A Plea For A Rational Discussion On Ward Churchill

[DemocratSinceBirth]

I have read and reread his essay on 9-11.

http://www.darknightpress.org/index.php?i=news&c=recent&view=9&long=1

Sir Issac Netwon noted in the eighteenth century "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction" and yes America has meddled in the affairs of other nations and many folks have taken umbrage at that meddling and reacted violently if not accordingly...

This is what Professor Churchill is saying about the antecedents to 9-11 and so far he is on firm ground...

Where Professor Churchill has gotten himself in trouble is to the degree of culpability he assigns to those that were killed on 9-11.....

Some here argue he has assigned no culpability.... Some here argue he has assigned major culpability and some here argue it's somewhere in between...

That is really what needs to be clarified...

[LiberalVoice]

1. I don't understand why theres confusion...

He said that the "technicians" of a technocratic society(i.e. the businessmen of major corporations who slaughter thousands of people every year in far off countries for the better of their companies, not to mention that they also control our govt. and are always directly behind any reasons we take drastic actions abroad) are those that caused 9/11 to happen. To say that those people were innocent victimes was bullshit. They are the reason 9/11 happened.

Basically what he said in a nutshell.

On Edit: Thats where the little eichmanns comment came in. Because indirectly those bussinessmen are responsible for the deaths of millions around the world.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. That Begs The Question..

Let's accept your premise....


Does that mean that it would be appropriate to say that those who worked at the WTC and we will make the perfunctory exception for working people had it coming..

I can't embrace that...

[LiberalVoice]

3. So are we to think that a janitor or child in those buildings...

is just as responsible for our nations foreign policies as big business is? Absolutly not. And never did he accuse anyone of deserving to die in those attacks. He merely said thats why they happened and that 9/11 aswell as many more 9/11's were/are inevitable.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

5. The Only People Who Are Responsible For A Crime

Are Those That Committed Them

As I said in my original post if all he said was that we shouldn't be surprised when folks respond to our meddling then there wouldn't be this brouhaha...


I think a reasonable reading of the text would suggest otherwise...


Isn't it really a mutually exclusive proposition.

Either the folks who were killed on 9-11 were undeserving of their fate or they weren't...

[tx_dem41]

4. Neither can I....

We, on the Left, seem very willing to condemn the use of violence over diplomacy. But, we seem unable to condemn the use of violence by the terrorists instead of attempting to use other non-violent means.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. The Sad Thing

is even if you think had it coming which I emphatically do not it's not America who is suffereing.. It's the people of the Middle East...

America can and will continue to kill 1,000 of them for every one of us...

[LiberalVoice]

8. What dimplomacy?

Show me where in the last 4 years this administration has shown diplomacy in their actions? What will you do when they come to your homes with rifles in your face? Will you lay down on the ground with your hands behind your head?

Show me the diplomacy in big business where they use the control of the strongest military in the world to for profit.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. What's The Alternative?

eom

[LiberalVoice]

13. Think about this instead...

Imagine they don't come for you...They come for your child.

This is why they have the control. Because we let them have it.

[tx_dem41]

46. That was my point. They don't show diplomacy, and we rightfully..

condemn it. But if you are equating the actions of 9/11 to citizen's protesting this regime (note: I'm not necessarily saying you are), we will have to part ways on that. Terrorism is wrong.

[Nimrod]

7. He deviated from the "rules"

The rules say that the bad guys must be portrayed as soulless, evil, baby-eating, slavering monsters operating for no reason other than their lust for the blood of innocents. All good guys must be portrayed as lily-white, saintly, and completely guiltless (white hat optional). Professor Churchill deviated from these "rules" and assigned responsibility to people who are supposed to be perfect and without sin.

A beautiful example of these rules in action can be found right here in hundreds upon hundreds of threads. It's called "support the troops". Pick up a paper and find an anti-war LTTE and it will ALWAYS begin with something like "I support the troops, but...". Here on DU, if you don't specifically state that you "Support The Troops" you are risking attack.

There was a guy at work who was about to be deployed in the reserves. Somebody asked him if he thought he might go to Iraq and his response was exactly this: "Give me a gun, I'm ready. One of those ragheads comes up to me and says 'I'm innocent' I'll go 'Bang! Now you're dead." He went on to gleefully describe his anticipation of his kill count.

