SHARE YOUR CITY'S PEACE RALLY HERE.

Tar:

I agree, but there are still a few "True Democrats" left--and getting the party back to these people is the only option I see at the moment.

As for the vigil:

We had some trouble getting organized--but we eventually did. Our organizer kind of forgot that the traffic flow is a bit different now.

I just don't want to see a world like this come to pass http://www.geocities.com/eradicate_98/New_Patriot/Index.htm. But I fear it may:(

from Portland, Oregon:

Driving past the mall here in my city my wife and I saw perhaps a dozen people protesting the war. Several were children, who were obviously there supporting their parents' opinions.

Anyhow, one of the signs read "Honk if you are for Peace". During the time it took me to approach their corner, stop and wait at the light right alongside them, and drive away, I heard NO HONKING from amongst hundreds of cars.

(Of course, it isn't that no one else was "for peace", just that no one else was "for" the protestors.)

Peace rallies in Mexico have not been very big. A couple of weeks ago around 15 thousand marched. Last saturday, they were 20 thousand (my oldest son among them).

That's just tiny.

Good for your son.

I'm glad he did go, sozobe.
Thirty years ago I was a teenager marching against Nixon's bombing of Cambodia and Vietnam. Now it's his turn.

Harrisburg PA
Well tioday's vigil went well. Got some positive feedback and a few hecklers (I actually had to be told to back off by one of the other demonstrators).

There was ONE thing that's eating me a bit--while there someone had a Flag. I told the man I though he was a COUNTER-protestor.

Am I getting to the point where I see Patriotism as being reserved for the warmongers--if so, I'm in trouble:(

NeoGuin

Bring your own flag next time, and encourage others to do the same. It ought not to be a symbol reserved for one viewpoint.

Neo - Well, perhaps there's some hope in that you seem to have reacted viscerally at some level to your own open contempt for our flag. Now, if you can get your head around the idea that those who disagree with you are not "warmongers", you might be able to consider this issue in a more meaningful way.

It's so easy to think that the other guy wants to do what's wrong. What is far harder, but far more fruitful, is recognizing that the other guy doesn't want to do what is wrong, but differs with you on what is right. If you can work from that point one of you has a chance of learning from the other.

Tres

No one here...no one...complains more often than do you that so many others cannot fathom out the truth past their existing biases and certainties...it's why they disagree with your views, they just can't see, can't think right.

It's a humble stance you take, acknowledging bias as clearly and loudly and as often as you do, with the damage it does to perception and understanding. It's humble because it heartedly implies its corollary in the speaker too. I love you for that implied humility.

Good post, tres.

Did you say something, blatham?

Please stop this - the current situation we're all now involved in is serious.

blatham - I am all too aware that I have to struggle to see past my own biases as much as anyone else does.

For instance, I seem to carry around some pent up frustration at things I perceive to be well-intentioned but ill-considered policies, positions or platitudes of what I call "the left" (though I suspect I'm really thinking only of the very very very very far off in the distance left). Anyhow, I have such a knee-jerk reaction at times to news stories of this or that effort by the government to "solve" some problem or intervene in some "crisis" that I find I have developed a very calloused response to news stories about people in crisis. While my frustration is not with these people, but with the federal government's attempts to "fix" them, my wife has pointed out to me on several occasions recently that to her I seem not just uncaring, but hostile towards these people in need.

As stated above, I know that a lot of this is spilling over from my political frustrations, but I also suspect that some of it is a defense mechanism with which I allow myself to avoid the unpleasantness of experiencing empathy for these people.

What am I learning from this you ask? Well, for one thing I can understand how easy it is for people on the left to think that those on the right are callous and uncaring (certainly if I come across that way to my wife, I can only imagine the perception others might have). The other, more important thing I am working to learn is to sidestep the "wrong" reaction and work to consider these "stories" with a bit more depth.

Well, that's enough of me spilling my guts for at least a few months. I have a reputation as an uncaring right-wing fanatic to uphold!

