Author: jameswagner

Not all of us are blind.

DEFINITIONS OF WAR
To the Editor:
Re “Detention Upheld in Combatant Case” (front page, Jan. 9):
If the definition of “wartime president” has changed from being president at a time of war that has been declared (Harry S. Truman most recently, as I recall) to when Congress has authorized money for military force but has not declared war (Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Bosnia and the Persian Gulf war, to name the major conflicts) to the president’s simply declaring a war (on poverty, on cancer, on drugs, on crime, on terrorism), then we have had a “wartime president” for as long as I have been alive.
The war on terror is not a real war. It is not declared by Congress. This is a continuing, never-ending excuse to forward an agenda and, at least as described in your article, trample civil liberties in the name of “war” — a conflict that is politically nurtured despite its terrible and very real roots.
BEBE BROWN
Barnstable, Mass., Jan. 9, 2003

I believe however that Bebe Brown is mistaken, in this letter which appeared in the NYTimes today, about Truman declaring war. Truman inherited the Second World War and Korea was a police action where no war was actually declared.

Almost a century after she helped create the conscience of a once lively American Left, Emma Goldman‘s words have been proscribed by a great American University. The University of California at Berkeley was the birthplace almost forty years ago of the free speech movement [Is America is regularly in need of a free speech movement, like, it’s a such a new idea?], and for 23 years it has been the repository of Goldman’s papers, but the school doesn’t seem to have learned a thing from its extraordinary history.

In an unusual showdown over freedom of expression, university officials have refused to allow a fund-raising appeal for the Emma Goldman Papers Project to be mailed because it quoted Goldman on the subjects of suppression of free speech and her opposition to war. The university deemed the topics too political as the country prepares for possible military action against Iraq.

And the words which are so offensive and political?

In one of the quotations, from 1915, Goldman called on people “not yet overcome by war madness to raise their voice of protest, to call the attention of the people to the crime and outrage which are about to be perpetrated on them.” In the other, from 1902, she warned that free-speech advocates “shall soon be obliged to meet in cellars, or in darkened rooms with closed doors, and speak in whispers lest our next-door neighbors should hear that free-born citizens dare not speak in the open.”

Just before they occupied the Administration building in December of 1964, Mario Savio had exhorted his comrades,

“There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, you can’t take part, you can’t even tacitly take part, and you’ve got to put your bodies upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to indicate to the people who own it, to the people who run it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all.”
Mario Savio

It’s that time again.

Zachie Achmat still won’t take his pills, even though Nelson Mandela has asked him to. It’s part of a very big plan, and it seems to be working, since, as he says, “The country is realizing that people can actually buy life, and that this is unacceptable.”
The class, racial or economic foundation of the world’s response to the AIDS pandemic has rarely, if ever, been illustrated so dramatically as it has been and continues to be in South Africa. A heroic activist in the country with the highest official count of AIDS-infected people in the world, Achmat has “dragged his government into savings its people,” fighting denial at all levels [the goverment of Thabo Mbeki questions the very existence of HIV as the cause of AIDS and minimizes the problem otherwise] and demanding access to AIDS medications for all regardless of ability to pay.
He needs those drugs himself, and he can afford them, but in 1998 he vowed not to take them until everyone in South Africa could. While that day may be dawning, at least in his own country, it may in the end be too late for the man most responsible for what would be a very great victory, one which would honor that associated with Mandela, who now calls Achmat a role model.

The parallels between the campaign and the A.N.C. are haunting. The [Treatment Action Campaign, of which Achmat is chairman] is one of the few organizations still wearing the A.N.C.’s mantle of activism. Its leaders are using techniques they learned in the anti-apartheid struggle. Mr. Achmat was jailed several times in the 1970’s, and spent the 1980’s living underground as an A.N.C. activist. The campaign is fighting an evil even more formidable and deadly than apartheid, and one that, absent universal access to AIDS treatment, is just as selective in bringing most of the suffering down upon South Africa’s poor.

While some may say the gesture trivializes and distracts from the gravity of the anti-war message, Unreasonable Women organizer Donna Sheehan said desperate times . . .
“It got your attention, didn’t it?” joked Sheehan of Marshall, who said she doesn’t even go into the kitchen without a robe on.

–maybe too stupid to deserve democracy.
I’ve always thought that the reason most Americans do not vote their interests, but instead support those of the super-wealthy, is that they actually expect to be among the super-wealthy themselves some day.
So goes a good part of the argument of an OP-Ed piece in saturday’s NYTimes.

People vote their aspirations.
The most telling polling result from the 2000 election was from a Time magazine survey that asked people if they are in the top 1 percent of earners. Nineteen percent of Americans say they are in the richest 1 percent and a further 20 percent expect to be someday. So right away you have 39 percent of Americans who thought that when Mr. Gore savaged a plan that favored the top 1 percent [the repeal of the estate tax, which is explicitly for the mega-upper class], he was taking a direct shot at them.

Calvin Trillin in the January 27 edition of The Nation:

THE QUESTION OF NORTH KOREA
Korea has the bomb, but not to worry.
It’s not a crisis. No, we needn’t hurry
To get inspections back. Why try to spot
The weapons they already say they’ve got?
Containment’s fine, no reason for attack.
The threat, we’ve said for months, is just Iraq.
And why destroy Saddam but still contrive
To let this wicked Kim Jong Il survive?
Because one wicked tyrant must remain
To run against in Bush’s next campaign.