People do NOT like it when I tell this story. Bet you some money that within two posts someone puts up something pointing out that this individual was rare if not almost unique and the VAST majority of these angel-faced Troops deserve our Support (capitalization intentional).

See, by telling this story I'm blurring the good guy/bad guy lines. Bad form, that. People like their heroes standing in white auras and their enemies drenched in the blood of babies. Any steps away from this rigid format is asking for trouble.

[LiberalVoice]

9. And thats the fucking truth...nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Nobody Here Is Saying American History Should Be Understood As A

Morality Play..


Some of us while aware of American perfidy are still troubled by the blurring of the distinction between those who are directly responsible and those who aren't...


I think the rules established at Nuremburg are just fine... Punish those directly responsible... They didn't hang the president of Mercedes Benz....

[LiberalVoice]

12. Help me understand?

Do you believe that the CEO of Halliburton is responsible for the deaths of innocent Iraqi's?

Just because you have someone else do it doesn't make you innocent.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. We Are Getting Away From The Original Topic...

He's morally responsible but that begs three questions


What is the controlling legal authority that determines his reponsobility?


What should be the punishment?


And who metes it out?

But the CEO of Halliburton is more reponsible for what's happening in the M E than some arbitrageur on the 99th floor of the WTC but not as responsible as the government that orders it...

We are going from specific questions to global questions...

[LiberalVoice]

17. Ok then, a specific question.

How exactly would someone in Colombia find justice through diplomacy for the murder of a loved one who worked in a factory owned or operated by an american company because he/she faught with a union for better pay from an american based company?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. By Punishing The Shooter Or The Person That Hired The Shooter

Here's where I think you get on shakey moral ground...


Almost all nations and races have collectively done nasty things to one another in the course of history but how do we then assign culpability to the acts of individuals....

[LiberalVoice]

21. Again...

By doing that you are only nipping at the top of the problem. Solve the problem. Don't cut off part of it only to let it keep growing back over and over and over and over.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Blowing Up Things Isn't Going To Solve The Problem Either...

The only way to solve the problem is to get our government to change it's policies...


The United States is not going to be cowed into changing it's policies....

Hell, sixty years of terrorism hasn't made the Israelis change their policies and they have but a scintilla of the resources we do to combat it...


I think dialogue trumps violence on both moral and prudential grounds...

[LiberalVoice]

36. Israel has america as their resource.

All i'll say is this...Hopefully one day you'll realize that while you're trying to engage one of their minions in dimplomatic dialogue they have a thousand others murdering children somewhere else.

[Nimrod]

15. That's nice as far as it goes

But see? In just that one line you've demonstrated a massive fault in our collective nature.

If a playground bully terrorizes, humiliates, and insults a smaller kid until one day the kid shows up with a gun and blows his head off - well, the kid with the gun is the one directly responsible. Nice, neat, clean. Got our good guy and our bad guy. If we allow ourselves to look at the entire scenario it opens up a whole range of issues: Why did this bully act this way? Who allowed this bully to act that way for so long? Could something have been done to prevent it? Could there be an inherent problem in the school system that allows this sort of behavior pattern to escalate to violence? Could I have somehow inadvertently contributed to this scenario?

Nope nope, way too confusing and following that train of thought might lead to self-examination and WE DON'T LIKE THAT! Self-examination is the greatest boogeyman to ever exist in the mind of man. We MUST be the one standing in that shining white aura.

Much more comfortable to just say the kid with the gun is directly responsible and leave it at that. Oh, and lets ban black trenchcoats while we're at it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. I Think We Should Use The Same Approach To Crime As We Use To Terrorism

The Weed and Seed Strategy

Operation Weed and Seed is foremost a strategy--rather than a grant program--which aims to prevent, control, and reduce violent crime, drug abuse, and gang activity in targeted high-crime neighborhoods across the country. Weed and Seed sites range in size from several neighborhood blocks to 15 square miles.

The strategy involves a two-pronged approach: law enforcement agencies and prosecutors cooperate in "weeding out" criminals who participate in violent crime and drug abuse, attempting to prevent their return to the targeted area; and "seeding" brings human services to the area, encompassing prevention, intervention, treatment, and neighborhood revitalization.

