Dear RN list, Sorry to send out a THIRD message today, but this just came in and it fits so well! all the best, Jan ******************************************************** Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 07:23:09 -0800 From: CyberBrook <•••@••.•••> Subject: Terror, Love and The State of the World John Robbins is the author of many best-sellers, including Diet For A New America, and his recently released The Food Revolution. He is the founder of EarthSave International, and can be contacted through the website foodrevolution.org, http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1101-01.htm >Thursday, November 1, 2001 >Terror, Love and The State of the World >by John Robbins > >When there is as much terror afoot as there has been since September 11th, >it is hard to see how love might prevail. >This is how it is with us human beings when we are afraid: We contract. Our >breathing becomes shallow and constricted. Concerns for our immediate >survival push everything else out of the picture. In the throes of terror, >our thinking is narrowed and short-term. The world is divided into two kinds >of people, those who are threats and those who can help us defend against >the threat. Everyone else is seen as irrelevant, and might as well not >exist. All our attention is focused on protecting ourselves from the >immediate danger. Our thoughts become dominated by "fight or flight," >triggering the reptilian part of our brain to take over. If we can't >successfully flee, then we must fight. It's kill or be killed. Nothing >else matters. > >That's the mindset of terror. That's what fear does to us. It's a state of >consciousness that's been widespread in our nation since the horrifying and >tragic attacks of September 11th. > >In Time magazine's special issue about the terrorist attacks, the concluding >essay was titled, "The Case for Rage and Retribution." The author of this >piece, frequent Time contributor Lance Morrow, called for "hatred," and "a >policy of focused brutality." He was far from alone in speaking of the >virtues of rage and retaliation. On Fox News Channel, Bill O'Reilly said >"the U.S. should bomb the Afghan infrastructure to rubble - the airport, the >power plants, their water facilities and the roads." As far as the civilian >population of Afghanistan, O'Reilly said, "If they don't rise up against >this criminal government, they starve, period." Calling for the U.S. to >massively attack not only Afghanistan, but also Iraq and Libya, he added, >"Let them eat sand." Meanwhile, the former executive editor of the New York >Times, A. M. Rosenthal, said we should issue ultimatums to six nations, >including Iran, Syria and the Sudan, and then, if they don't comply to our >satisfaction within 72 hours, follow up with massive bombing. New York Post >columnist Steve Dunleavy was also something besides coolheaded, saying "As >for cities or countries that host these worms, bomb them into basketball >courts." The editor of National Review, writing in the Washington Post, >concurred, adding, "If we flatten part of Damascus or Tehran or whatever it >takes, that is part of the solution." > >With the sounds of such war drums reverberating through the American psyche, >polls show that 80% support not only the use of ground troops in >Afghanistan, but also military action against other countries in the >Middle East. > >I am no stranger to the desire for revenge. Like President George W. Bush, >and most likely like you, I have felt it surge through me in recent weeks. >Contemplating what took place on September 11th, are there any among us who >have not, at least momentarily, felt their blood boil with outrage, and with >the demand that these mass murderers and all those behind them pay with an >eye for an eye? > >But at such times, when our hearts are filled with outrage and our eyes look >everywhere for revenge, it is extraordinarily important that we remember the >awesome truth behind Gandhi's prophetic statement: "An eye for an eye will >only make the whole world blind." > >This is the very truth that the Osama bin Ladens of the world would want us >to forget. They would like us to be so lost in hysteria that we can't think >straight. They would like us to be so terrified, so anxious, so belligerent, >that we lose perspective and make rash and destructive decisions. If we stay >within the bubble of our fear, then the bin Ladens of the world will have won. > >Sometimes we need to take a very long, very slow, and very deep breath, to >restore our mental balance and ability to function with clarity. There is a >difference between enraged action and wise, effective response. > >Of course we should find the people and organizations responsible for the >attacks of September 11th, and the subsequent anthrax mailings, and any >other attempts that might yet be made to terrorize our nation. We should >find them, destroy their networks, and bring them to justice. By no means >should we tolerate or excuse their actions, much less allow them to >continue. These are people not the slightest bit interested in giving peace >a chance. The possibility that they might acquire and use nuclear weapons is >unfortunately all too real. If we fail to track them down and uproot them, >we may find ourselves in even worse shoes than the European who wrote, after >World War II, "We who live beneath a sky still streaked with the smoke of >crematoria have paid a high price to find out that evil is really evil." > >But as we work to uproot the terrorists and their networks, we must be >careful to do so without escalating the cycle of violence, and without >causing the deaths of even more innocent people, for this would only deepen >the anger and rage already