is easy listening, with no abnormalities, since anything unique is considered weird.
There is no solution to the “pop problem.” It’s called popular for a reason – many people enjoy it. People who like pop and rap music are the same as people who like rock and punk music – they are just fond of a particular genre of music. It’s not a heinous crime, and there’s no easy way to sway their views.
Still, many artists are ruined because of the increased focus on money and image. My suggestion is not to buy into music like this when you can explore something new. Expand your horizons. Dig up your parents’ old records and CDs. You never know what you might find.
"It Is A Dismal Time"
If you are someone who is at all concerned with peace for our country, the destruction of the environment or the civil liberties we are supposedly guaranteed by the constitution, your sensibilities are being attacked from all sides. In the flag-waving, red, white, and blue tidal wave of patriotic fervor that has grown in the wake of 9/11, anyone who dares question the motives of the right-wing conservative agenda will be ridiculed with the same vicious persecution this country suffered through during the McCarthy era. If you tune in to any of the top-rated Fox TV news shows such as Hannity and Colmes or The O'Reilly Factor, you will undoubtedly witness an array of venomous tirades of conservative propaganda that will make you wonder if you aren't actually watching a rerun of a bad Saturday Night Live episode. Any person appearing on one of these shows urging restraint against American aggressions overseas or warning of the backlash that will undoubtedly occur will be labeled traitors and communists, if they are allowed to speak at all against the bullying arrogance of the nouveau patriotic for Nielsen ratings.
The president and his staff have now been given carte blanche to carry out dangerous, short-sighted policies that threaten catastrophe for peace and political stability in the world. Don't believe me? North Korea issued a statement that they were actively restarting their nuclear program. What the networks didn't tell you was that in their official statement the North Korean government blamed the U.S designation of the DPRK (North Korea) as the "axis of evil" as one of the main causes for their actions. This is a concrete example where the president's own lack of diplomatic skill in foreign affairs has directly resulted in the escalation of the nuclear arms race. Former President Jimmy Carter said that the damage from that statement alone could take decades to reverse.
Throughout history whenever there has been a dominant world power there has always been shadowy forces conspiring to topple it and they have invariably succeeded. We are the latest on top of the totem pole and there are more and more people around the world aiming to knock us off. The current political regime in this country chooses to confront conflicts with aggression rather than diplomacy, and attack the results instead of the causes. When you then factor in the increasingly negative economic news, and the reports from leading scientists that the damage we are doing to the environment is ten times worse than even they imagined, the outlook for our country with warmongering oil executives in office is, without exaggeration, extremely dim.
The important thing to remember is that white house officials and policy makers are concerned with two things that are crucial to their survival and the implementation of their policies; the American voters and what they call, "the street", or in other words, the potential adverse response from pissed off people who might suddenly decide they'd heard enough and either (a) vote them out of office, or (b) coalesce into a group with numbers large enough to stage effective protests, boycotts, and demonstrations. They can do whatever they want if we remain mildly content and apathetic.
In the 60's this idea was brought to the forefront when our country grew tired of seeing their sons being brought home in body bags on T.V., and took to the streets and capitals and voiced their anger and resentment at white house policy that was playing political power games with human lives. Decades later, the principal architects of the Vietnam war readily admit that they made grave mistakes in their decisions to keep the war going. The negative response of the American people to the conflict definitely figured into their decision to finally put an end to it. Unfortunately, with the "me generation" of the 70's, the hedonistic 80's and the apathetic 90's, we have been lulled into a false sense of security and powerlessness that now threatens our very survival. In other words, there has never been a better or more crucial time for you to put some action behind your words and use your voting power.
In the last election I heard a lot of people saying they felt their vote didn't count. When you see how unbelievably close the election was, that position is absolutely ludicrous. It's my opinion that if all the whining, apathetic people who were too lazy to go to the polls would have voted, we would not be in the position we find ourselves in today. Not voting is an unforgivable insult to the millions of people who have no voice at all in the fate of their country.
Conservative right wing republicans vote religiously and now enjoy an undue influence over the laws, policy, and politics in our country. Clarence Darrow said, "Sympathy is the child of Imagination". In other words, people who are artistic and imaginative, like most people in the punk rock scene I hope, usually are more concerned with peace and progress for our planet. When our people realize the power they have to really effect change in this country, and therefore, the rest of the world, and exercise their American right to vote and dissent, the warmongers will be out of office sooner rather than later.
The president and his staff have now been given carte blanche to carry out dangerous, short-sighted policies that threaten catastrophe for peace and political stability in the world. Don't believe me? North Korea issued a statement that they were actively restarting their nuclear program. What the networks didn't tell you was that in their official statement the North Korean government blamed the U.S designation of the DPRK (North Korea) as the "axis of evil" as one of the main causes for their actions. This is a concrete example where the president's own lack of diplomatic skill in foreign affairs has directly resulted in the escalation of the nuclear arms race. Former President Jimmy Carter said that the damage from that statement alone could take decades to reverse.