Sure, Ms. Olga, I'll get my sackcloth, hey, tres...

Can I borrow some ashes?

Let's commence with the wailing and the gnashing of teeth....

Just stick to the isuues, maxsdadeo .... is that too hard?

t.p.

It's good that you've made an effort to explain your point of view ... where you're coming from. OK.

I have no wish to enter into an on-line argument with you (or anyone else, for that matter ..) but I must disagree with your argument that it's the "far left" who are opposing the war. Here in Australia (& I suspect, just about anywhere else) demonstrations have been attended by people from all walks of the community: old, young, school children, parents & their children, trade unionists, peace activists, the clergy, Christians, people of every ethnic group & religion (we are a diverse cultural community here), & yes, probably what you describe as "the far left", too ...
But, overwhelmingly, the spirit & sentiments of the participants were a strong desire for peace & sanity on the planet. We feel so strongly that we are being led into something very immoral & indefensible against our wishes.

Now can were get back to the subject of the thread?

HOLD ON HERE!

How you get contempt from that fact that it seems that at most rallies that the flag is being used by those who are of the war party?

I have no contempt, I just think that Bush and AM Talk radio have succeeded in convincing many people that patritism and pacifism are exclusive--one need only look at the "Red-Baiting" coverage of the October and January Anti-War rallies.

I'm half tempted to buy a flag and in the other hand have a banner that says "This is my flag too!"

"This is my flag too!"



exactly

If there were a "far left" in this country, I might agree with Tres' and Max's posts, but that view of the "American political spectrum" is laughable if you compare our limited and narrow our political differences with those of other "free" nations. What's more, the "far right" (two and a half steps in the other direction) are desperately opposed to this war. Look at their websites, their radio talk shows. On our local "loco radio," "Constitutionalists," anti-Trilateral Commission folks and "Christian Americans" are much more vocal than we Diffuse Disappointed Democrats are in their hearty hatred for Bush & Gang. They have built (for example) a tightly crafted 9/11 scenario which is fascinating and damn near convincing and should be made into a movie, at least. The differences of opinion within these threads look like center-vs.-center compared to what can be found "out there."

But what puzzles me here, as in Abuzz, is not that there is disagreement , of course, but that there is always a troop of bitter commentators, usually from the Right. They hover within, seldom offering a hard-won thought or apercu, but ever ready to pounce on those who do. When they feel their cattle-prod isn't working properly, they resort to insult and direct personal attack. We silly, sentimental antiwar folks feel beleaguered and defensive, but the true defensiveness is coming from the other side. While we're out here wearing our hearts on our sleeves, carrying our flags and banners, and parading in the open air, breathing deeply, they're standing nearby shouting angrily but so tightly clad in battle gear that they are invisible as humans. One wonders why they turn up every day just to shout.

Tres

I like your post. These corners of ourselves can take a lifetime to understand even some portion of. And we do all have them.

The long-term debate over how much government ought to be in place, and where it out to be operative (eg military or social services) is not one any of us should assume has simple or obvious answers.

'Common sense' can't be counted on, because its conclusions are seldom commonly held, and are often later proved to be wrong. Good sociological work, thoughtful political philosophy, and cross-cultural studies can each help, but we too often don't have or don't take the time and work necessary to study these with the necessary depth and breadth.

Switzerland, I have just recently been informed by a person raised there, offers free heroin to users at common little red cross stations. It is simply bland medicine, given out at inobtrusive and bland little buildings. No judgementalness, no cool drug cache, and far far less of a social problem than in the US or Canada. How many of us know about this alternate policy success?

We can, and often do, rely on partisan cliches, to our own detriment as thinkers and as citizens. We, all of us, ought to drop those cliches, and the unreflective partisan trust. Let's assume the person in front of us to whom we are talking is trying as hard as we are at something which isn't easy. Let's look for the easy dismissal, and label it as the culprit in bad discourse and thinking and in citizenship.