extant in our world. Burning down the haystack is >not the best way to find the needle, especially when, in the effort, you >might set the barn, and the whole world, on fire. We must bring those >responsible to justice without jeopardizing our ability to create a world >where terrorism won't take root, a world where criminal psychopaths find no >followers, a world where hatred has no lure. > >This is no small task, but it is the task before us. Our leaders are wise in >working to form a multinational coalition to fight terrorism. But this >should not be merely a coalition of countries who allow the U.S. military >the use of their airspace, or the use of their airports, or provide other >military support. No coalition to defeat terrorism can be ultimately >successful unless it is also a coalition of countries joining together to >build a peaceful, just and prosperous world. Our coalition to defeat >terrorism will do only half of its job if it merely seeks to defeat those >who are responsible for the attacks of September 11th. It must also work to >build a world of international cooperation, a world where no part of the >greater human family is left out or marginalized. > >Approximately 6,000 people perished in the September 11th attacks. Our >nation reels from that despicable brutality. But those who died from the >attacks on that tragic day were not alone. On September 11th, 35,000 >children worldwide died of hunger. A similar number of children died on >September 12th, and again on the 13th, and on every single day since then. >Meanwhile, we in the U.S. feed 80% of our grain harvest to livestock so that >a people whose cholesterol levels are too high can have cheap meat. > >To advance human security and control terrorism, we must not only find the >brutality of the September 11th attacks to be totally intolerable. We must >also find intolerable that one billion people worldwide struggle to survive >on $1 a day, that more than one billion people lack access to safe drinking >water, and that 3 billion people have inadequate access to sanitation. > >The presence of such dire poverty is an insult to human dignity and would be >deplorable enough. But today, with worldwide telecommunications making the >rising inequality between a rich, powerful and imposing West and the rest of >the world visible to all, its continued existence can only spur those who >have no prospect of a better life to previously unheard of levels of despair >and rage. In a time when a handful of desperate and suicidal people can >devastate the most militarily powerful nation in the history of humankind, >any coalition dedicated to defeating terrorism must also be a coalition >dedicated to the goal of bringing justice and prosperity to the poor and >dispossessed. If we are serious about stopping terrorism, then our goal must >be to reduce the level of pollution, fear, and poverty in the world. > >If this is truly our goal, and if we devote our actions and resources to its >accomplishment, the support for the bin Ladens of the world will inexorably >evaporate. People who would have otherwise sided with the terrorists will be >clamoring to tell us who and where they are, and to help us find and >defeat them. > >This goal is too costly, many say. But this is not true. The cost of our >initial military response will easily top $100 billion (on top of our >already enormous annual defense budget of $342 billion). What could we >accomplish if we spent even a small fraction of that much on programs to >alleviate human suffering? > >In 1998, the United Nations Development Program estimated that it would cost >an additional $9 billion (above current expenditures) to provide clean water >and sanitation for everyone on earth. It would cost an additional $12 >billion, they said, to cover reproductive health services for all women >worldwide. Another $13 billion would be enough not only to give every person >on Earth enough food to eat but also basic health care. An additional $6 >billion could provide basic education for all. > >These are large numbers, but combined they add up to $40 billion - only one >fifth as much as the $200 billion the U.S. government agreed in October 2001 >to pay Lockheed to build new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) jets. > >Our government leaders have not hesitated to build an international >coalition and to spend hundreds of billions of dollars to defeat those who >launched the attacks of September 11th. What if we were equally as dedicated >to building an international coalition to eradicate hunger, to provide clean >water, to defeat infectious disease, to provide adequate jobs, to combat >illiteracy, and to end homelessness? What if we understood that, today, >there is no such thing as national security as long as the basic human needs >of large portions of humanity are not met? In today's world made transparent >by television and other telecommunications, any country that attains >prosperity unshared by its fellow nations can only breed resentment and >hatred. > >Most immediately, we must address what is rapidly becoming an overwhelming >humanitarian problem in Afghanistan. This nation has endured decades of >conflict. As a result, there are millions of people there who, even before >our bombing campaign began, were dependent on food aid. Now, they face the >prospect of imminent starvation. According to United Nations experts, this >is the most severe humanitarian emergency ever. > >The U.S. Government has made much of C-17 cargo planes dropping 20,000 food >packets a day to Afghan civilians. But according to world hunger relief >organizations active in Afghanistan such as Oxfam, the program has been a >dismal failure. The president of one