Throughout history whenever there has been a dominant world power there has always been shadowy forces conspiring to topple it and they have invariably succeeded. We are the latest on top of the totem pole and there are more and more people around the world aiming to knock us off. The current political regime in this country chooses to confront conflicts with aggression rather than diplomacy, and attack the results instead of the causes. When you then factor in the increasingly negative economic news, and the reports from leading scientists that the damage we are doing to the environment is ten times worse than even they imagined, the outlook for our country with warmongering oil executives in office is, without exaggeration, extremely dim.
The important thing to remember is that white house officials and policy makers are concerned with two things that are crucial to their survival and the implementation of their policies; the American voters and what they call, "the street", or in other words, the potential adverse response from pissed off people who might suddenly decide they'd heard enough and either (a) vote them out of office, or (b) coalesce into a group with numbers large enough to stage effective protests, boycotts, and demonstrations. They can do whatever they want if we remain mildly content and apathetic.
In the 60's this idea was brought to the forefront when our country grew tired of seeing their sons being brought home in body bags on T.V., and took to the streets and capitals and voiced their anger and resentment at white house policy that was playing political power games with human lives. Decades later, the principal architects of the Vietnam war readily admit that they made grave mistakes in their decisions to keep the war going. The negative response of the American people to the conflict definitely figured into their decision to finally put an end to it. Unfortunately, with the "me generation" of the 70's, the hedonistic 80's and the apathetic 90's, we have been lulled into a false sense of security and powerlessness that now threatens our very survival. In other words, there has never been a better or more crucial time for you to put some action behind your words and use your voting power.
In the last election I heard a lot of people saying they felt their vote didn't count. When you see how unbelievably close the election was, that position is absolutely ludicrous. It's my opinion that if all the whining, apathetic people who were too lazy to go to the polls would have voted, we would not be in the position we find ourselves in today. Not voting is an unforgivable insult to the millions of people who have no voice at all in the fate of their country.
Conservative right wing republicans vote religiously and now enjoy an undue influence over the laws, policy, and politics in our country. Clarence Darrow said, "Sympathy is the child of Imagination". In other words, people who are artistic and imaginative, like most people in the punk rock scene I hope, usually are more concerned with peace and progress for our planet. When our people realize the power they have to really effect change in this country, and therefore, the rest of the world, and exercise their American right to vote and dissent, the warmongers will be out of office sooner rather than later.
"George W. Bush Is A Gangser"
When I first sat down and started thinking about what I was going to write I remembered something that I heard while watching a speech on T.V. by Aaron McGruder, the creator of the comic strip “The Boondocks.” Mcgruder’s speech was called “Free Speech in a Time of War” and he made the observation that whenever George W. Bush or any of his cronies are asked legitimate questions that they don’t want to answer they pull the gangster routine and tell us all: “mind your business.” Did candidate Bush use cocaine and then happily send thousands who did likewise to prison while he was the Tough on Drugs Governor of Texas? His answer: “mind your business.” What got discussed during Dick Cheney’s Energy Commission meetings, and can Congress see the notes? Cheney’s answer: “mind your business.” Is the United States applying the Geneva Convention’s rules regarding the treatment of POW’s to alleged Al Qaeda fighters held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba? Rumsfeld’s answer: “mind your business.”
When a street gangster tells you to mind your business, I imagine that you duck your head down instantaneously, hoping all the while that you don’t get shot for your impertinence. I’ve never actually had a street gangster tell me to mind my business, but I have a pretty good imagination and I’ve seen enough Mafia movies to know how the system works. McGruder then went on to make the best point I’ve heard in quite a while. “The Bush Regime has already pulled off the ultimate scam, they stole the election. Not only did they steal the election, the actual winner (and can you find a sorrier excuse for a Democrat than Al Gore?) rolled over and played dead, and so did the Democratic Party. So now, the Bush Regime is emboldened. They know that there is no one, at least in the mainstream, who dares oppose them. They are on the ultimate power trip. They know all they have to do is tell us all to mind our business, and most people will do just that.”
