Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Evidence We're in a Third--or Fourth--Turning - Page 12







Post#276 at 10-10-2001 11:07 PM by Barbara [at 1931 Silent from Pleasantville joined Aug 2001 #posts 2,352]
---
10-10-2001, 11:07 PM #276
Join Date
Aug 2001
Location
1931 Silent from Pleasantville
Posts
2,352

I don't know about the thirties, Hopeful (well, we didn't do it in 1938 and 1939, anyway), but during the War things like that were done school-wide on a few occasions. Remember, there was no CNN or WWW back then. They would do things on the radio, though, so that's probably a good parallel, because most people listened to the radio, certainly in the evening after supper and before bedtime. We actually had a flag in the parlor, and everyone in my family would get up and put our hands over our hearts, assume the position, and recite.

I don't know the history of Flag Day (I used to know more but I have CRS disease <g>). But I do know that it's in June and been a holiday as long as I've been alive. We usually were still in school in June, and would have a big elaborate assembly ceremony with entertainment and refreshments. And I know it still was done that way across the nation for many, many years (throughout my schooling, and then throughout the Fifties when I started teaching, and then I think it got less popular perhaps in the Sixties.

If you really want to know, I think it would be more like the old days if they started doing something like that weekly. Every assembly program we ever had in school seemed to have a student color guard with the flag. That was back in the days when it was actually highly desired to be elected hall monitor, too. :grin:

Oh, and if anyone wants to know, I received an email today that says tomorrow, Thursday, Oct. 11, the 30th day since 911, is National Day of Driving with Headlights On. To show support, compassion and respect for those who were lost on Sept. 11, and to show your patriotism. Sounds kind of like the same thing as you mention, but for adults.







Post#277 at 10-10-2001 11:19 PM by Barbara [at 1931 Silent from Pleasantville joined Aug 2001 #posts 2,352]
---
10-10-2001, 11:19 PM #277
Join Date
Aug 2001
Location
1931 Silent from Pleasantville
Posts
2,352

Oh, hey, one more bit of trivia, Hopeful. I can remember during the war we used to say the Pledge at the movie show before they'd turn the lights off before the newsreel and feature. A US flag always stood to the side on the stage beneath the screen. Our state flag stood on the other side.

Is anyone encountering that where you live? I am not seeing it, but it's 'young yet'.

Hey, Virgil, don't you prefer classical and baroque to anything rock n roll, anyway?

:wink:

Actually, I think rock n roll or any music that was loved by Boomers will find it's way back into everything more and more as this goes on longer. Prophets do determine the message, after all.....

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Barbara on 2001-10-10 21:21 ]</font>







Post#278 at 10-10-2001 11:55 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
10-10-2001, 11:55 PM #278
Guest

While I understand this is very "3T" of me, ya just gotta love this little gem... from "la la land."



:lol: :lol: :lol:







Post#279 at 10-11-2001 12:47 AM by Vince Lamb '59 [at Irish Hills, Michigan joined Jun 2001 #posts 1,997]
---
10-11-2001, 12:47 AM #279
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Irish Hills, Michigan
Posts
1,997

On 2001-10-10 20:38, HopefulCynic68 wrote:
I'm note sure how to file this, but here it is:

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/ap/20..._pledge_1.html


This is apparently totally without irony or embarrassment, and it reminds me a lot of descriptions of the thirties and forties. It also sort of reminds me of some very old cartoons and newsreels I've seen from that time, in tone.
Here's one place that was about to abstain from this, but has been overtaken by events:

Vote by School Board against pledge angers residents
http://wisconsinstatejournal.com/local/6473.html

Berzerkley isn't the only university town with left-leaning ideas!







Post#280 at 10-11-2001 01:02 AM by Tom Mazanec [at NE Ohio 1958 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,511]
---
10-11-2001, 01:02 AM #280
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
NE Ohio 1958
Posts
1,511

There is a local boy who put several posters on his locker about the attack, and was suspended for intimidating Arab-American students. A court has ruled in his favor, last I heard.







Post#281 at 10-11-2001 01:11 AM by Barbara [at 1931 Silent from Pleasantville joined Aug 2001 #posts 2,352]
---
10-11-2001, 01:11 AM #281
Join Date
Aug 2001
Location
1931 Silent from Pleasantville
Posts
2,352

I know you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about the good old days, but I had to look at a classroom of kids reciting the Pledge every morning for 1/2 of my 30 years of teaching, at least, and you learn from that. Kids don't even pay attention to what they are saying after while. That's something to consider if the objective is to inculcate patriotism in our young.

Of all the decades in my life, these types of patriotic show got downright onerous in the Fifties. This was excessed on, and it was IMO just one more reason the Awakening was so welcomed....

That article was fascinating, though. I was mildly shocked at some of the negative reaction, and how accusative it was. People are talking in a way that would be really over-reacting at any other time in the Cycle but NOW. Judgment Day is getting closer and closer.....







Post#282 at 10-11-2001 01:19 AM by Tom Mazanec [at NE Ohio 1958 joined Sep 2001 #posts 1,511]
---
10-11-2001, 01:19 AM #282
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
NE Ohio 1958
Posts
1,511

I agree with Barbara. I recently read a short story inspired by the author's child's mindless repitition of the Pledge of Allegiance. In an hour after some country (presumably Russia) had occupied the United States, the new school teacher had completely re-doctrinated her class to be good little Marxists. It was chilling, but I do not have the copy with me and forgot the title.
I was a parochial student, and did all the praying & pledging before class. If you want to shape students to be good citizens, however, you have to do more work than just a minute of mumbled words.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Tom Mazanec on 2001-10-10 23:22 ]</font>







Post#283 at 10-11-2001 01:24 AM by Vince Lamb '59 [at Irish Hills, Michigan joined Jun 2001 #posts 1,997]
---
10-11-2001, 01:24 AM #283
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Irish Hills, Michigan
Posts
1,997

I don't know if this is evidence of 3T or 4T, but it is evidence that when the going gets weird, the weird get going:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,36218,00.html

Edited note: Sigh, you'll have to copy and paste the URL into your browser window. Clicking on the link won't work.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Vince Lamb '59 on 2001-10-10 23:26 ]</font>







Post#284 at 10-11-2001 01:40 AM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
10-11-2001, 01:40 AM #284
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

Racial tensions redirected?

