Categories
Diversity History

Women’s Movement

I am ashamed to say that I did not know this month was dedicated to Women’s History until I read this lovely rundown of historical moments by Alas, a Blog.

In keeping up with the theme, bean is continuing posting events in women’s history that have happened on each particular day in January. These are in keeping with all the other exceptionally good writings posted at this site.

I am ashamed that I don’t write on Women’s Writing or history for that matter, as much as I should for someone with my interest in both. Too easily sidetracked into other things that aren’t that important.

Such as political speeches that focus more on steroid use in athletes then on providing health care for all the people in this country. But then, we have California’s example to go by – that state felt it more important to rollback increases in car license fees rather than ensure the children of that state get access to medical care.

Damn, I just got sidetracked again. I think I’ll spend some more time at Alas, and focus more on women’s writing than the President and his politics – it is a much more palatable subject.

Categories
History

December 7th, one of so many days in infamy

Today is the anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, and the start of World War II for the United States. When I was younger, I used to get this day mixed up with my father’s birthday, which was yesterday, the 6th.

“No dear,” my Dad would say. “I was born on the 6th, war started on the 7th.”

Point of fact, my Dad turned 93 years old yesterday, and he spent his birthday 62 years ago working as a railway engineer on a train somewhere in the Northwest. The next day when he heard about Pearl Harbor, he got off at the next city that had a military recruiter and signed up in the Army. Eventually he ended up in the 82nd Airborne, spending much of his time in Europe, with a few side trips into Northern Africa.

He had achieved the rank of Captain by the time the war was over, all through battlefield promotions. This means his leaders weren’t as lucky or perhaps as watchful as Dad. Or perhaps it means that Dad’s leaders would put themselves at risk rather than their men.

Dad spent some time in London, where he picked up his love of ‘good tea’. I have suspicions that he did more than drink tea and jump out of planes, because among his memorabilia (that ended up lost during one move), there was a photo of a beautiful woman in uniform who I’d ask Dad about, but he’d never respond with anything other than saying softly she was a ‘…woman he knew in London.”

Dad planned on staying in the Army after the war until he realized that he wouldn’t have much of a career in the military because of his age – he was in his 30’s. So he quit and eventually ended up a Washington State Trooper, which is lucky because otherwise he wouldn’t have met my mother, a beautiful, frustrated 19 year old, in 1951. Then there was Mike, and then me, and then divorce.

Eventually Dad also spent time in Vietnam, a place he said we didn’t belong. While he was there, we were invited to meet him during our summer vacation and we were given the choice of Hawaii or Japan. Being kids, we picked Hawaii, which I don’t regret, though I wish now I’d picked Japan.

When we were in Hawaii, we spent time at the USS Arizona Memorial, which just didn’t mean that much to me and my brother. We were more interested in going swimming.

Dad’s a good conservative, and Republican, but he doesn’t think we have any business in Iraq. Doesn’t think much of Dubya, but liked his Dad. He’ll still vote for Bush though, rather than that “big mouth” from the north.

This is my Dad through the years, and who he is now. But first there was a man riding a train hearing the news that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor, and listening to the words about the …event that will live in infamy.

(National Geographic has an excellent Flash Presentation on the events surrounding the attack on Pearl Harbor.)

Categories
History People

Slay the Dreamer

On the anniversary of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr and the National Civil Rights Museum:

Visitors pass through displays depicting African-American life in the Jim Crow South, honoring early civil rights pioneers like Ida B. Wells and describing seminal events like the 1955-56 bus boycott in Montgomery, Ala.

Finally they come to the room in which King spent his final minutes and look onto the balcony where he was standing when Ray’s bullet hit him. Some find this place as evocative an American shrine as Independence Hall or the battlefields at Gettysburg and Antietam.

Thanks to wood s lot.

As I stated earlier, I would never join a protest based on a ‘celebration’ of an assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. However, I am aware that, in some ways, marching against war on the anniversay of King’s death is a vindication of the last few years of his life, spent fighting the Vietnam war. In an excellent perspective article on King’s death, On anniversary of assassination, some want King remembered as more than ‘dreamer’, the author, Gregory Lewis, writes:

As far as Julian Bond is concerned, the day King was shot to death is “the beginning of the reshaping of King’s legacy by erasing the last five years of his life, freezing him in August 1963.” Since his death at the age of 39, King’s image as a dreamer has supplanted King the radical opponent of the Vietnam War and economic exploitation of the poor.

Yet it’s King’s fight for economic equality for blacks, and his fight against the Vietnam war in addition to his eloquent and powerful influence for civil rights that made him, truly, the great man for all times. In one of his speeches, he said:

“Perhaps a more tragic recognition of reality took place when it became clear to me that the war was doing far more than devastating the hopes of the poor at home. It was sending their sons and their brothers and their husbands to fight and to die in extraordinarily high proportions relative to the rest of the population. We were taking the black young men who had been crippled by our society and sending them eight thousand miles away to guarantee liberties in Southeast Asia which they had not found in southwest Georgia and East Harlem.”

“Beyond Vietnam,” April 4, 1967

How uncanny that King would use the same words then, in a different war, that are so appropriate today: about securing liberties several thousand miles away when we’re being denied liberty here in this country, now. If anything marching against war would seem the perfect memorial for King.

