Author: Nancy LeTourneau

Some of you may know that I was trained as a Family Therapist. The whole point behind this kind of practice is to look at how family systems operate in order to better understand an individual’s behavior. In other words, most of what we do is not done in a vacuum, but is influenced by the behavior of those around us. Since our families are the people we spend the most time with, we tend to develop systems of response to one another that can be rather entrenched and difficult to change.

For years I worked with families as a way to address the needs of troubled kids. It was great work and I really learned alot. But I think that ultimately, my mind wanted to go bigger than just looking at individual family systems. I think our communities and culture are systems as well that operate much the same way families do. So, for example, these days, instead of just looking at the fact that we have an epidemic of children labelled with things like AD/HD, Depression, Eating Disorders, etc, I think about how our culture is AD/HD, Depressed and has an Eating Disorder.

The systems are all in place to make it difficult for us to even see all of this at work, much less to change our individual behaviors. Just take a look, for example, at the Eating Disorder issue. This one is enough to make anyone crazy. On the one hand, we are sold food (and pretty tasty stuff at that) everywhere we turn. All at the same time that we are “sold” unrealistic levels of thinness as the ideal. Then, along comes the diet and exercise industry to make their money off this struggle and the science industry to tell us we will all die early if we don’t buy in. Did you know that in actuality, the morbidity rate in this country is higher for people who are too thin than it is for people who are too fat? That’s not something these industries want us all to know. So, a huge portion of the population in this country spends an inordinate amount of time and money dealing with an issue that, in my mind, has been created for us. Is it any wonder then, that our children have developed eating disorders??

So you might begin to see, with all of this, how my training and my interest in politics comes together. But I’m not so interested in how our leaders behave, but why we let them get away with it. And this led me recently to a look at the research that has been done over the last 60-70 years about the Authoritarian Personality. John Dean wrote a book about it titled Conservatives Without Conscience. Apparently back in the 1930’s in Germany, a group of social scientists wanted to understand how the people were led into such strong hatred and prejudice against Jewish people. They had to flee Germany and came to the US to continue their studies. Wikipedia has a pretty good summary of all this.

Research by Theodor Adorno/Else Frenkel-Brunswik suggests that a major determining factor in the formation of the authoritarian personality was found to be a pattern of strict and rigid parenting, in which obedience is instilled through physical punishment and harsh verbal discipline.Other traits associated with this personality type include dependence on authority and rigid rules, conformity to group values, admiration of powerful figures, compulsiveness, concreteness, and intolerance of ambiguity.

The list of charactaristics of the authoritarian personality could read like a diagnosis of all that is wrong with our US culture today:

Conventionalism — uncritical acceptance of social conventions and the rules of authority figures; adherence to the traditional and accepted
Authoritarian Submission — unqualified submission to authorities and authority figures
Authoritarian Aggression — hostility toward individuals or groups disliked by authorities, especially those who threaten or violate traditional values
Intellectual hollowness — rejection of the subtle, subjective, imaginative and aesthetic; little or no introspection
Superstition and Stereotypy — ready acceptance of pseudoscience as truth, cliché, categorization; ethnic and religious prejudice; fatalistic determinism
Power and Toughness — identification with those in power; excessive emphasis on socially advocated ego qualities; rejection of gentleness; contempt for the weak, unpopular, and powerless
Destructiveness and Cynicism — general hostility, lust for violence, extreme pessimism, view of the world as a dangerous place
Projectivity — belief in the overwhelming power of evil in the world, even in natural phenomena, and to project unconscious emotional impulses outward
Sex — undue concern with the methods of reproduction and sexual activities of one’s self and others

Some child development experts say that the authoritarian personality develops when children are raised in such a way that their feelings about sexuality and anger are repressed and are therefore dealt with by projecting them onto some “other” group who have been identified by those around them as the target of prejudice. This clearly develops a pattern of the “in group” who cannot be criticized, and the “out group” that encompasses the enemy. This also means that a person with the authoritarian personality must always live in fear because at some place inside themselves, all of these shadow feelings (ie, sexuality and anger) exist, but must be denied and hidden from themselves as well as the rest of the world.