<font color="blue">Sept. 11 Attack Narrows the Racial Divide
By SOMINI SENGUPTA
n Fort Greene, Brooklyn, a crew of black and Latino teenage boys say they can no longer think of the police as enemies. Since Sept. 11, the boys say, the officers who patrol their neighborhoods, most of whom are white, no longer eye them with suspicion.

Several Haitian-American groups, which had angrily protested police abuse in recent years, have sent a letter to a local police chief in Crown Heights expressing admiration for the officers.

Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has been embraced by black leaders. On the national stage, with few exceptions, black members of Congress, seething all year long about the election of George W. Bush, have rallied to his side.

Black New Yorkers joke among themselves about their own reprieve from racial profiling. Even the language of racial grievance has shifted: Overnight, the cries about driving while black have become flying while brown ? a phrase referring to reports of Muslim-Americans being asked to get off planes.

Ever so slightly, the attacks on the trade center have tweaked the city's traditional racial divisions.

This is not unheard of in wartime, historians say. Nor do most people believe it will last long. The black-white racial pattern has too deep a history.

But the signs of change have revealed themselves in dozens of interviews across the city in recent weeks. Some of it is evident in how police and civilians see each other. Some of it is how ordinary men and women react to each other on the streets, on subways, in bodegas. Some people attribute it to the solemnity that hangs over the city, others to fear, still others to a newfound unity as Americans. Whatever it is, the way that New Yorkers perceive one another across color lines ? however accurate those perceptions were to begin with ? has changed.

If old racial antagonisms have dissolved, new anxieties have surfaced.

Keith Wright, an assemblyman from Harlem, said that before Sept. 11, "people were looking at young black men like they were all suspected of some kind of crime."

"Now people are looking at people of Middle Eastern descent as suspects of terrorism," said Mr. Wright, who is black. "Now we have to be careful not to do that."

The New York Police Department has seen a rash of possible hate crimes against Arabs, Muslims, Sikhs ? in short, anyone perceived by untrained eyes to be suspect in the terrorist attack. Yemeni-owned delis have been vandalized, shopkeepers and newsstand workers have been punched, a Sikh cabdriver has been shot at, Arabs and Pakistanis have been attacked on subways and on the street. Of the 120 alleged bias incidents reported to the police since Sept. 11, 80 have been against Arabs and South Asians; the suspects are whites, blacks and Hispanics.

Late last month, a Star-Ledger/Eagleton- Rutgers poll taken in New Jersey asked whether airport officials should regard Middle Eastern travelers with "more suspicion" than others. Blacks and whites differed only slightly in their responses: 38 percent of blacks and 42 percent of whites said those travelers should be treated with more suspicion. On the question of whether immigration from the Middle East should be "more restrictive than it is now," the differences were similarly small: 29 percent of blacks and 23 percent of whites said such immigration should be halted, while 55 percent of blacks and 56 percent of whites said it should be limited.

At the center of the shift in attitude is the group of boys playing football on a balmy afternoon last week at Fort Greene Park. Some of them are African-Americans, others have roots in the Caribbean; the family of one fled war in El Salvador. "The police would probably racially profile everyone that's here," said Louis Johnson, 18, pointing to his friends with a jut of his chin.

The child of Trinidadian immigrants, Mr. Johnson said he had all but grown accustomed to being trailed by the police. "They used to watch me from the time they see me, they watch me till I leave," he said. "But now they don't really bother us. They, like, stop everyone that has Middle Eastern features. They stop them. They ask them questions like that."

The boys see themselves transformed. "I just thought of myself as black," Mr. Johnson said. "But now I feel like I'm an American, more than ever."

Miqueo Rawell-Peterson, 17, notes gravely that the police were among the first to rush into the burning towers. "We've become a little more at ease with the policemen," he said. "We realize what they've done. Now we look at them more as heroes, instead of ? I guess, what you'd say, enemies."

Police on the street call this going "from zero to hero" as people smile and say thank you and call in with tips. "Everyone's taken a second look at how they conduct themselves," said Lt. James Woods, a community relations officer at the Brooklyn South patrol office. "There's a lot more public display of affection, of support, of kindness."

Sgt. Thomas Seyfarth was stationed at a subway platform in central Brooklyn recently when a call came over the police radio about a man, apparently of Middle Eastern descent, sitting on a bench on a subway platform, but not taking a train. "Nobody ever would have called that in before," Sergeant Seyfarth said. (As it turned out, the man was on the wrong platform, waiting for a train going in the opposite direction.)

"I guess it's in fashion now," Sergeant Seyfarth said, referring to the new spirit of cooperation. "It's different. It's something you're not used to."

"Can't get too used to it, though," he added quickly. "The people who don't like you will be vocal again."

The examples offered as evidence of change are mundane encounters ? the way someone talks to you, a look on a stranger's face. Always, they are matters of perception.

Richard Greene, director of the Crown Heights Youth Collective, recalled an open-air memorial held in front of the home of a victim of the attack on the trade center. At the sight of some police officers, one young black man, Mr. Greene recalled, groused: "What are they doing here?" A second man, whom Mr. Greene overheard, explained that the police were there to keep traffic off the block. "It neutralized it right away," Mr. Greene said.

It may not have happened the same way before Sept. 11. "Absolutely, it has altered human relations," Mr. Greene surmised. "Race has a piece in that. Everyone in New York has had a sobering wake-up call as to our frailty as human beings."

To Joyce Hata, an Asian-American living in largely African-American Fort Greene, that call has given people permission to talk across the usual racial divides. Ms. Hata said she is used to being on the receiving end of cold stares from some of her neighbors. But the other day, she found herself in an unusually candid conversation with a middle-aged black woman on the street; the woman, Ms. Hata learned, she had just lost three of her neighbors.

"She's someone who would have been less accessible," Ms. Hata, 38, observed last Sunday after services at the Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian Church. "It's easier to break through now. People are so desperate to have someone hear them."

If people are talking, what they are talking about has changed, too, the pastor of that church, the Rev. David Dyson, noted. Mr. Dyson, who is white, said that people at the bodega down the street now ask each other: "How are you? How's the church? How's the family?"

"I haven't heard the word gentrification uttered since this happened," Mr. Dyson said. "There's not nearly as much us against them ? the old us against them."

In Greenpoint, Brooklyn, Victor Lavalle, a writer, paints two pictures. The first is of his local pizzeria. Before Sept. 11, it was the usual New York jostling: the mostly black and Latino boys from the neighborhood high school would come in, loud and rambunctious, prompting dirty looks from the elderly Polish women. After Sept. 11, the boys come in quietly. They ask the women if they've ordered. The women look at them, step aside and say, "Go ahead."