We have, quite simply, a gangster in the White House. We have gangsters running the entire Executive Branch of our government, except that it isn’t a government that is any way, shape or form responsive to We the People. As the Bush Regime has so amply demonstrated in seven years, they don’t give a damn about us. They don’t care what we think, what we want, who we are or what we care about. If they did, they wouldn’t be where they are right now. They wouldn’t be ready to send even more troops into Iraq and kill even more innocent people than the U.N. Sanctions and bombings already have. They wouldn’t have exploited the genuine tragedy of the World Trade Center disaster to undermine our Civil Liberties and warmonger in the most detestable fashion. They wouldn’t be chomping at the bit to take military action that will further destabilize the Middle East, a region that is notoriously unstable even in the best of times. Israel, Pakistan and India, all allies of the United States in the Middle East, have nukes. It’s not such a stretch to foresee a scenario where the region gets even more destabilized because of the Bush Regime’s military action. What if someone in one of the countries is crazy enough to actually use those nukes? Where the hell are we going to be then?
This is why it is more important than ever that anyone who has even the slightest inkling that there is something rotten going on must take a stand. We must make our voices heard. We must organize. We must demonstrate. We must support one another. We must focus on the similarities we share with other activists to achieve the larger goal of making this world a peaceful place, rather than getting bogged down and defeated by infighting over whose agenda is more important or who is more punk. When you choose the lesser of two evils, you are still choosing evil. Don’t get me wrong – these people must be voted out of office. But I want to encourage you to look beyond the two dominant parties when you vote, and think about who will really represent and fight for what you believe in.
American involvement in the Vietnam War ended, not because President Nixon had a change of heart, or because the military decided to throw in the towel, but because enough of the American people, despite overwhelming amounts of propaganda to the contrary, made it politically unfeasible for the government to continue fighting it. It didn’t happen overnight, and it didn’t happen without sacrifice, but ultimately the American people prevailed and the war ended. That war ended because enough of the American people had the courage of their convictions to be activists, to demonstrate, to do something instead of waiting for someone else to do it. Now we need to do the same. It won’t be any easier, or any less daunting than their task was. In some ways it might even be more difficult. But it won’t get done unless we get off our couches and make it happen. So what are we waiting for? Let’s get up and do something.
When a street gangster tells you to mind your business, I imagine that you duck your head down instantaneously, hoping all the while that you don’t get shot for your impertinence. I’ve never actually had a street gangster tell me to mind my business, but I have a pretty good imagination and I’ve seen enough Mafia movies to know how the system works. McGruder then went on to make the best point I’ve heard in quite a while. “The Bush Regime has already pulled off the ultimate scam, they stole the election. Not only did they steal the election, the actual winner (and can you find a sorrier excuse for a Democrat than Al Gore?) rolled over and played dead, and so did the Democratic Party. So now, the Bush Regime is emboldened. They know that there is no one, at least in the mainstream, who dares oppose them. They are on the ultimate power trip. They know all they have to do is tell us all to mind our business, and most people will do just that.”
We have, quite simply, a gangster in the White House. We have gangsters running the entire Executive Branch of our government, except that it isn’t a government that is any way, shape or form responsive to We the People. As the Bush Regime has so amply demonstrated in seven years, they don’t give a damn about us. They don’t care what we think, what we want, who we are or what we care about. If they did, they wouldn’t be where they are right now. They wouldn’t be ready to send even more troops into Iraq and kill even more innocent people than the U.N. Sanctions and bombings already have. They wouldn’t have exploited the genuine tragedy of the World Trade Center disaster to undermine our Civil Liberties and warmonger in the most detestable fashion. They wouldn’t be chomping at the bit to take military action that will further destabilize the Middle East, a region that is notoriously unstable even in the best of times. Israel, Pakistan and India, all allies of the United States in the Middle East, have nukes. It’s not such a stretch to foresee a scenario where the region gets even more destabilized because of the Bush Regime’s military action. What if someone in one of the countries is crazy enough to actually use those nukes? Where the hell are we going to be then?
This is why it is more important than ever that anyone who has even the slightest inkling that there is something rotten going on must take a stand. We must make our voices heard. We must organize. We must demonstrate. We must support one another. We must focus on the similarities we share with other activists to achieve the larger goal of making this world a peaceful place, rather than getting bogged down and defeated by infighting over whose agenda is more important or who is more punk. When you choose the lesser of two evils, you are still choosing evil. Don’t get me wrong – these people must be voted out of office. But I want to encourage you to look beyond the two dominant parties when you vote, and think about who will really represent and fight for what you believe in.
American involvement in the Vietnam War ended, not because President Nixon had a change of heart, or because the military decided to throw in the towel, but because enough of the American people, despite overwhelming amounts of propaganda to the contrary, made it politically unfeasible for the government to continue fighting it. It didn’t happen overnight, and it didn’t happen without sacrifice, but ultimately the American people prevailed and the war ended. That war ended because enough of the American people had the courage of their convictions to be activists, to demonstrate, to do something instead of waiting for someone else to do it. Now we need to do the same. It won’t be any easier, or any less daunting than their task was. In some ways it might even be more difficult. But it won’t get done unless we get off our couches and make it happen. So what are we waiting for? Let’s get up and do something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)