One of the reasons this interests me so much is that I was raised in a family and a community that fits this description to a tee. Everyone I knew was an authoritarian personality and I was well on my way to becoming like this until my mid-twenties. So I know what it feels like on the inside and I know what it takes to challenge this way of seeing the world. But herein lies the hope as well, it can be done and I am living proof of that. But I’m not the only one. In doing some research about this topic, I ran across an amazing series on the Orcinus Blog written by Sarah Robinson and titled “Cracks in the Wall.” It is a three part series, but I’ll provide a link to the 2nd Part titled Listening to the Leavers because in this one she describes how people she knows have been able to leave these kinds of systems and open themselves up to the world again. Here’s a quote from her that meant alot to me:

These people know that the tiny flicker of enlightenment kindling in their minds is about to set their entire lives ablaze. And yet — with a courage that I always find astonishing — almost all of them forge ahead anyway. Some race for the wall. Others pace back and forth for months, planning their escape. A few disappear for a while, but return again a year later, having put their lives in order and ready to go at last.

We must never, ever underestimate what it costs these people to let go of the beliefs that have sustained them. Leaving the safety of the authoritarian belief system is a three-to-five year process. Externally, it always means the loss of your community; and often the loss of jobs, homes, marriages, and blood relatives as well. Internally, it requires sifting through every assumption you’ve ever made about how the world works, and your place within it; and demands that you finally take the very emotional and intellectual risks that the entire edifice was designed to protect you from. You have to learn, maybe for the first time, to face down fear and live with ambiguity.

I was so glad to find these words by Robinson. They not only affirm my journey and what it took for me to change, but they demonstrate that the rational arguments so many want to develop as a way to change the mind of an authoritarian personality WILL NEVER WORK. This is an emotional challenge, not an intellectual one. In order for change to happen, the fear must be faced – not argued away. Its still a constant struggle for me (as it probably is for most of us) to embrace my shadow side – the parts of me I don’t like, that are inadequate, that are shameful. But ultimately, that is what we all must do. I have to take responsibility for myself. I can’t give away the tough calls to someone in authority and I can’t deny who/what I am and project in onto anyone else.

And if we are ever going to change our culture of authoritarianism, we are going to have to help others face these fears as well. Robinson’s third part in the series, Escape Ladders, gives us some ideas of how to do that. I am convinced that this is how healing and change will happen.

Crossposted at Everybody Comes From Somwhere

Most of you probably know by now that Andrew Bacevich, Viet Nam war veteran, Iraq War critic and author of the book “How Americans Are Seduced by War,” lost his only son in Iraq on Mother’s Day this year.

I recently heard a short interview with Bacevich on NPR and was moved by this quote:

What kind of democracy is this when people speak, and the people’s voice is unambiguous, and nothing happens?

Yesterday in an editorial in the Washington Post Bacevich expounded on this theme (h/t to sbj in Brenda Stewart’s diary Memorial Day). I think Bacevich’s analysis, thoughts and feelings are a profound statement about where we are this Memorial Day.

What exactly is a father’s duty when his son is sent into harm’s way?

Among the many ways to answer that question, mine was this one: As my son was doing his utmost to be a good soldier, I strove to be a good citizen.

As a citizen, I have tried since Sept. 11, 2001, to promote a critical understanding of U.S. foreign policy…

Not for a second did I expect my own efforts to make a difference. But I did nurse the hope that my voice might combine with those of others — teachers, writers, activists and ordinary folks — to educate the public about the folly of the course on which the nation has embarked. I hoped that those efforts might produce a political climate conducive to change. I genuinely believed that if the people spoke, our leaders in Washington would listen and respond.

This, I can now see, was an illusion.

The people have spoken, and nothing of substance has changed.

He then goes on to hold both the Bush administration AND the Democrats responsible for not listening to the people because…

Money buys access and influence. Money greases the process that will yield us a new president in 2008. When it comes to Iraq, money ensures that the concerns of big business, big oil, bellicose evangelicals and Middle East allies gain a hearing. By comparison, the lives of U.S. soldiers figure as an afterthought.