The second picture he paints is of an Indian-American friend. Last week, the friend started to park his car on a residential street in New Jersey, only to be greeted by a volley of threats and insults from a white man who stepped out of his house. Mr. Lavalle said his friend got back in his car and drove away, chilled to the bone.</font>
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#285 at 10-11-2001 01:50 AM by alan [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 268]
---
10-11-2001, 01:50 AM #285
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
268

Barbara...thanks for reminding me of childhood memories, I'd forgotten the pledge of allegiance at the movie show in the 1950's. It would have been unthinkable not to stand and say it with everyone else, unimaginable even.
And now today there's this surrealist story about having all the schoolchildren recite the pledge at the same time, as if its a magic spell which will "do" something magical, or as they're saying "send a powerful message".:smile:
Also...has anyone noticed the little news article about Bert from Sesame Street defecting to the Taliban?
These are strange and wondrous times.







Post#286 at 10-11-2001 08:44 AM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
10-11-2001, 08:44 AM #286
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

Our GI teachers did not allow us to mumble the Pledge or to let our eyes wander about. It was indoctrination with articulation, enunciation, and expectation.


At my 4-H club we had it all again plus 4-H
pledges to boot. Our GI parents again made sure we toed the line. We also sang the National Anthem even though it was hard and we were told (much to the limiting of our self esteem) that we could do better and not that we had done well. HTH







Post#287 at 10-11-2001 09:58 AM by Ricercar71 [at joined Jul 2001 #posts 1,038]
---
10-11-2001, 09:58 AM #287
Join Date
Jul 2001
Posts
1,038

VS-

I can only imagine how awkward the Star Spangled Banner must have sounded with 13-15 year old boys just hitting puberty, unsure of which octave range to sing it in, voices cracking, gangly Adam's apples bobbing, etc. It must have been times like those that made the Beatles and Elvis seem like a breath of fresh air.

(Anyway, I found it somewhat ironic that the British--even the Queen--were witnessed to sing it in Westminster Abbey (?) on world television. One of the verses in there is about how the evil nasty Limeys got what was comin' to them.)

The Pledge of Allegance was something we had growing up, too, and for a time during early youth, I thought that the words sounded "and to the republic, for witches stand, one nay shun, under God, INVISIBLE..."







Post#288 at 10-11-2001 11:15 AM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
10-11-2001, 11:15 AM #288
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

A liberal argument FOR war:

<font color="blue">AN OPEN LETTER TO THE PEACE MOVEMENT
Parting Ways Over the War on Terrorism
I first marched for freedom, justice and peace in 1963. The place was Los Angeles, and the cause was civil rights. In the late '60s and early '70s, as a graduate student at the University of Oregon, I marched often against the Vietnam War. In fact, there has not been a single military action by the United States that I've supported as an adult. Not one.

Over the years, however, I've expressed the view that, if the U.S. were under attack, I would support a military response. And I believe that is the case now, which is why I am leaving your ranks.

I am writing to share my steps in deciding to leave the peace movement; to challenge you to do your work in a way that is constructive rather than divisive (as I believe your early responses have been); and to urge you to avoid easy analogies, such as Vietnam, and to find radical new ways to "wage peace."

1. We are under attack. I know some of you think we are not under attack, a position I cannot comprehend. Others of you think we are justifiably under attack, a position I partially understand.

But the facts are clear: We explicitly have been under attack at least since the late '90s, when various proclamations against us were issued by radical Islamic groups; a "holy war" against the U.S. was explicitly declared. The seriousness of that decree now should be clear to all.

2. When a nation is under attack, the first decision must be whether to surrender or to fight. I believe there is no middle ground here: You either fight or you don't fight, and doing nothing amounts to surrender.

I realize the great danger of fighting is turning into the enemy. But the certainty of not fighting is being defeated by the enemy. I believe one side or the other is going to win this war. I don't think "a draw" is possible. And I believe there is much more opportunity to create "a radical peace," creating a more just world, if the U.S. coalition wins rather than the terrorists.

3. There are many ways to fight. Here is where I part company with my former colleagues in the peace movement.

I do not believe the network of terrorism can be defeated without engaging it directly, which I believe will result in violent acts. I believe this because I don't believe anything can be done to make terrorists surrender, and because I believe, in their world view, dying for their cause is a holy act, which means they are willing to take others out with them, as we have seen. On the Sunday after the tragedy, there were two large marches in Portland. The first, drawing several thousand, was a peace march. In that march, I was able to find only one American flag being carried. Later there was a patriotic march, also drawing several thousand, and almost everyone carried an American flag. The contrast was startling and very misleading.

The danger of the peace movement is that it will convey the impression, in a world in which media images are important (whether we like it or not), that it is neutral, or even negative, about the issue of supporting what has been variously called "the American way of life," or "the values of the civilized world," or "the free world."

Some of you are cultural relativists and believe that the Taliban's treatment of women, to list one example, is "a cultural phenomenon" about which we should not make value judgments. But I believe a war of historic proportions is going on here. Some historians are calling this "the 12th century against the 18th century" in terms of the contrasting views of humanity in conflict; I tend to think of it as a war between two perversions, the perversion of extreme materialism against the perversion of extreme spiritualism.

So a choice must be made. As the old labor song goes (which I've sung with you many times in another context), "Which side are you on?" It's time to write new verses to that cherished old tune.

So farewell, my friends. I look forward to a future time when our views are similar again. I hope for victory, and when we have won it, I hope to join you again in working for "a radical peace" that will make the world more equal, more free, and more pleasant for all the world's peoples.

Respectfully,

Charles Deemer</font>
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#289 at 10-11-2001 03:05 PM by Kurt63 [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 36]
---
10-11-2001, 03:05 PM #289
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
36

This article is reproduced for non-commercial, discussion purposes only.

-----

ATTACKS-CHANGE OF HEART
Seattle


October 2, 2001 - A Vietnam War protester has had a change of heart. He pulled down an American flag from a Seattle federal building during a 1970 demonstration. Now, he wants to return the flag.

The man, who's asked not to be named, has turned the flag over to a Seattle Times columnist. After last month's terrorist attacks, the former protester says "it's time" for the flag to fly again.

He says the country has healed and pulled together since the divisions over Vietnam. The General Services Administration will take the flag back, but offers no guarantees it will be used.