A community-orientated policing component bridges weeding and seeding strategies. Officers obtain helpful information from area residents for weeding efforts while they aid residents in obtaining information about community revitalization and seeding resources.

The same approach to be used in the war on terrorism*... We should prosecute, imprison, or kill the terrorists while working to ameliorate the conditions that give it rise...

The post 9-11 environment has become so heated that a thoughtful discussion is essentially impossible and throwing flames on the fire as Professor Churchill did is only going to get the folks in the M E burned because we have the firepower...

* I used the term "war on terrorism" for shorthand but terrorism is a tactic... It's like declaring war on karate....

[Nimrod]

18. while working to ameliorate the conditions that give it rise

Beautiful, and I agree 100%. So I can give as specific an answer to your initial question as I can:

What Professor Churchill has done is point out conditions that give it rise. He started right here at home - WE AS A NATION are a condition that give it rise, and he narrowed down to specifics from there.

Needless to say, we didn't like that much. Humans do not accept responsibility well.

[Just Me]

30. Good point. Churchill explains our role in creating the environment.

Most Americans aren't even aware of the atrocities committed by their corporate governance primarily because the government has intentionally concealed such information.

Nevertheless, the oppression and violence waged by our corporate governance created the environment of desperation that lead to a horrific form of vigilantism. Desperate people who see no other means to recognize justice turn to desperate means.

Now, if a person is sophisticated, that person can faily easily distinguish between an examination of the underlying causes/motivations associated with certain events from a judgment of the events themselves as right or wrong. Less sophisticated folks prefer to stick with the ease of judging an event rather than invest the energy and discomfort associated with understanding the whole picture.

[LiberalVoice]

19. Are you shittin me?

"Officers obtain helpful information from area residents for weeding efforts while they aid residents in obtaining information about community revitalization and seeding resources."

Bullshit...That maybe what they're saying they're doing but they sure as shit aint. They don't fix the problem, they just cut a little piece of it off the top.

If you believe thats what they do your misinformed and if you believe that it will work you're lost.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. The Weed And Seed Model Is A Sensible One...

In a perfect world it would be properly funded...The authorities would put the drug dealers in prison and ameliorate the conditions that make being a a drug dealer or pimp an attractive job option...

[LiberalVoice]

24. Hows it sensible if it doesn't work?

It doesn't work. It never works. It solves none of the problems it is set to. It is fatally flawed because it STOPS NOTHING. Again, I ask you how is it sensible if it doesn't work?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. Crime Has Gone Down...

I could show you communities where this method of dealing with crime has been employed and has worked...


Just intuitively one would think it would work.... Get rid of the bad guys and then ameliorate the conditions that gave rise to them...

[LiberalVoice]

33. Have you ever lived in the ghetto?

Cuz let me tell you something. I spent damn near my entire life in different ghettos in different cities and i've never seen your plan come to fruition. They might build a community center, or a playground, but so long as there is a system put forth by the rich to keep people poor it'll never do any good. So long as the government tends to the needs of the powerful, waiting on them hand and feet, and provides minimal services to poor people with poor educations taught to them in poor schools that system will be shit.

Do you really think with the way our government enslaves us for the good of the few that they're just dieing to line up contractors to build more fascilitating schools, or even update curriculum in the old delapidated ones? Please :eyes:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. Then What's The Solution...

You could argue that the problem of the urban poor is insoluble and therefore we are best off ignoring it...


As a point of privilege I have mentored at risk kids and have seen first hand what broken homes, poverty, and drgus can do to an individual...

[LiberalVoice]

39. Just because your method doesn't work doesn't mean it cant be fixed.

IF our govt put forth a serious effort and was run by politicians who gave a fuck it could work. Imagine what such a giant wealthy system like our form of goverment could do if the people at its highest seats actually gave a fuck about us little people down here.

And just so you know I thank you for trying to help mentor children living in poverty stricken areas. It helps them alot to know that there really are people somewhere out there like you that care and want to make things better for them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

40. Robert Kennedy Reduced Human Needs To It's Simplest Element...

"A job and some hope"


The only qualifier I would add is that it be a job that provides dignity to the person who does it and a living wage...

[LiberalVoice]

42. Well we both very much agree on that :) nt

[Nimrod]

43. You've nailed it right there

Hell yeah it could work - but man, that's an IF the size of South America.