In closing, I’ll just add one more powerful voice who also, in my mind, correctly analyzes the nature of our situation today…Al Gore in an editorial this week in The Guardian:

The pursuit of “dominance” in foreign policy led the Bush administration to ignore the UN, to do serious damage to our most important alliances, to violate international law, and to cultivate the hatred and contempt of many in the rest of the world. The seductive appeal of exercising unconstrained unilateral power led this president to interpret his powers under the constitution in a way that brought to life the worst nightmare of the founders.

Its no news to anyone here that our democracy is in serious peril – if not already lost. I just think we need to really wake up to the truths these two men are speaking and align our actions with the reality we are facing.

I know that all over the blogs for the next two years talk of elections will center on the presidential elections and federal offices. But, like many in these parts, my hopes for REAL change are limited when I look at the candidates.

Almost a year ago Kid Oakland tried to organize the BT community around local progressive candidates. At the time, I participated nominally – mostly because KO is someone I have a tremendous amount of respect for. But my involvement was limited because, even locally, the races seemed to be controlled from the top down. And I didn’t think my voice really mattered. But this year, in very small races for City Council in St. Paul – there is some hope on the way!!
I’d like to introduce you all to Pakou Hang, a 30 year old Hmong woman who is running for St. Paul City Council in her first political race against a 3-term incumbent who is retired from the Police Department and also served on the St. Paul School Board years ago.

Here is Pakou telling her own story:

Yes, from immigrating here with her family as an infant, to graduating from Yale, to running the campaign of State Senator Mee Moua (the first Hmong ever elected to state office) to being Deputy Political Director of Paul Wellstone’s last campaign, Pakou is a force for progessive, grassroots politics. Here’s another video that shows more of her passion (the first voice you will hear is that of State Senator Mee Moua campaigning in the Green Bus for Paul Wellstone):

St. Paul politics all take place within the Democratic party, so both she and the incumbent vied for the party endorsement at ward conventions in March. This town was shocked that Pakou was able to challenge the endorsement process to a virtual tie and so the two are likely to meet in the election this November. But in talking to Pakou this week, she is already beginning to struggle with the need for funds to run her campaign and the pressure from the establishment groups to pay homage to them in a way that betrays her grassroots commitments.  

I’m going to do all I can to help and support Pakou because Wellstone’s legacy lives on as we build from the bottom up here in St. Paul.

Crossposted at Everybody Comes From Somewhere

I’m sure I’m not the only one who wonders why there is not that much discussion about the amount of money we are spending in Iraq. I know the human cost is overwhelming. But I’m also outraged at the waste of money. Today the Boston Globe looks at that question with a slide show titled What Does $455 Billion Buy? Go take a look at the slide show, but here are a couple of samples:

1. 2,949 state-of-the-art high schools
2. A free year at Harvard for 14.5 million people
3. Feed and educate the world’s poor for 5 1/2 years

It alternately saddens and enrages me that we are spending overwhelming amounts of money to destroy and spread hate (not to mention to enrich the corporatists). But to think for just a moment what could be accomplished with those resources…well, I’m just at a loss for words.

As if that wasn’t enough, yesterday the Washington Post reported that The Katrina Aid Program is short $3.9 billion. Here’s the money quote (so to speak):

More than 20 months after the Katrina catastrophe, tens of thousands of houses remain vacant, in part because of administrative delays in the aid program, the largest single source of direct federal help for homeowners. To date, only 16,000 of 130,000 applicants have received money.

Meanwhile, back in Iraq, I’m continuing to watch the weekly vidoes produced at Hometown Baghdad. The latest episode shows Saif, one of the young men the series has been following, packing up his house to move to Jordan. The way this series is progressing, I think it will finally end with all of the videographers leaving the country. At the end of this particular video, a woman comes to his house begging and Saif, after giving her some money, says this happens 5-6 times a day. Here’s one of the comments to this particular video:

The social structure and fabric of Iraq has been destroyed. Iraq is full of beggars and homeless, including children. We are seeing the destruction of a country, its culture and its people and we are powerless to do anything.