(Copyright 2001 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)







Post#290 at 10-11-2001 04:14 PM by Starkk [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 61]
---
10-11-2001, 04:14 PM #290
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
61

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nyt/200...n_tapes_1.html

At U.S. Request, Networks Agree to Edit Future bin Laden Tapes

five major television news organizations reached a joint agreement yesterday to follow the suggestion of the White House and abridge any future videotaped statements from Osama bin Laden or his followers to remove language the government considers inflammatory.

The decision, the first time in memory that the networks had agreed to a joint arrangement to limit their prospective news coverage, was described by one network executive as a "patriotic" decision that grew out of a conference call between the nation's top television news executives and the White House national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, yesterday morning.

(for the rest, view the link listed above)







Post#291 at 10-11-2001 04:52 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
10-11-2001, 04:52 PM #291
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

On 2001-10-11 07:58, jcarson71 wrote:

The Pledge of Allegance was something we had growing up, too, and for a time during early youth, I thought that the words sounded "and to the republic, for witches stand, one nay shun, under God, INVISIBLE..."
This sort of thing never came up in our rural St. Louis County school as we were forced to speak clearly from first grade on and if caught speaking in the manner Mr. Carson relates, one would be sent to get a dictionary and find the word and use phonics to sound out the word partially and then in whole and then define the word.


If one was caught "mumbling" again; one might get the opportunity to write out and then declaim the pronunciation and definition a hundred times while the others went outside to torment each other with large rubber balls and jump ropes. Repeated as needed. HTH







Post#292 at 10-11-2001 06:23 PM by Barbara [at 1931 Silent from Pleasantville joined Aug 2001 #posts 2,352]
---
10-11-2001, 06:23 PM #292
Join Date
Aug 2001
Location
1931 Silent from Pleasantville
Posts
2,352

Virgil, you'd have been my star pupil! While you were away harvesting for the winter-over clover, I got to pretend to be you for a second. I used the word "elocution" in a post (relative to this topic and your post, too, BTW), and Mr. Lamb was so impressed he looked it up.

At any rate, I have no doubt your elocution of the Pledge was and is still flawless. That kind of educating is for the history books now, alas.....

P.S. - Had you ever had your knuckles rapped with the pointing stick? I did! Ouch!







Post#293 at 10-11-2001 06:42 PM by Virgil K. Saari [at '49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains joined Jun 2001 #posts 7,835]
---
10-11-2001, 06:42 PM #293
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
'49er, north of the Mesabi Mountains
Posts
7,835

On 2001-10-11 16:23, Barbara wrote:
P.S. - Had you ever had your knuckles rapped with the pointing stick? I did! Ouch!
This was handled in the manner of the Inquisition. Mrs. H (the Instructive authority) would pin a sealed note on my coat collar as I left school with the request for a reply from my parents (the secular authority) the next morning.

My mother would send an envelope in return the next morning, which I never learned the content of as it was not my business. Yes, I received my whacks and the knowledge that they would come on a long bus ride home just "concentrated" the mind. Physical abuse and psychological torture at the one by the "Greatest Generation". I wonder if the children of Millennials will enjoy the conjoining of the two? HTH







Post#294 at 10-11-2001 09:40 PM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
10-11-2001, 09:40 PM #294
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

More evidence we are in 4T:

<font color="blue">There?s no going back
We're far from what we once believed was normal


Two decades ago, I had an obsession. It concerned a question. At the time, I was working at a magazine that covered nuclear arms control. Pondering nuclear war every day took a toll. I regularly dreamed of nuclear devastation. The scenario was usually the same. I'd be engaged in some mundane activity -- say, walking down the street -- and then ... ka-boom. Just as the blast began, I would be jolted awake, not knowing for a moment that the world had been destroyed only in my mind.
During my waking hours, I often dwelled on these dreams and wondered, if a nuclear attack did occur would there be any warning. Not warning in the sense that the military air defense command might pick up a radar image of an incoming missile and sound air raid sirens. I wanted to know, in the event of a nuclear assault, whether one would be able to look toward the sky, see the falling warhead or its contrail, realize what was about to occur, and have time to murmur, "Oh shit." I was aware some warheads were designed to detonate at high altitudes, some were set to explode upon impact. But how fast would they be traveling, and at that speed would could you follow the downward trajectory of the object of doom?

I had the means to answer this question. I knew experts. But I never sought an answer. Instead, I wondered over and over, frequently recalling the opening line to Thomas Pynchon's Gravity's Rainbow: "A screaming comes across the sky." I shared this morbid curiosity with no one. (It was certainly not good first-date material). My twentysomething life went on, punctuated by occasional dread. Were others around me -- coworkers at the office, clubhoppers on the dance floor, people on the sidewalk -- also worried about the prospect that all could be obliterated at any moment, through either an act of malice or miscalculation? It did not seem polite to ask. Who wants to be a downer? After two years at the magazine, I left; the reoccurring nightmare appeared less often, and my preoccupation with that particular question faded. (Twenty years later, the dream does return once in a while.) At the time of that obsession, I took partial comfort in the fact that there seemed to be no one who truly desired to use nuclear weapons to achieve massive carnage. That generally left error, not hatred, to fear.

That was then ... These days, when I walk around Washington, DC -- gazing at new concrete barricades and the additional police on patrol, watching security guards at government buildings as they inspect visitors more closely, listening more attentively to the distant sirens of emergency vehicles -- my apocalyptic musings do not fixate upon the sky. Seconds of warning? No way. An act of nuclear terrorism will originate at, not fall upon, ground zero. But what about the flash? Could you discern the flash? Can impulses speeding through your neural pathways outrace the shockwave of a small nuclear device? Could you whisper a goodbye?

Life after September 11 -- I have the sense our national leaders have not quite grasped the profound change that has been wrought.

Apparently, though, it is not a productive use of time to worry about nuclear terror, for the media and congressional hearings in recent days have concentrated on the threat of biological and chemical terrorism. Before a Senate committee, Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson, who days earlier had told 60 Minutes "we're prepared ... for any kind of bioterrorism attack," acknowledged that, um, we're not. At another hearing, a terrorism expert was asked if the medical establishment was equipped to deal with a biological attack. Are you kidding? he replied, half the public health officials in this country don't have computers on their desks. In The Washington Post, Georgetown matron and what-about-me journalist Sally Quinn defended her recent efforts to acquire gas masks for her family. (For those who worry about Quinn and her brood, good news -- the mission was a success. She found masks available from a place in Salt Lake City, which was stockpiling them for the Olympics.)