of the world's most prestigious aid >organizations, Doctors Without Borders, speaking from Islamabad, deplored >the program as so much "PR." The airdrops, he said, are a huge waste of >money. The packages, containing enough to feed an adult for a day, land all >over the place, with no guarantee that they will be retrieved. Many land in >the midst of landmines. And the amount being dropped is insignificant is a >country where seven or eight million people are in danger of starvation. The >money ($25 million according to U.S. Government sources) would be far better >spent provisioning the regular aid convoys already in action. > >There is a terrible irony here. The United States has long been a major >supplier of food aid to Afghanistan. But now it is U.S. bombing that is >destroying roads and making it impossible for substantial food aid to be >delivered. If we were to make a dramatic effort, now, to get meaningful >amounts of emergency relief to these people, it would make a great >difference to their survival. If we don't, it will only cement in the minds >of the world's masses the image of the U.S. as indifferent to the needs of >the poor. > >While the vast majority of Americans care deeply about the welfare of their >fellow human beings, the foreign policies of the U.S. Government have for >some time now been seen by much of the rest of the world as arrogant and >selfish. And it is a sad fact that we have far too often given them cause >for such a view. It is hard to be proud of our country for standing nearly >alone among nations in refusing to sign the treaty banning land mines; for >being one of only four nations (the others are Libya, Syria and Iraq) who >refuse to comply with a global treaty to eliminate chemical weapons; and for >almost single-handedly blocking U.N. efforts to reduce the use of children >as soldiers, even when two million children have been killed in armed >conflicts in the past decade. > >Our nation has also done many wonderful and generous things. We have at >times behaved with honor among nations, and been a beacon of freedom. But >the world has seen our other side, too. It's not easy to feel grateful to >the United States for being one of only two nations (the other is Somalia) >to refuse to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, and one of >only three nations (the others are Libya and Iraq) to oppose the UN being >able to investigate and prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, and war >crimes such as rape and sexual slavery. > >There is an enormous disconnect taking place between the will of the >American people and the foreign policy of our government. The American >people are for the most part honest, decent, and compassionate. But few U.S. >citizens are aware of how much U.S. foreign policies have betrayed our >caring and our humanity. How many Americans know that we are far and away >the world's leading arms merchant? Or that, in the last fifteen years, the >U.S. share of the worlds arms trade has increased from 16% to more than 70%? >How many Americans know that even before September 11th we were spending 18 >times more money on the military than the combined spending of all of the >nations identified by the U.S. Government as potential enemies (Cuba, Iran, >Iraq, Libya, North Korea, and Syria)? > >President Bush began his term by withdrawing from almost every multilateral >agreement and international treaty that came up, except those that in the >short term served to enhance American profits and power. From the outset, >his administration angered and alienated the world community by disengaging >from treaties attempting to deal with global warming, nuclear disarmament, >population control, trafficking in small arms, and chemical and biological >weapons, to name just a few. > >This is not a matter of partisanship. Both Republican and Democrat >administrations have come all too often to define American self-interest >almost without regard for the concerns of other nations. It's sad but true >that to assure American access to oil and other natural resources around the >world, and to provide a constant pool of cheap labor, the U.S. Government >has frequently supported undemocratic and repressive regimes that have been >hated by their own populations. We have massively supported governments that >have engaged in widespread terrorism against their own people. Instead of >supporting human rights and self determination, we've sold hundreds of >billions of dollars of weapons to a string of tyrannical governments as long >as doing so provided us with cheap oil and access to their markets. > >But now, suddenly, we are realizing that we desperately need the help of the >world. There are signs of hope. As a London newspaper recently commented, >"Colin Powell, in a stunning and rare display of humility for an American >official, now acknowledges that in order to fight terrorism effectively the >U.S. is going to have to be more sensitive to the concerns of other cultures." > >Might the United States remember in all of this that our national purpose is >greater than the construction of a McWorld, and that we have a deep and >paramount interdependence with the well-being of all of the world's peoples? >As the president of the State of the World Forum, Jim Garrison, puts it: "If >out of the present crisis the United States emerges more connected with the >rest of the world, more willing to live cooperatively within coalitions than >outside them, then light will have truly come from out of the darkness and >redemption out of the recesses of hatred and war. In one of the deepest >paradoxes of contemporary history, the present crisis might compel America >to… (realize) no country is an island unique