I don’t know how to end this diary. I’d like to offer some words of hope, but I have none. I only know that today I want to bear witness to this travesty.

Crossposted at Everybody Comes from Somewhere.

I recently ran across this quote from Glen Ford on The Black Agenda Report:

There’s a term going around in the corporate media called, “multi-polarity.” It’s really a euphemism, designed to describe the death of white supremacy over the planet. It’s been a long time coming – more than five centuries, since the European invasion of the rest of the continents began, resulting in the death of untold millions of people. Whole civilizations were wiped away, to make way for a northern European global sphere of influence. Now that era is coming to an end.<…>

China, India, Brazil and South Africa have joined in a political and economic compact to resist the domination of the United States and Europe. The political-economy of capitalism dictates that these nations must be dealt with. The social realities of the United States dictate that it cannot raise a military force sufficient to suppress the dark masses. Europe learned this lesson a generation ago. Now it is time for the white supremacist Americans to learn the same lesson: they cannot rule the world.

This sounds interesting. I wanted to learn more about “multi-polarity,” so I did just a little bit of research. Turns out it is actually a concept that was developed by Jacques Chirac several years ago. Here’s how wikipedia defines it:

Multipolarity in international politics describes a distribution of power in which more than two nation-states have nearly equal amounts of military, cultural, and economic influence.
What I found is that, while this concept might be being discussed in the corporate media, we certainly haven’t heard much about it – but the rest of the world is talking about it quite a bit. I’d like to share a couple of examples with you.

Here’s an example from The Asian Times in an article by Michael Weinstein from June 2004.

The question is whether the Iraq adventure marks a watershed in world politics, in which the currents that once ran toward multilateralism in the decade following the fall of the Soviet Union have now shifted in the direction of multi-polarism. Well before the second Gulf War, China, Russia and France had voiced preferences for multi-polarism, in which American leadership is replaced by negotiation among regional power centers, among them North America. The Iraq war may have tipped the balance so that it favors the multi-polarists. If the United States cannot be trusted to take the interests of allies and collaborators into account in its strategic policy, these governments will seek to retrench, moving to gain as much control as possible over their regions, so that they can exert a veto on American interventions into them. Although each regional power center has its own independent interests, they all have a shared interest in fending off American dictation and, therefore, constitute an incipient defensive alliance.

Multi-polarism is a containment policy against the United States – the one-time hyper-power that has revealed its vulnerability and the limits of its military control.

And here’s something that Hu Jintao, the current President of the People’s Republic of China, said back in 2001:

“Multipolarity constitutes an important base for world peace and the democratization of international relations is an “essential guarantee” for that peace”, said Chinese Vice President Hu Jintao on Monday during his five-nation tour in Paris.<…>

“The multi-polarity composes an important base for achieving a durable peace on this planet,” he said. Such multi-polarity is conducive to building a new, just and reasonable eco-political order, setting up a relatively-stable international political framework and promoting exchanges and cooperation, he added.

Here’s Weinstein again in December 2004 from EurasiaNet:

What Washington has most essentially lost is acquiescence to its leadership. Other powers no longer have any compunction about opposing U.S. policies and preferences when it is not in their own independent interests to follow them. It is a game of every power for itself, in which each regional power center cooperates with others when it shares common interests with them and opposes them when interests conflict. The result is the absence of a single paradigm of world order or even of a coherent pattern of alliances. In their place are coalitions of convenience that — taken together — have no consistent direction.

Currently the major presumptive power centers are China in East Asia, India in South Asia, Brazil in South America, the Franco-German combine in Europe and Russia at the center of its multiregional periphery. As an area of contention that is internally divided and subject to strong pressures from outside powers, the Near East has no single presumptive power center, although Iran is bidding for that role. There is no state in Africa that has the resources to be a hegemon, although Nigeria and the Republic of South Africa might take that position or share it in the future. The U.S. has secure dominance in its North American base, but its global reach is in question as it faces challenges and tests from ascending powers elsewhere.