But the President, while he prepares for war, encourages the nation to get back to normal. Citizens, head to the malls. Even as Attorney General John Ashcroft notes another wave of terror is a distinct possibility. And get back on those airliners, too. Even as authority is granted to military commanders to shoot down planes they believe to have been hijacked. Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, referring to the intelligence community, notes, "the thinking is ... [the terrorists] put the second wave into place before [September 11]. In other words, whatever is going to happen next is already in place." On the same day that an intelligence official in a closed-doors briefing told senators there is a "100 percent" chance of a terrorist strike should the United States hit Afghanistan, the White House press secretary Ari Fleischer declared there are "increasing signs that life in America is getting back to normal."

Normal? Who's in denial? Will Sally Quinn resume her renown dinner parties -- but with gas masks slung over the back of the dining room chairs? Have we returned to normal, because Hollywood reports the public has again started consuming the same-old junk? Forget Pynchon. Now it seems we are in a Delillo novel. We will pursue the large and small dramas of our lives, waiting -- or trying not to wait -- for those bursts of horrific violence that arrive intermittently, each one of us hoping the next tragedy occurs in another town and penetrates our own world only via the television screen. Welcome to globalization. As Osama bin Laden might say, Borders are for suckers.

Who knows how best to proceed within this new world disorder? Should we join the rush to normalcy? (You can get a great deal on a 2001 model car now.) Or should we be screaming, this is so god-damn crazy? Unfortunately, neither course of action offers much solace or security. And military retaliation -- even if succeeds in capturing or killing the September 11 plotters -- is unlikely to protect us from future terrorism. In delivering a hawkish speech practically calling for war, British Prime Minister Tony Blair did assert that the war on terrorism ought to be tied to a global campaign for social justice. The best chance the West has to free itself from the madness of terrorism, Blair suggested, is to confront inequity and deploy compassion as readily as force. That won't rid the globe of murderous hatred, but it might damper support for terrorists among governments and populations overseas. This would be an attempt to drain the swamp, and Blair is taking a long view. But the present leadership of the United States shows little interest in a holistic strategy that gazes beyond the us-and-them perspective of the commander-in-chief. And the opposition -- that would be the Democrats -- shows no signs of being able to address the disturbing new fundamentals of life after 9/11.

So what, then? Get used to it? Life has risks -- and now there are more? In essence, that is what Bush and his aides are telling us. Don't ask too many hard questions. Shop while you fret. What else do they have to say? They're lost, too. Bush keeps insisting he is waging a campaign for freedom, as he makes military alliances with repressive, non-democratic or autocratic regimes that care not a whit for freedom. Does the Bush clan have a good idea of how to prosecute an effective war on terrorism? Recently, a senior official traveling with deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz told a reporter, "It is difficult, in my view, to overestimate how much we don't know." If those who govern our nation can provide us with neither gas masks nor assurance we won't soon need them. And Bush's solution to the attendant economic woes? Accelerating the tax cuts for the rich. (To be fair, Bush also proposes extending unemployment benefits and other domestic spending as part of a $75 billion economic stimulus, in a move that has angered conservative Republicans who consider this an opportune moment to press for business tax cuts.)

Sorry for the pessimism. But, then, I'm the sort of person who has nuclear nightmares. Feel free to party like it's 1999. Perhaps there will be self-help books aimed at coping. (Success over Terror: Empowering Yourself in a Time of Uncertainty?) For those who do not wish to repress reasonable fears, my less-than-satisfactory suggestion is that we ought to demand more from our leaders -- even if we do not know precisely what that entails. They have failed us in imagination, preparation, and protection. They should be pressed to talk straight about the threat and the possibilities for achieving a secure world, at home and abroad, for there is no distinction. No phony attempts at assuaging anxieties. Let's have them acknowledge we're far from what we once believed was normal and are not likely to be in that territory for a long time.</font>
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#295 at 10-11-2001 09:55 PM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
10-11-2001, 09:55 PM #295
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

A liberal vision of how America should fight this war.

<font color="blue">War and peace
This is a historic opportunity for the U.S. to become a kinder, gentler force in the world
Gary Kamiya is Salon's executive editor. By Gary Kamiya / Salon.com
10.09.01 | As the first missiles struck Afghanistan Sunday night, it was hard not to feel that America had just jumped off a cliff in the dark. In his speech to the nation, President Bush told American troops, "Your mission is defined. The objectives are clear. Your goal is just." The goal -- destroying Osama bin Laden's terrorist network, al-Qaida, and bringing down the loathsome Taliban regime -- is indeed just. But the mission, the battle against world terrorism, is neither defined nor clear. In fact, it is one of the most ill-defined and potentially dangerous campaigns we have ever embarked upon.

This does not mean we should not undertake it. We should. There can be no serious argument that the destruction of al-Qaida and the removal of the Taliban are not morally justified. Six thousand innocent people lie dead at the hands of bin Laden and his associates, victims of one of the most monstrous crimes in history. Not to seek to bring those responsible to justice is unthinkable. As for the grotesque Taliban regime that shelters al-Qaida and refuses to hand over its leader, neither the Afghan people nor the world will weep when their bloody reign comes to an end.

Beyond justified retribution, there is the urgent need to prevent future attacks. The very existence of bin Laden and his network is a threat. As long as dedicated fanatics with the will and means to strike devastating blows exist, no country or individual that does not subscribe to their rigid belief system is safe.

The only argument against military action worth taking seriously (the knee-jerk anti-Americanism of some ossified thinkers on the Left is not worth refuting) is that the cure will be worse than the disease. If we strike at the Taliban, so this argument goes, we may create thousands of bin Ladens where now there are hundreds. Since ultimately an open society cannot defend itself against suicidal terrorists, it is rash to risk creating a whole generation of new ones. Since al-Qaida and its shadowy associates are so dispersed, with operatives in dozens of countries, even destroying terrorists in Afghanistan will not significantly affect global terror operations. A gaudy American strike may satisfy the public's desire for revenge, but it's strategically shortsighted and ultimately irresponsible.

This argument cannot be dismissed out of hand, and the bellicose commentators who accuse its adherents of being some kind of "Fifth Column" are doing their country no service. However, I believe that in the end it is not convincing. The urgent need to destroy the threat posed by bin Laden's Afghanistan-based network trumps the possibility of excessive "blowback" (spy-speak for unintended consequences, i.e., the creation of an unacceptable number of new terrorists) from a military operation. In any case, there is no guarantee that potential terrorists would not strike against the United States even if we did not attack al-Qaida.