Overcoming that IF would take a near-total breakdown of our system of government. Not all American leaders are evil by nature, but they ARE all members of a very elite minority who have zero understanding of the "common" American. Those who aren't corrupt and evil are merely clueless, and there's really no way of educating them because of the vast chasm that exists between us.

Personally, I think we should pay our leaders minimum wage. That might be a start at least, but it's not very likely to come to pass y'know?

[LiberalVoice]

47. I've always sadi...

"If we payed our politicians as much as we pay our teachers and vice versa this world would be alot better"

[Nimrod]

23. It is a beautiful idea on paper

And it could theoretically work. The only problem with Weed and Seed is it's a BIG job.

We like to see cause and effect as A leads to B. Cause and effect is a lot closer to A leads to B leads to C leads back to more B leads to D leads to F,G,H,I,J,K all at the same time leads to O. L M and N come in somewhere, but we're not sure just where yet.

Manipulating cause and effect on a societal level is extremely difficult, especially for an impatient and easily frustrated species like ours.

[sendero]

26. Well said...

.... and I'd add that I find it completely fallacious when folks ignore the overriding message in favor of attacking some trivial facet of the way the point is made.

[Nimrod]

28. Indeed!

I am SO with you on this one. It's a lovely example of how we think in terms of absolutes and extremes. I'm certainly guilty of it, although I've been working for a long time to overcome that.

If you said you like vanilla ice cream and I responded with something along the lines of "So you think anyone who likes chocolate is an idiot and you want to make chocolate illegal" it would be pretty easy to spot how irrational and ridiculous I sound. But this is how people think.

How many times have you been called an anti-American terrorist sympathizer? I get that one a LOT. :) Same exact method of thinking, just on a more important issue than ice cream flavors.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. Then We Are Lost....

If America is polarized into two camps and one camp believes "they hate us for our freedom" and the other camp knows the truth is way more complex then we are lost because the former camp has the guns.....

[Nimrod]

34. My signature gives my views on that

And what do you mean "IF"? :)

Actually, it would be a lot easier if we were just polarized into two camps - unfortunately we've been polarized into hundreds - or thousands - or millions, each one thinking they hold absolute TRUTH and are standing alone in that white aura.

And yes, this includes the bad guys we should "get rid of".

People often ask me for MY solutions, when I flat out don't have any and doubt any exist - Certainly no simple ones, and killing all the bad guys is about as simple as it gets. That works in video games and movies, and although we REALLY want to believe it's the perfect solution to real life it's doing nothing but treating a symptom. Killing the bad guys is removing a tumor the size of a pea while pretending not to see the one the size of a watermelon because you don't know how to remove that one.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

38. I'm Not Ready To Go Off Gently Into That Good Night...

Some of these problems are soluble through dialogue...


What's the alternative?

[RafterMan]

45. Bah

There's nothing "layered and complex" in this presentation -- it's the same sneering moralism found on the right, except in the opposite direction.

I'm all for layered and complex. This isn't it.

[G_j]

48. the "support the troops" phrase

was specifically created to imply that the peace movement was 'anti-American'.

as somebody said, "the yellow ribbons are cute, but they haven't saved a single life"

[Nimrod]

57. An essay I wish I could find

Google search turns up nothing, but the title pretty much says all: "Your American Flag Decal Won't Get You Into Heaven Anymore"

[pstans]

49. Great point

People don't like to think about the consequences of their actions. Churchill hit that nerve. People want to think the way Bu$h has marketed the whole terroism thing: "Your either with us or against us."

[Tinoire]

53. Bingo. n/t

[robbedvoter]

25. 911 is the fault of atheists, gays, feminists, pagans..." Falwell Discuss

Why are we even hitting ourselves in the head - just because they want us to. Turn off the damn teeveee already!

[Just Me]

32. Now, there's a person who should've permanently lost his job,...

,...as some representative of JC. What gawd-awful, hateful garbage this man spews against fellow Americans as he wears JC on his sleave. :mad:

[Nimrod]

35. The fact that this man

...isn't rotting in prison somewhere is a crime in itself.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

41. Thanks For The Participation...

Please carry on without me...

I am now going to focus on more mundane things like recapturing Congress and the Presidency for the Democrats and rooting for the Miami Heat to win the NBA championship...