There are articles that discuss the dangers of this growing multipolarity. Like this one from The Guardian that was written during Israel’s attacks on Lebanon last year.  But just look at the title and tag line for the article:

Lebanon, North Korea, Russia … here is the world’s new multipolar disorder.The unipolar moment of American supremacy has passed. But the new multipolarity may prove to be very nasty indeed.

I find all of this interesting on so many levels. First of all, it makes sense. At least until BushCo is out of the White House, other powers in the world would be blind to think they can be trusted. I imagine there is a lot of work to “hedge our bets” going on all over the world with respect to the failing state of the US.  

And I actually think its a hopeful sign. Just as the founders of this country recognized the need for a “balance of powers” in our constitution, the world needs a balance of powers for any sense of security and stability to develop. It might be a bit of a roller-coaster ride to get there – but I think this is a path that has some promise.

Yesterday I had a bit of an awakening about the struggles faced daily by my brothers and sisters of color in this country – and therefore the struggles in which we are all engaged if we are to give ANY meaning to what we say we stand for.

On a personal level, I had a long conversation at work with a black woman (lets call her Mary) who is fairly new to our agency. She had taken the staff she supervises to an exhibit on Race at our local Science Museum of Minnesota. Mary grew up in the south and overcame tremendous odds to get where she is today. And she’s done so at least in part, by doing her best to “fit in” with our dominant white culture and trying to forget all the ways she was and is marginalized. The visit to the exhibit triggered a lot of this and I could tell it when I saw her face yesterday. The bright, hopeful, engaging eyes had lost their luster and just looked drained and sad. We talked for a while, but I could tell the words didn’t mean much. She was a mixture of anger and hopelessness. But bless her heart, even in the midst of all this, she was saying that she was going to be thinking, reading and talking to try and find something she can do to try and make a difference.

Then I came home and was reading around the blogs. As has become my pattern, I check in at The Unapologetic Mexican. He posted a diary about the violence of the LAPD on the marches that happened there on Tuesday that was quite a rant. He expressed his anger at both the silence of the msm and the “progressive” blogs about this travesty. Here’s some of his “wake-up” call to all of us:

THERE IS NO RIGHT TO PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY IN AMERICA. There were signs earlier, it’s true. But now it can be said to be official. File this along with what you read on blogs about habeas corpus and wiretapping, this latest display of contempt for our rights: here is a clear example of excessive use of police force, of tyranny by weaponry, of unwarranted police aggression, assault and battery–on women, children, and citizens alike. The police issue their typical statements about investigations and being upset, but give it a month (when the results of thier “internal report” is due and we’ve seen how these turn out time and time again) and it doesn’t matter anyway. They have done what they wanted, made their mark, instilled fear. And despite what they say, they didn’t do this because some people stepped off the sidewalk, bullshit. We know why the cops were there and in such gear, and with such attitudes and agendas. The government fears the numbers they saw last year on 2006. In 2006 we actually showed, lived out, demonstrated the Power of the People, and it scared the living shit out of our keepers. Because America is only about the Power of the People in word. That’s advertising to keep us defending our jailers, paying our taxes, and joining the grinder military. America is really about the Power of the Few. And the Power of the Gun. And the Power of the Dollar. And the Power of the Lie…

But yeah–the press and cops are counting on Average Americans not to care because they will tout the gathering and the abuse as nothing more than ALIENZ being corralled. And who cares about ALIENZ????

And you think this doesn’t apply to you? Do you, then, silently give up your right to assemble in great numbers? Because that’s what this is about. Power of the People. Numbers that freaked out the old white men in Washington. They don’t want to see us in numbers, and they don’t want us to feel empowered. But they don’t want that for any of us! Brown, black, or white! They want us all living in fear. Always in fear.

I don’t know if its worth all that much, but today I wanted to say that I stand with you Mary and Nezua. As much as is possible for me in this moment of my life I feel the rage and the hopelessness that I see in your eyes and hear in your words.