Without being able to look into the mind of the actual and potential Islamic terrorists in the world, all judgments about the consequences of American military action are speculative. Bin Laden's chilling videotape, which was quickly disseminated all over the Muslim world on Sunday, will play well in some quarters, with its popular appeals to the Palestinian cause and the human costs of the U.S. embargo on Iraq. (Many Palestinians in the West Bank Gaza welcomed bin Laden's support for their cause, leading to violent confrontations with the Palestinian Authority Monday.) Combined with rage at America for attacking a Muslim state, perhaps it will breed a few new terrorists. But without the resources and command and control functions offered by a network, terrorists are severely handicapped. And in a larger sense, it seems reasonable to conclude that even the more fundamentalist and anti-American Muslims will give the U.S. a pass -- if we confine ourselves to a short-term and highly specific military action against bin Laden and the Taliban, limit civilian casualties as much as possible, help Afghanistan get back on its feet again and take tangible and visible steps to address the root causes of Islamic anger at America.

Even more daunting than the military campaign against bin Laden's forces is the long-term challenge of establishing peace and security in the world. In this struggle, the plowshare must play a far greater role than the sword.

The fact is that our national tragedy has given us -- as tragedies sometimes do -- an extraordinary opportunity to both lead and join the world. If we join the world -- if we continue to treat the rest of the world with the same respect with which we are treating it now -- we can help create a new era of international cooperation, in which the entire civilized community is brought closer together by a shared struggle against barbarism. If we do not, if we revert to a policy of short-sighted realpolitik, or worse, aggressive military adventurism against states like Iraq or Syria, we run the risk of turning what is still merely an infection of hatred into a cancer. And we will lose a unique chance to make the world a more just place.

In the days, months and years ahead, America has the opportunity -- and the necessity -- to begin winning the hearts and minds not merely of the Islamic world, but the world as a whole. To do so, we must commit to a humanitarian policy that is not merely situational. We must undertake a fundamental reappraisal of our morally flawed and strategically disastrous Mideast policy. And, above all, we must reconsider our entire shortsighted, me-first approach to foreign affairs.

A month ago, the latter proposal would have sounded utopian, if not laughable. Today no one is laughing, because cooperation and communication -- the "feminine" virtues, always derided by the male "realists" who have brought us world history -- is so evidently in our self-interest. The danger is that the moment will pass and the Hobbesian arrogance that has generally driven our policies hitherto (we join the rest of the world in this, but as the world's only superpower, our selfishness breeds more ire) will return. The crucial test, as the war against terrorism unfolds, will be whether the Bush administration has the wisdom to understand that at this historical moment doing what is right, and doing what is right for America, happen to coincide.

The actions of the Bush administration since Sept. 11 have been a kind of preview of the kinder, gentler America that could emerge from this crisis. Bush has consulted the rest of the world, paying attention to nations whose concerns he ignored just weeks ago. He has grasped the vital necessity of helping the Afghan people, whom we abandoned when the Soviet threat vanished. He has finally leaned on the Israelis to address the plight of the Palestinians. He has moved deliberately, resisting the temptation to lash out in indiscriminate rage.

This newfound American humility is not dictated by some sudden impulse to altruism, some Christian epiphany about the Golden Rule. It is dictated, to put it bluntly, by fear. As the world's only superpower, and a nation given to regarding itself as operating with the express blessing of the Almighty, the United States is not accustomed to moving cautiously. But we are suddenly confronting an enemy that we cannot defeat by conventional means.

Fear focuses the mind, but when fear passes, old jingoist habits return. In the new world, those habits are dangerous. What is vital is for America to recognize that the world has changed: It is infinitely more interconnected now. Like the Internet, money and violence move at warp speed and know no boundaries. Imperialistic actions, support for corrupt client states or nakedly greedy corporate gambits that could be kept invisible a few decades ago are felt around the world instantly. The world has suddenly become far more transparent.

This makes the international arena more dangerous, but it also makes it potentially more unified. And this moment holds out a singular opportunity. The world has rarely spoken as one, thought as one, wept as one, as it did after the terror attacks. The moments of silence observed around the world to commemorate the tragedy, for example, are more than deeply moving: They are actually significant. They represent one of those extraordinary and all-too-infrequent moments when humanity itself steps quietly forward and asserts its primacy -- over nationalism, over politics, over everything. Yes, that empathy will fade -- but if a wounded and suddenly vulnerable America shows that it can respond to hatred not just with hatred but with nobler emotions, it is something real to build on.

And there is much to build on now. Most critically, Russia has thrown its lot in with us against terror in an unprecedented way -- and although Chechnya is clearly a motivation, this is not merely a marriage of convenience. Putin's opening to the West signals a major shift in geopolitics. Europe, led by Great Britain, is solidly behind the United States, as long as we don't overplay our hand against Islam. China remains ominous, but is staying out of the way. The Islamic world, in particular the Arab world, alone is hanging back. But a powerful U.S.-led peace initiative in the Middle East, one that corrects our no longer strategically justifiable tilt toward Israel while protecting the Jewish state's existence, would address that problem -- as would a timely opening toward Iran.

The United States could also seize this moment to let some of our more corrupt and undemocratic allies and clients -- including Saudi Arabia and Egypt -- know that we are no longer as inclined to turn a blind eye to their habit of suppressing dissent with an iron hand. Of course, there are no easy solutions to the problems posed by states like Saudi Arabia, in which autocratic regimes friendly to us -- and vital to our economy -- are threatened not by democratic movements but by Islamic extremists. But the example of Iran, now the most democratic of all Middle Eastern Islamic states, suggests that in the long run, it's better to allow states to actually go through the fundamentalist stage: In the age of MTV, it's hard to stay in the year 1100 for long. (Similarly, continuing to move away from our misguided support for "authoritarian" regimes in Central America and elsewhere is clearly indicated.)

In short, the United States should begin practicing what we might call enlightened globalism. We would continue to be a capitalist country, acting out of self-interest, but we would no longer define our self-interest so narrowly. In one of the campaign debates, Bush derided "nation-building," but in an interconnected world nation-building, with all its uncertainties, often lays the most solid foundation for peace. Toward that end, the concept of the Marshall Plan should be dusted off and updated for the new millennium. Today, Pakistan's standard of living and its government matters a great deal to us: We should begin to conduct ourselves in such a way that it would matter in the future, too. Outreach to Muslim moderates is vitally needed. A revived Peace Corps, in which members of the world's underclasses come face to face with actual Americans, would protect our borders in the long run better than a thousand electric fences. Not all of the changes would be dramatic, and in some areas we wouldn't make progress at all. We would face paradoxes and challenges that defy easy solutions. But in the long run, a shift in American foreign policy away from classic realism and toward cooperation would both "drain the swamp" of potential terrorists and make the world a more equitable place.