Peace

Brian

[Nimrod]

44. ::grins::

Complicated, ain't it? :)

[bunny planet]

50. Malloy had Professor Ward Churchill on his program last night.

He read a brief statement of clarification written by Churchill in response to all this furor before the interview. While I haven't read the essay Churchill wrote 3 years ago, his explanation did clear up and pinpoint what he was trying to say, and the interview was most illuminating. Malloy also read an article by someone named Frank (not Thomas Frank) that appeared in the New Republic magazine (I think) that pretty much called for the murder and torture of three anti-war activists including Arundhati Roy.

Malloy's point being that right wing opinion is allowed to get away with insufferably violent and abusive language but anyone on the left who expresses an opinion that is provocative in the least and has an audience is gone after and destroyed. Churchill has had death threats against his family these past two weeks, the man at the university that hired him for the speech has been fired, nazi signs have been painted on Churchill's car. But, right wing people like Coulter, who publicly stated that terrorists should bomb the NYTimes building and kill everyone in it is rewarded with more talk show appearances and lucrative book deals. Starting to see the 'vast right wing' conspiracy in this.

Churchill made some very clear points last night, simply put, Americans can not expect to create such havoc, death and destruction in the world and not also expect it to come back and bite them in the ass in the way of retribution. It is the seemingly too complex a thought for many so-called 'patriotic' Americans, that if we were attacked pre-emptively on our own soil, the way the Iraqis were, and our country and loved ones threatened in such a way, we would fight back tooth and nail as well and essentially become the 'insurgents' against unjust occupation.

Churchill also singled out Madeline Albright's statement about the deaths of over 500K Iraqi children during the sanctions as being something 'we could live with' because it was worthwhile in terms of the alternatives or some such crap. Churchill did not make that much of a distinction between the Bush administration or the Clinton administration, indeed between any administration since 1945 in terms of criminal practices around the world perpetrated by our governments in our names. We can not expect to go unpunished for this behavior in the long run is essentially what he was saying.

He would not rule out the * administrations possible complicity in the 9/11 attacks but simply said that until he had proof he did not like to conjecture. He said that the Pentagon had CIA offices in the World Trade Towers and therefore in the eyes of the terrorists, they were as distinct a military target as the Pentagon (I disagree on this vehemently). He also said that the Pentagon itself views all the innocent civilians killed in the towers as 'collateral damage' just like in any other military attack. Most Americans would be surprised to hear those people referred to that way but Churchill has no doubt that that is the way they are viewed in Pentagon speak and mindset.

Overall a good interview, I'm glad Malloy had him on. He made some very important points about humanity beginning to understand that it is imperative to make our governments follow the rule of law in the world (easier said than done of course) and that you reap what you sew . Americans insist on seeing themselves as separate, better than, and more noble than other societies even with evidence to the contrary right in their faces. They assume that deaths of children and other innocents in other parts of the world do not have the same meaning or affect of the Universe as their own deaths. This attitude will be our undoing. They are the others, their deaths do not matter as much as our own. We will live to regret that attitude if we don't change it, and soon.

[Tinoire]

54. Excellent post.

Thanks for taking the time to recap...

[Spazito]

55. After listening to Dr. Churchill on Mike's show...

I understand where he was coming from regarding his comments and I think he is right on point which is why the witch-hunt is now ongoing. Could he have been more 'tactful' in his comments, possibly, but would using tact have blurred the very important point he was making, probably. He came across as reasoned, articulate and passionate. I liked him.

[bunny planet]

56. I did too. When have right wing spokespersons been required to be

'tactful'. Is Ann Coulter tactful? Rush Limbaugh? The difference is of course that they are spewing the party line and talking points for the far right and they are paid liars for this administrations policies.

The double standard is infuriating.

[bunny planet]

51. Here is a link to Churchill's response to the furor over his statements.

http://www.nativevillage.org/Messages%20from%20the%20People/Ward%20Churchill%20responds.htm

[bunny planet]

52. This is the Cockburn article where he points out that there is a double

standard in what is tolerated in right wing opinion vs left wing opinion. Left wing opinion is targeted (sometimes rightfully so) while right wing extremist positions are sanctioned and allowed to go unchallenged. Hmmm, I wonder why that is?
http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/02/1719839.php