Perhaps Melissa won’t mind if I quote her song because I think that what Mary and Nezua are speaking is also an inconvenient truth.

I am not an island
I am not alone
I am my intentions
Trapped here in this flesh and bone…
I want to change
I need to shake up
I need to speak out
Oh, Something’s got to break up
I’ve been asleep
And I need to wake up
Now

As Bush readys his veto pen, I’ve been listening to some new and interesting voices about the situation in Iraq. A New York-based firm Chat the Planet worked with Iraqi producers to get video cameras to several young Iraqi men (too bad they’re all men – but so it goes). They are doing video diaries about their lives that are posted at a web site/blog Hometown Baghdad. At the blog, there are also wonderful conversations going on between young people all over the world, including the young men featured in the videos.
Here’s a sample of one of the 20 videos that are currently posted:

In the blog discussion about this video, one of the commentors asks these young men if they want the US troops to leave. Here is how Ausama, one of the young men in the video answers:

it would be great if the american troops leave the country ( it’s not only good for us but good for the american famillies ! ) but Unfortunatly , there’s a terrible instability in my country … all the militias are growing stronger ! ! !

so now if you ask me if the pull out is good or not ? I would definity say it’s not , they have to change their policies and try to be honest about building good , fair Iraqi security forces not just to leave the country…. or you know ? they just have to let the UN forces handle the Iraq.

Iraqis are dying , the american soliders are dying … they have to act fast while they still can , and leaving the country and lying about how did they built a good democratic system is not the solution !

There are alot of Solutions , they just have to lose that arrogance for a while !

(what I mean by ” they ” is the american government ofcourse ! )

The videos range from a tour of the college campus where teachers and students have been killed, to a group of young men who sneak into an abandonded house to swim in the pool and escape the Baghdad heat. In total, a pretty good picture of what life is like for young men in Baghdad these days. But here’s the one that had the most impact on me:

I’d invite everyone to go – watch, read and learn.

I’d like to repost a diary I wrote over at Everybody Comes from Somewhere almost a month ago. I thought it spoke to some of the general themes that seem to be emerging on the blogosphere these days.

I’ve never seen the TV show “The Wire” because I don’t have HBO. But I can tell you that later today I’m going to rent copies of the dvd and start watching it all the way through its 4 seasons. That’s because I just finished reading an article by William Hughes over at The Black Commentator that describes a speech by its creator David Simon.

Simon predicts the end of the American Empire as the result of the triumph of capitalism over humanity.

I am wholly pessimistic about American society. I believe The Wire is a show about the end of the American Empire. We…are going to live that event. How we end up…and survive [and] on what terms, is going to be the open question… There will be cities. We are an urban people…What kind of places they will be are…dependent on how we behave toward each other and how our political infrastructure behave…

But what I found most interesting in all this, is Simon’s thoughts about why this is happening:

Continuing, Simon emphasized: “We are in the postindustrial age. We do not need as many of us as we once did. We don’t need us to generate capital…to secure wealth. We are in a transitive period where human beings have lost some of their value. Now, whether or not we…can figure out a way to validate the humanity of the individual…I have great doubts…We (America) haven’t figured out the answers to these questions. I have doubts whether anyone is going to be able to do it…

As for the characters on the program, Simon explained, “Their lives are less and less necessary. They are more and more expendable. The institutions in which they serve…are indifferent…to their existence.”

This spoke to me on so many levels. First of all, like Simon, I see the effects of this indifference daily in the lives of urban youth and families. I keep trying to tell myself that if people knew how these families lived…they’d care. And sometimes I get that confirmation from individuals. But for the most part, the system as a whole gives it all a big yawn. We might care about an individual we hear about, but there is absolutely NO interest in changing the system that continues to put urban families in these circumstances.

