We've known for a long time that Blackwater has basically been functioning as an appendage of the US military, but Erik Prince (its owner) has never been so publicly forthright in discussing it as he recently was with Vanity Fair. Here, Blackwater buff Jeremy Scahill puts it in perspective for us.
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
PDX Protests Afghan War
I was initially disappointed when I got to the anti-war rally in downtown Portland yesterday. A three mile walk got me to the deflated intersection of Madison and SW 3rd, where a small crowd of lackadaisical protesters held up signs in opposition to the Afghan war. People were lounging around and chatting amongst themselves, letting their signs do all the work. In short, it was the most lifeless political rally I've ever been to.
Evident was the toll of our lengthy "War on Terror." Lately it seems war protesters are worn out and frustrated. And they be should, too. If a demonstration of 800,000 at the RNC (as estimated by NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne) back in 2004had so little impact, what can 80 people holding signs hope to accomplish? Who were we even protesting to?
So many peace rallies are vague and passive in this way. I may as well have posted a fucking facebook status about the war sucking balls (Santos thinks the war sucks balls). World saved. Rallies simply can't be this aimless. There has to be a specific and realistic goal, as there was at the Battle of Seattle in 1999 when activists prevented the WTO meeting from taking place. And it's not just about causing a ruckus either: the 2004 RNC protest was a freak show (one of the biggest gatherings ever), with approximately 1,800 arrests being made. Even that event that got us nowhere. If there is no objective, failure is the only possible result.
However, I did leave Portland's modest rally with a glimmer of hope: hardly anyone showed. Obviously this could mean that people are even more apathetic than they were before, but maybe...just maybe...it could mean that we more collectively understand now that we've been fighting the wrong fight. Because most of our problems aren't the problem. Health care, war, bailouts...we address these topics individually, but they're really the same issue. It's the insurance companies for health care, the oil companies for war, the bankers for bailouts. This is our problem. Politicians cannot be on our side and their side at the same time because these institutions make money off of our poverty. One piece of legislation capping campaign spending or prohibiting donations from massive corporations would alleviate this situation. It is my hope that we are mobilizing in this direction. I'm not even close to the first (or 500th) person to suggest this, but for the love of money, don't let me be the last.
Evident was the toll of our lengthy "War on Terror." Lately it seems war protesters are worn out and frustrated. And they be should, too. If a demonstration of 800,000 at the RNC (as estimated by NYPD Deputy Commissioner Paul Browne) back in 2004had so little impact, what can 80 people holding signs hope to accomplish? Who were we even protesting to?
So many peace rallies are vague and passive in this way. I may as well have posted a fucking facebook status about the war sucking balls (Santos thinks the war sucks balls). World saved. Rallies simply can't be this aimless. There has to be a specific and realistic goal, as there was at the Battle of Seattle in 1999 when activists prevented the WTO meeting from taking place. And it's not just about causing a ruckus either: the 2004 RNC protest was a freak show (one of the biggest gatherings ever), with approximately 1,800 arrests being made. Even that event that got us nowhere. If there is no objective, failure is the only possible result.
However, I did leave Portland's modest rally with a glimmer of hope: hardly anyone showed. Obviously this could mean that people are even more apathetic than they were before, but maybe...just maybe...it could mean that we more collectively understand now that we've been fighting the wrong fight. Because most of our problems aren't the problem. Health care, war, bailouts...we address these topics individually, but they're really the same issue. It's the insurance companies for health care, the oil companies for war, the bankers for bailouts. This is our problem. Politicians cannot be on our side and their side at the same time because these institutions make money off of our poverty. One piece of legislation capping campaign spending or prohibiting donations from massive corporations would alleviate this situation. It is my hope that we are mobilizing in this direction. I'm not even close to the first (or 500th) person to suggest this, but for the love of money, don't let me be the last.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
