ALSO SEE: "Bush Fulfills His Grandfather's Dream"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a693d/a693d919ccf9ad4c213499ce3ea93656c9d2f0d6" alt=""
by Mickey Z. (with Rosemarie Jackowski)
Atlantic Free Press
14 August 2008
No, this is not a rehash of the Ward Churchill/Little Eichmann witch-hunt. But I have been contemplating the sentiment behind Churchill's original essay. In Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt wrote, "The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many wereneither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal." She wrote of a "new type of criminal," who "commits his crimes under circumstances that make it well-nigh impossible for him to know or to feel that he is doing wrong." Raise your hand if this sounds frighteningly familiar. The time is long overdue for all of us to be actively and relentlessly reminding the criminals that they are criminals. Until we do, they have the freedom to live in denial.
I sent the above paragraph to Rosemarie Jackowski (RMJ) to start a conversation.
RMJ: All over the United States people are working at jobs that result in the deaths of innocent people. There are military contracts and sub-contracts in small towns and villages, big cities, etc. Any job that supports the war machine is a real problem. I understand why people take jobs like that, but it would be a much better world if everyone just made the decision to do no harm.
MZ: You know what that line will provoke...the inevitable "so what can we do?" question.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8b8f/d8b8f96bd6c1dab10bf880442f4bc78bcd85100c" alt=""
MZ: Becoming? Our culture views compassion and empathy as nothing more than masks, disguises to hide the harm we're all guilty of.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0a7ae/0a7ae0342d9f383dc30f463691da79a893b99140" alt=""
MZ: So we agree: Little Eichmanns do exist. But I'll bet if Ward Churchill had used a different term, he would have remained as obscure as ever. The way I usually phrase it in articles or talks is that with few exceptions, there are no innocent bystanders in America. Any closing thoughts?
RMj: Well, I disagree that Ward Churchill was obscure before, but the "E-word" did bring a lot of additional attention. I knew about him because he is a fellow member of Veterans for Peace. Churchill's use of the "E-word" and the controversy that resulted was a valuable national learning opportunity that was missed. The media attention was misdirected from the facts of history and what Churchill really said. Instead the media focus was directed toward ad hominem attacks on Churchill. It just happened again when Rev. Jeremiah Wright made his comments about US history. Instead of having a national discussion on the merits or flaws in what Wright said, the media was consumed with ad hominem attacks on him. Basically it boils down to this - in the US if you speak the truth you will pay a high price. Mickey, you make an important point. There are no innocent bystanders in the US. We are all complicit - every one of us.
MZ: And that goes double for anyone who has fallen for the Obama hype.
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/4537/32/
No comments:
Post a Comment