Here’s Simon about why…

“I didn’t start [out] as a cynic…,” Simon underscored, “but at every given moment, where this country has had a choice…its governments…institutions…corporations, its social framework…to exalt the value of individuals over the value of the shared price, we have chosen raw unencumbered Capitalism. Capitalism has become our God… You are not looking at a Marxist up here…But you are looking at somebody who doesn’t believe that Capitalism [can work] absent a social framework that accepts that it is relatively easy to marginalize more and more people in this economy…[Capitalism] has to be attended to. And that [this attending] has to be a conscious calculation on the part of society, if that is going to succeed…” If it doesn’t succeed, Simon predicted, “You are eventually going to have the gated communities and the people inside saying: `Isn’t it a shame you can’t drive downtown anymore’. That is where we are headed…[towards] separate Americas…Everywhere we have created an Alternate America of haves and have-nots…At some point, either more of us are going to find our conscience or we’re not.” Simon believes that the city is basically “the victim” of this ongoing brutal process of “unencumbered Capitalism.”

None of this comes as any surprise to me or to any of you. The only question remaining is, can we do anything to change it? Can we find the value of humanity and hold it up as worthy? And what will have to change to make that happen? Its not just in our war zones that we are fighting for “hearts and minds.” I think that it is right here in our midst. I think its about each of us, engaging those around us and challenging the many ways that daily, the value of our humanity is sacrificed on the alter of greed.

Here is the challenge that Simon leaves us with:

Simon described himself as a storyteller. He concluded his insightful and relevant remarks by stating: “The Wire is certainly an angry show. It’s about the idea that we are worth less. And that is an unreasonable thing to contemplate for all of us. It is unacceptable. And none of us wants to be part of a world that is going to do that to human beings. If we don’t exert on behalf of human dignity, at the expense of profit, and Capitalism and greed [which] are inevitabilities, [and] if we can’t modulate them in some way that is a framework for an intelligent society, we are doomed! It is going to happen sooner than we think. I don’t know what form it will take…But, I know that every year it [America] is going to be a more brutish, and cynical and divided place.”

Every year – a more brutish, and cynical and divided place…sound like any place you’ve been lately??

Obama steps out:

Promoted by Steven D

Here’s some of the text of his press release from TPM Cafe.

Goal to Redeploy All Combat Brigades out of Iraq by March 31, 2008

Fact Sheet: The Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007

Today, Senator Obama introduced the Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007. The Iraq War De-escalation Act of 2007 is binding and comprehensive legislation that not only reverses the President’s dangerous and ill-conceived escalation, but also sets a new course for U.S. policy in Iraq that can bring a responsible end to the war and bring our troops home. It implements – with the force of law – a phased redeployment of U.S. forces that remains our best leverage to pressure the Iraqi government to achieve the political solution necessary to promote stability. It also places conditions on future economic aid to the government of Iraq and calls for the United States to lead a broad and sustained diplomatic initiative within the region. This plan is based on Senator Obama’s November 20th, 2006 speech before the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, and it implements key recommendations of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

The Obama plan offers a responsible yet effective alternative to the President’s failed policy of escalation. Realizing there can be no military solution in Iraq, it focuses instead on reaching a political solution in Iraq, protecting our interests in the region, and bringing this war to a responsible end. The legislation commences redeployment of U.S. forces no later than May 1, 2007 with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008, a date that is consistent with the expectation of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. The plan allows for a limited number of U.S. troops to remain as basic force protection, to engage in counter-terrorism, and to continue the training of Iraqi security forces. If the Iraqis are successful in meeting the thirteen benchmarks for progress laid out by the Bush Administration, this plan also allows for the temporary suspension of the redeployment, provided Congress agrees that the benchmarks have been met and that the suspension is in the national security interest of the United States.

In short, the Obama plan halts the escalation and requires a responsible, phased redeployment of American forces from Iraq in a manner that protects U.S. troops and exerts leverage to achieve the political settlement among the Iraqis.