unto itself…and the only >solution to hate is to stop the underlying causes that produce it, working >within the community of nations to achieve goals that benefit the poor as >well as the rich, the south as well as the north, the developing nations as >well as those more advanced. Achieving this, America will fulfill the >deepest yearning of one of its founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, who >wrote that he believed the real destiny of America would not be about power; >it would be about light." > >Will the day come when the United States fulfills our true national purpose >and achieves lasting national security? > >We'll know we've begun when we break our addiction to oil, and develop an >economy based instead on hydrogen, wind power, solar power, and other >non-polluting, safe and renewable sources of energy. > >We'll know we've begun to create true national security when we define the >greatness of our civilization not by our military capabilities, not by our >ability to inflict massive damage and punishment, but by our ability to >bring out the best in ourselves and others, and by the quality of life we >leave our children. > >We'll know we've begun when we stop thinking there is such a thing as >"smart" bombs or "sophisticated" weapons. "Sophisticated" means having the >ability to use our intelligence, empathy and imagination to solve serious >and complex problems. "Smart" means realizing that when these bombs kill >civilians they leave them just as dead, their families just as heartbroken >and enraged, the spiritual fabric of the world just as shredded, and the >human heart just as violated. > >We'll know we've begun to defeat terrorism when we see the connection >between the $5 trillion the U.S. has spent on nuclear weapons since World >War II and the homeless children shivering in the cold, the battered women >who have no shelters, and the families broken by grinding poverty; when we >see the connection between the $1 billion a day we've spent every day for >decades on the military and the hungry people who have no hope, the children >dying from preventable diseases, and the families who sell their daughters >into sexual slavery because they see no other way to survive. We'll know >we've begun to create a world where terrorism can't find a foothold when we >commit ourselves and our resources to the building of a peaceful world with >as much dedication as we've committed ourselves to war. > >We'll know we're on the right track when we begin producing and eating food >that is healthy for our bodies and healthy for the Earth, and when we no >longer find acceptable the existence of human hunger anywhere on the planet. > >We'll know we're upholding the human spirit when the power we seek is the >ability to nurture and befriend, rather than to conquer and subjugate; and >when the success we pursue is one in which all beings share because it is >founded on reverence for life. > >We'll know we've begun to create a safer and kinder world when we design our >public policies and personal lifestyles not just for individual advantage, >but for the greater good of the whole Earth community. Then we will ask God >to please hear the prayers of the people in prison, of the homeless, of the >refugees walking on roads because a war has forced them from their homes. We >will ask God to hear the prayers of those who hunger and are not fed, and >those who are despised by their fellow humans because they are somehow >different. We will ask God to feel the exhaustion of those living too close >to the edge of their physical and spiritual resources. Then our religious >and spiritual lives will make us more human, more humble, and more able to >live with respect for all beings. > >In times of fear, most people step back and wait to see what others are >going to do and what's going to happen. Some people, though, see the >situation as an opportunity to step forward and take a stand. The more of us >who in our hearts and lives take a stand for the creation of a thriving, >just and sustainable way of life for all, the less likely it is that the bin >Ladens of the world will accomplish their purposes, and the greater the >chance that it will be love and not fear that will prevail. Then those who >perished in the September 11th attacks will not have died in vain, but will >live on in the flourishing of human hope and well-being. > >The bitter historical events that came to fruition on September 11th did not >come from nowhere, but developed over decades and even centuries. Likewise >the peace and understanding that we seek, and which alone will make us truly >safe, need to be nurtured and cultivated over generations of time. > >It is to the planting, nurturing and harvesting of fruits worthy of all that >is good and beautiful in us that we must now, as never before, dedicate our >lives. Because now, as never before, the world needs our wisdom, our >cooperation, and our understanding that all humanity is connected. > >John Robbins is the author of many best-sellers, including Diet For A New >America, and his recently released The Food Revolution. He is the founder of >EarthSave International, and can be contacted through the website >foodrevolution.org. > http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1101-01.htm Academic / Activist Call for Justice and Peace: http://www.iol.ie/~mazzoldi/toolsforchange/peace.html ! Lots of Links - Search and Enjoy ! http://www.hotlinks.com/members/cyberbrook/ <^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> "Frequently the only possible answer is a critique of the question and the only solution is to negate the question." --- Karl Marx <^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^><html>