But I think that Martin Luther King, Jr would disagree. He wasn’t a man who be comfortable with shrines, and wreaths, and glass cases containing memorabilia. I think he would say that the perfect memorial for him would be a living one, reflected in people fighting for freedom and against injustice and inequality every day of the year.

Categories
Government History

Not saying stop is not the same as saying go

In some ways I regret my Peaceblog no more writing, not because I don’t believe what I wrote — I do. And not because I feel like I’m selling out — I’m not. It seems to me this issue is on the minds of other people who marched and worked for peace. And it’s not an easy issue to discuss either.

I am aware that there are some people who are unhappy that I’m not continuing to protest the armed conflict in Iraq. That doesn’t bother me, as I knew that there will be people protesting the war until the end and that some will understand where I’m coming from, others won’t. I can accept this.

No, what does bother me is that others see this as a form of support for the war, as some sort of right-thinking move. (I hate that term with a passion, almost as much as I dislike neo-con.)

Let me be blunter: I am still against this war in Iraq. I believe, strongly, that the United States has no right to make what amounts to a unilateral invasion of Iraq. People are suffering and dying because of super inflated egos who have worked out a ‘strategy’ on paper and who refuse to acknowledge that they don’t have all the answers; in most cases, they don’t even know what the questions are. No, I believe the US screwed up.

However, I am also most interested in focusing my energy on what we can do to help the people of Iraq as soon as possible, as well as minimize the anger in the rest of the Arab world. In my opinion, this means establishing an interim government that will be acceptable to the Iraqi people and the majority of countries in the Middle East. At least until the Iraqi feel comfortable enough, as a whole, for everyone to “please just leave now”.

To me, this interim government should be overseen by more neutral parties, in my opinion, something joint between the Arab League and the UN.

I think the worst possible thing will be for the United States to continue in any form of controlling position in this country. Not only will this increase the stress and the anger in the Middle East, quite bluntly, I don’t trust the current leadership of this country not to screw up.

I also want to ensure that the US does not invade any other countries without cause. Not on my watch at least.

Now, taking all that, and borrowing from Jonathon’s upcoming “‘How to Respond to Idiots’ for Dummies” book, I don’t know how one gets from being sadly resigned to the belief that pulling troops out at this time would do more harm than good to the Iraqi people to I am now behind this war to give freedom and human rights to the Iraqi people.

However, there may be some confusion because of a mixed message I’m sending. After all, I am behind a war for freedom and human rights; it’s just that this war is being fought within the United States, not Iraq.

Archived with comments at the Wayback Machine

Categories
Government History

Peaceblog no more

I have removed the Peaceblog logo from the sidebar. I’m not sure at this point exactly what a peaceblog is. After three difficult days of thinking, I’m not sure what ‘peace’ is.

Before the invasion, ‘peace’ meant to me working to prevent my country from invading Iraq without good and decent cause and world support. By world, I mean UN support.

I never at any time considered Iraq an imminent threat. We are not justified attacking the country for this reason. We’re not justified attacking the country for 9/11. The only justification we could have for an armed conflict is to remove Saddam Hussein because of his oppression of the people of the country, but talk about Weapons of Mass Destruction is not concern about the Iraqi people. Too late the people of Iraq entered our regard.

Once we entered the country, once we dropped the bombs, we started something and to leave now will just result in a stalemate that will result in yet more death in a country that’s seen too much of it. The same type of death that resulted when we encouraged the Iraqi people to revolt 12 years ago and then didn’t stay around to help them. I bitterly regret that we started this war, but we can’t just leave now.

However, acknowledgment of finishing what we’ve started is not support. I do not support Bush and his administration. I do not support their short-sighted arrogance or their frightening long-term view for the Middle East.

The Sydney Morning Herald had a story today about disagreement within the Bush Administration about post-war strategy. It notes that the State Department (Colin Powell), as well as Britain’s Blair, believe in turning over the administration of Iraq to the UN after the war, though Powell has shown he won’t publicly refute the President’s and the Pentagon’s interest in maintaining US control.

I agree with turning the temporary administration of Iraq to UN control, as the country goes through what will be an extraordinarily difficult time. Replacing US control of Iraq with UN control is my push and my focus now, and that’s what I’m working for. The US presence will still be there, including our money and aid — we did start this after all — but under UN supervision as part of the UN forces.

And I do not agree with American corporate profiting from this war. Period.

The US staying in control of Iraq makes this a war of imperialism, regardless of how we want to wrap it. Not only will this inspire more terrorism, it will further destabilize the Middle Eastern region with fear of what the US will do next. I won’t soon forget the discussion about Syria and Iran last week. I won’t forget the implications of those words, and neither will Syria or Iran. Or, most likely, North Korea.

I also support direct Arab League involvement in the administration of Iraq. We have to start getting over our distrust of each other — Western world and the Arab world. Being the enemy without is not going to stop the spread of Muslim fanaticism or any form of fanaticism for that matter.

A most vivid image in my mind is that Iraqi driver the morning of the first bombing of Baghdad. The country was under war and the city had just been bombed, but the driver still signaled to turn, still stopped at a red light. Of all the images of destruction and violence and death from Iraq, this is the image that haunts me the most.

What the people of Iraq, and the Middle East, want is what we want — normalcy. Nobody wants war but the fanatical and the ambitious.

Archived with comments at the Wayback Machine