Key Elements of Obama Plan

• Stops the Escalation: Caps the number of U.S. troops in Iraq at the number in Iraq on January 10, 2007. This does not affect the funding for our troops in Iraq. This cap has the force of law and could not be lifted without explicit Congressional authorization.
• De-escalates the War with Phased Redeployment: Commences a phased redeployment of U.S. troops out of Iraq not later than May 1, 2007, with the goal that all combat brigades redeploy from Iraq by March 31, 2008, a date consistent with the expectation of the Iraq Study Group. This redeployment will be both substantial and gradual, and will be planned and implemented by military commanders. Makes clear that Congress believes troops should be redeployed to the United States; to Afghanistan; and to other points in the region. A residual U.S. presence may remain in Iraq for force protection, training of Iraqi security forces, and pursuit of international terrorists.
• Enforces Tough Benchmarks for Progress: These 13 benchmarks are based on President Bush’s own statements and Administration documents and include:

o Security: Significant progress toward fulfilling security commitments, including eliminating restrictions on U.S. forces, reducing sectarian violence, reducing the size and influence of the militias, and strengthening the Iraqi Army and Police.

o Political Accommodation: Significant progress toward reaching a political solution, including equitable sharing of oil revenues, revision of de-Baathification, provincial elections, even-handed provision of government services, and a fair process for a constitutional amendment to achieve national reconciliation.

o Economic Progress: Requires Iraq to fulfill its commitment to spend not less than $10 billion for reconstruction, job creation, and economic development without regard for the ethnic or sectarian make-up of Iraqi regions.

Should these benchmarks be met, the plan allows for the temporary suspension of this redeployment, subject to the agreement of Congress.

• Congressional oversight: Requires the President to submit reports to Congress every 90 days describing and assessing the Iraqi government’s progress in meeting benchmarks and the redeployment goals.
• Intensified Training: Intensifies training of Iraqi security forces to enable the country to take over security responsibility of the country.
• Conditions on Economic Assistance: Conditions future economic assistance to the Government of Iraq on significant progress toward achievement of benchmarks. Allows exceptions for humanitarian, security, and job-creation assistance.
• Regional Diplomacy: Launches a comprehensive regional and international diplomatic initiative – that includes key nations in the region – to help achieve a political settlement among the Iraqi people, end the civil war in Iraq, and prevent a humanitarian catastrophe and regional conflict. Recommends the President should appoint a Special Envoy for Iraq to carry out this diplomacy within 60 days. Mandates that the President submit a plan to prevent the war in Iraq from becoming a wider regional conflict.

Sorry for the complete “cut and paste” but I think this is important and worth discussing. Sounds good to me – I’d love to hear what other people think.

Last night I watched a bit of the rerun of Secreatry Rice’s testimony in the Senate. I was particularly struck by her response to a question about why the administration has decided to not pursue negotiations with Iran and Syria as was advised by the ISG. She simply assumed an understanding of their position and said there was no point in talking to them. After all, they are the enemy and we have nothing to gain by giving them the opportunity to make demands that we have already decided are unacceptable.

This response got me thinking about the paradigm that is being used when talking about finding solutions to the situation in Iraq. The only way I can grasp that paradigm or an alternative is to think about the words we use.
So I decided to try and make a list of words I want to hear a lot less and those I would like to hear more often. Here’s what I came up with:

Words I’d like to hear less often
Enemy
Victory
Defeat
Evil
Forces
Troops
Terrorists
Surge
Weapons
Threat
Violence
Insurgents
Secure and hold
Unilateral
Win/Loose
Command
Extremist
Attack
Destroy
Border
Detainee
Rules of engagement
Homeland
Targets
Invade

Words I’d like to hear more often
Civility
Diplomacy
Compromise
Allies
Listen
Hear
Learn
Negotiate
Cooperation
Understand
Empower
Enhance
Humanity
Humanitarian
Support
Resources
Unite
Restore
Opportunity
Wisdom
Forgive
People
Humility

Is there some reason why words like this are unacceptable when talking about finding solutions to the situation in Iraq? If so, call me naive in continuing to “have a dream.”

I suspect that the reason its not seen as acceptable is that anyone using the words I’d like to hear more often would quickly be labelled a “girly man” and loose his/her “Alpha Male” credentials.

Anyway, there’s what I want to hear. Have any additions?