After Sept. 11, such dreams have some urgency.

There is nothing in President Bush's track record to suggest that he will take this road. In the first nine months of his term, his administration spurned international treaties (including one aimed at controlling bioweapons), walked out of problematic but important international conferences like the one on racial justice and generally swaggered through the world like a Texan. And if the campaign against the Taliban succeeds, he will be lobbied by ultra-hawks like Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle, who will try to convince him to take out Saddam Hussein and pro-Palestinian groups like Hezbollah and Hamas as well. It is arguable that Bush Sr.'s failure to topple Saddam was a mistake, but these maximalist proposals now have the whiff of lunacy. They commit the United States to a future in which we govern the Arab world with a whip -- always a recipe for instability -- and dangerously assume that America's unquestioned superiority in conventional warfare can prevent domestic terrorism. If America wants to become Israel -- hated by millions and under constant threat of violence -- the fastest way is to embrace these proposals, which in fact are being aggressively advanced by the Israel lobby in the U.S. media, including New York Times columnist William Safire, New Republic publisher Martin Peretz and Weekly Standard editor William Kristol. It's become increasingly clear that if America's and Israel's security is to be ensured, the Palestinians must have a secure homeland as well.

Bush has not heeded these apocalyptic voices. Indeed, he and his team have performed far better than many of his critics thought he would so far. And he may surprise again.

Even the most appalling acts can have positive consequences. After Sept. 11, we no longer write the rules of the game. Our illusion of invulnerability has been shattered, and we must define our place in the world in a radically new way. Our safety, prosperity and way of life will increasingly depend on befriending the world, not overpowering it. If we learn this lesson, the points of distant light that flashed on CNN Sunday night could be beacons of hope. If we do not, they could be harbingers of a future more dreadful than any we have ever imagined.

Copyright 2001 Salon.com


URL: http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemId=12105</font>
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#296 at 10-11-2001 10:12 PM by Mr. Reed [at Intersection of History joined Jun 2001 #posts 4,376]
---
10-11-2001, 10:12 PM #296
Join Date
Jun 2001
Location
Intersection of History
Posts
4,376

Bush himself is starting to show a little bit of 4T era behavior. Bush might force Israel to negotiate with Palestine.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterro...568305,00.html
<font color="blue">US puts squeeze on Israel amid fears over propaganda battle

Ewen MacAskill and Suzanne Goldenberg in Jerusalem and Michael White in Cairo
Friday October 12, 2001
The Guardian

The US is to make a determined effort to force Israel to enter into peace negotiations with the Palestinians, fearing that the west is in danger of losing the propaganda war with Osama bin Laden.
In an attempt to address one of the main Muslim grievances, President, George Bush will use all the financial and political muscle at his disposal to push the Israelis and Palestinians to the negotiating table.

Mr Bush, whose patience with the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, has finally snapped, is drawing up a detailed plan to be published in the next few weeks in the hope of finally resolving 53 years of conflict.

But Mr Sharon, whose camp has been unnerved by the development, will not be moved easily, and the scene is set for a gigantic battle of wills.

Tony Blair, who returned to London last night from a two-day visit to the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Egypt, highlighted a gnawing anxiety in the US and Britain.

Only five days after the bombing of Afghanistan began, Mr Blair made the extraordinary admission that the west was in danger of losing the propaganda war in Muslim states.

He said: "One thing becoming increasingly clear to me is the need to upgrade our media and public opinion operations in the Arab and Muslim world. There is a need for us to communicate effectively."

Bin Laden electrified parts of the Muslim world within hours of the first bombs landing on Afghanistan by releasing a video in which he tried to polarise the conflict between the west and Islam, focusing especially on the Israeli-Palestinian crisis.

A senior aide to Mr Blair conceded that the broadcast had found a receptive audience in the Middle East.

The west's biggest worry is the dangerous schism between Arab leaders, who basically support the west and are appalled by Bin Laden, and sections of their people to whom he has become a potent symbol of defiance.

Acknowledging this, Mr Blair said: "All moderate, sensible parts of Arab opinion know that it is right that we are acting in Afghanistan and support that. But they do point out to us that they have a general problem with their own people, that we have lost interest in the peace process. It is a perception we need to counter."

In a series of interviews in the region and a signed article offered to Arab newspapers - all part of Downing Street's new battle for public opinion - Mr Blair stressed the urgent need to "convince people that we are sincere in our desire" to get the Middle East peace process back on track. Central to that is the new US thinking, which Saudi Arabia and Egypt are enthusiastically backing. It is based on proposals on the table when the Israelis and Palestinians met in January at Taba in Egypt, the closest they have ever come to agreement. It envisages Jerusalem as the shared capital of Jewish and Palestinian states.

The ideas, which were to be announced in a speech by the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, that was postponed because of the September 11 attack, are expected be revealed formally later this month.

Leaks in the American and Israeli press are causing tremors of nervousness around Mr Sharon, even though US diplomats say the proposals could change before they are publicly aired.

"This government is not going to divide Jerusalem. Period," Mr Sharon's spokesman Raanan Gissin said. "Jerusalem will remain the capital of the Jewish people."

Mr Sharon will visit Washington next month to press his case, Israel Radio reported yesterday. He is known to be angry that Mr Powell consulted Saudi Arabia and Egypt but not Israel when he drafted his speech.

Palestinian officials lauded the idea of a "viable homeland" - seen as an improvement on Mr Bush's call for a Palestinian state.

Revealing the nervousness of Arab governments, it emerged yesterday that a tentative plan to include Saudi Arabia on Mr Blair's Middle East itinerary was scrapped at the last minute.

The Saudi government is fearful of Islamic fundamentalist opinion in the kingdom.

The London paper Asharq al-Awsat quoted "informed sources" in London as saying the kingdom told Mr Blair that it could not receive him because the leadership was sensitive about its role and position in the Islamic world.

Downing Street played it down, insisting that the visit was not logistically possible.</font>
"The urge to dream, and the will to enable it is fundamental to being human and have coincided with what it is to be American." -- Neil deGrasse Tyson
intp '82er







Post#297 at 10-11-2001 10:20 PM by HopefulCynic68 [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 9,412]
---
10-11-2001, 10:20 PM #297
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
9,412

On 2001-10-11 19:40, madscientist wrote:
More evidence we are in 4T:

For those who do not wish to repress reasonable fears, my less-than-satisfactory suggestion is that we ought to demand more from our leaders -- even if we do not know precisely what that entails. They have failed us in imagination, preparation, and protection. They should be pressed to talk straight about the threat and the possibilities for achieving a secure world, at home and abroad, for there is no distinction. No phony attempts at assuaging anxieties. Let's have them acknowledge we're far from what we once believed was normal and are not likely to be in that territory for a long time.</font>
No, in truth our leaders did not fail us in imagination, preparation, or protection. Any political leader proposing steps to proteect against the sort of thing that occured on 911 would have been laughed out of office by the general public.








Post#298 at 10-11-2001 10:37 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
10-11-2001, 10:37 PM #298
Guest

Please, "Hopefulcynic," say it ain't so!

What is a "leader" afterall? One who follows the "pack," the "polls," the "image seekers"?

Truly the Constitution, which charges the "government," with the number one responsibility of "protecting" our freedom from foreign invasion, must be held accountable, at least to some degree, when that "responsibility" is abdicated in such a blatant manner as 911.

Else, what is that document for? Other than the value of the parchment upon it is written?




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Marc Lamb on 2001-10-11 20:39 ]</font>







Post#299 at 10-11-2001 10:59 PM by Opusaug [at Ft. Myers, Florida joined Sep 2001 #posts 7]
---
10-11-2001, 10:59 PM #299
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Ft. Myers, Florida
Posts
7

On 2001-10-10 23:11, Barbara wrote:
I know you guys are probably tired of hearing me talk about the good old days, but I had to look at a classroom of kids reciting the Pledge every morning for 1/2 of my 30 years of teaching, at least, and you learn from that. Kids don't even pay attention to what they are saying after while. That's something to consider if the objective is to inculcate patriotism in our young.

Of all the decades in my life, these types of patriotic show got downright onerous in the Fifties. This was excessed on, and it was IMO just one more reason the Awakening was so welcomed....

That article was fascinating, though. I was mildly shocked at some of the negative reaction, and how accusative it was. People are talking in a way that would be really over-reacting at any other time in the Cycle but NOW. Judgment Day is getting closer and closer.....
On 2001-10-10 23:19, Tom Mazanec wrote:
I agree with Barbara. I recently read a short story inspired by the author's child's mindless repitition of the Pledge of Allegiance. In an hour after some country (presumably Russia) had occupied the United States, the new school teacher had completely re-doctrinated her class to be good little Marxists. It was chilling, but I do not have the copy with me and forgot the title.
I was a parochial student, and did all the praying & pledging before class. If you want to shape students to be good citizens, however, you have to do more work than just a minute of mumbled words.
The Pledge of Allegance was something we had growing up, too, and for a time during early youth, I thought that the words sounded "and to the republic, for witches stand, one nay shun, under God, INVISIBLE..."
On 2001-10-11 09:27, choselh wrote:
We said the pledge every day in grammar school (early 70s) and learned to sing the anthem too. I had no idea what the words meant. Thought the pledge was for someone named "witchit stans" and the song was about the "dawnser lee light."
Okay, so let me get this straight. What y'all are suggesting is that Barbara and the other Silents indulged the Boomers in their rebellion against their GI parents until schools were no longer teaching kids vocabulary, diction, or spelling, they removed all traces of civics and history from the curriculum, then gave up any hope of teaching rational thought to the little barbarians following them to the point that 13ers are now a bunch of blithering idiots who don't know what anything means, even though they recited these same things every day.... And the end result is the conclusion that we have to stop doing all this "praying & pledging before class" because it's meaningless to the kids anyway.

What's left to teach kids? Oh, that's right - we can teach them how to strap a condom on a banana! How silly of me - that certainly can fill 7 hours a day for 180 days in a year, and to hell with all that stupid reading and math crap. After all, they'll never figure it out enough to read the Constitution anyway.... and a good thing, too, or they'll get the mistaken impression that they have a right to bear arms - or worse yet, they'll figure out that there really is a right to practice your religion. And it'd be too confusing trying to explain why the words of the 10th Amendment don't apply to anything whatsoever, but "abortion" really is in the 14th, even though you can't see it.

Barbara, is it totally lost on you that we paid you to teach the kids what the pledge meant. You have no one to blame for the failure of my contemporaries to learn these crucial lessons beyond the person you see in the mirror in the morning.

thunk-thunk-thunk

Some day I'll hit my head on this desk enough that I'll understand why I'm so in love with a country that outlaws euthanasia.

On 2001-10-11 16:23, Barbara wrote:
Virgil, you'd have been my star pupil! While you were away harvesting for the winter-over clover, I got to pretend to be you for a second. I used the word "elocution" in a post (relative to this topic and your post, too, BTW), and Mr. Lamb was so impressed he looked it up.

At any rate, I have no doubt your elocution of the Pledge was and is still flawless. That kind of educating is for the history books now, alas.....

P.S. - Had you ever had your knuckles rapped with the pointing stick? I did! Ouch!
Barbara, I just want to point out that some of us weren't permitted the benefit of a parochial education (where we could have escaped some of the insanity I mention above) because our parents were so overtaxed to support the salaries of idiotic school teachers that we couldn't afford it. So, you see, it is your own fault that I never had a stern nun standing over me with a ruler, teaching me why I shouldn't be such an S.O.B. like I'm being right now.

It's approaching that time when I'll have to leave these forums for a while and forget why I keep leaving these forums for a while. Maybe I'll do that right after I get the splinters taken out of my forehead....


_________________
Christopher O'Conor
aka "Opusaug"
proud 13er, '68 cohort

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Chris '68 on 2001-10-11 21:02 ]</font>







Post#300 at 10-11-2001 11:23 PM by Opusaug [at Ft. Myers, Florida joined Sep 2001 #posts 7]
---
10-11-2001, 11:23 PM #300
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Ft. Myers, Florida
Posts
7

Evidence that we have passed the catalyst into a 4T will come when children who were required to speak the words of the Pledge of Allegiance return to Arlington National Cemetery in body bags, and there's a national consensus that they learned the meaning of those words well, and the gratitude and pride overshadow the sorrow and grief.

Evidence that we are at the climax will come when we - without flinching - ask our own children to fill one of those bags themselves.
Christopher O'Conor
13er, '68 cohort
-----------------------------------------