Which side is our Side?
By Staff Writer: Theresa Chaze
There is no us. There is no them. We are all us. We are all them. Very simple statements, yet the message keeps getting lost in fear and manipulation as small minded people fight to stay in power. When the changes in the social and economic structure changed the balance of power, those who wished to maintain the status quo used ignorance and bigotry to exploit the masses by creating fear of change. Whether it be lifestyle, religion, or cultural background, they reinforce the belief that diversity is evil. Playing on ignorance they maneuver the lesser informed to believe that to accept those who are different, they put their own values, beliefs and lifestyle at risk. When they are unable to discredit diversity of thought and beliefs message, they attack those who promote on a personal level, thereby trying to silence others who would speak an alternative message.
Although most religions promote peace, love and harmony, the reality is they are the primary route taken to divide peoples and create hatred of those who are different. By controlling spiritual doctrine, religious leaders limit the understanding of the text or twist the meaning behind the words.
The most current example was Pat Robertson calling for the assignation of another country’s leader. While most of the Christians were shocked and appalled, here were many who applauded his outspokenness. These same extremists blamed 9-11 on homosexuals, pagans and feminists. After all if white men and the Christian doctrine had remained in total power in the United States, then all of its citizens would remain safe–with the except of women, non-Christians and non-whites who didn’t remember their place.
Back in the fifties, when the good ole boy’s club was in control in most of the country, they used brutality, limiting educational opportunities and economics to keep themselves in power. The Christian churches of all denominations supported them. By keeping the patriarchal system strong, they kept their coffers full and their doctrine the ruling the land. People who strayed from the flock were brutalized and ostracized. They lost their homes, jobs, children and their lives.
After educational and economic possibilities became available to the masses in the sixties and seventies the culture begin to change; individuals no longer allowed themselves to forced to conform to the narrow expectations of the so called “moral majority.”
Accurate information about alternative religions, medical advancements and unconventional lifestyles seeped into mainstream society and began to create communities of like mind people. This cause the church to lose it’s tight grasp on the country as individuals drifted away from its narrow perspectives and domineering doctrine. In attempt to reign in the wandering sheep, the church again raised the specter of the devil, claiming Earth- based and Eastern religions worshiped the Satan. Suddenly there were cases of Satanic ritual killings from coast to coast. Most of the charges were legally proven false.
Still there were those, who refused to see the facts. Instead they stuck to the old bigotries; Non-Christians, whether they be Jewish, Muslin, or an Earth- based are evil. Jews are Christ killers. Wiccans and Pagans ritualistically kill babies to worship the devil. Since 9-11, all Muslims are terrorists and are just waiting for the opportunity to kill Americans. None of these bigotries are true, but there are still religious leaders who promote these beliefs to create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust.
It is the only way they can remain in control over their minds and wallets of their followers. The religious leaders claim that in order to be a good Christians, individuals must promote their religion so everyone follows their specific doctrine; everyone must believe, look and act the same otherwise they are evil and must be converted or eliminated. Instead of being an uniting force of peace and love, they have turned their religion into a way to creating division as they promote their beliefs above all others.
Without considering the good of the whole, politicians also use whatever means is necessary to keep themselves in power. They use slander, deception and manipulation to play on the fears of the public. Bin Laden wasn’t a stupid man; if he truly wanted John Kerry to be President, he wouldn’t have endorsed him within a few days of the election. He would have kept silent or asked the voters to support Bush. Instead a very poor quality tape was released promoting Kerry.
Of course it had the opposite effect. Without looking at the motives behind the message, many reacted in fear and voted for Bush. The main question that they should have been asked is “who benefited?". Who gained from the tape being released when it was? The answer is Bush. In the past four years, when Bush’s approval rating started dropping, there were unconfirmed security alerts and suddenly his approval rating started climbing. In the past few weeks Bush’s rating radically dropped even with those who supported him in the past. His failure to properly plan for the war in Iraq and the delays in the aid after Katrina have people questioning his leadership ability.
Suddenly there is a terrorist alert with “creditable” information threatening the New York subways. But just as quickly the “creditable” is downgraded to questionable. Suddenly the issue was dropped as had been many alerts before under similar circumstances. The only difference is that more people were quicker to question the information and confront the creditability of the sources.
On the opposite side of the political spectrum, there are those who play on the grief to regain power. Leaving Iraq now would be a bigger mistake than it was going in. Instead of pandering to those who are tired of the loss, they need to focus their attention and energy to form a strategy to win the war and a valid exit tactic. Packing up and leaving in the near future isn’t an option. So now is the time to look outside the box for other ways of stabilizing the region while minimizing the loss of life on both sides.
The current the fear issue is the bird flu out break in Asia. Technically called Avian Influenza, it is a virus usually contained within the bird population. However, it can be spread to humans who have close contact with bio-secretions such as mucus and feces.
This information is true. However, the administration is attempting to incite a panic by comparing the current outbreak to the Spanish Flu [A(H1N1)] of 1918-19. Approximately 675,000 died in the United States, while the world death toll was estimated between 30-40 million. The Asian Flu in 1957-58 and the Hong Kong Flu in 1968-69 have also been linked to bird connected illness. Both were deadly, however they did not compare to the Spanish Flu.
Although preparedness and keeping public current with information is important, the administration has blown the issue out of proportion by making the deaths of millions seem a certainty. What the administration is glossing over is that the circumstances have changed since 1918. People are healthy due to better medical care and better living conditions. Antibiotics and anti-viral medications were not available back in 1918.
In addition most people did not have access to good health care, nor did they have a clear understand how personal hygiene contributed to the spread of disease. The simple act of washing one’s hands eliminates many illnesses before they can affect the body. Sanitary conditions both in the home and society have radically improved. Indoor plumbing brings in healthy water and removes waste products, keeping the environment more virus and bacteria free. Instead of the bathing once a week or less frequently, most people bath daily. All of which leads to a stronger, healthier population, which is less likely become infected by any illness.
Why would the administration attempt to cause a panic? It’s simple–to divert attention from the it’s failures in Iraq, New Orleans, suspicions of a cover up and their many other short comings. Instead of facing the issues straight on, this administration has continue to muddy the waters by trying to create panics in the masses by inflating problems and situations, while doing their best to ignore or down play what they want the public to ignore. It is no different than a skilled magician directing the audience’s attention to one hand, while he conceals the coin in the other.
Unfortunate “race” continues to be an issue on many levels in the United States because the leaders on both sides keep using it to control of their constituency. Whether it’s a natural disaster or an individual’s bad behavior, they bring it down to the color of the person’s skin. Each side blames the other for the issue being brought to the forefront. Yet it is both sides who use the problem in their own way to gain power, while pointing their finger at the other side. What happened in New Orleans had nothing to do with color but came down to incompetence and simply not caring. From the Mayor to Bush and everyone in between there were mistakes made. How many people died because the errors we will never know, but it is certain there is enough blame to go around to everyone involved. The resignation of the head of FEMA does not end the administration’s responsibility.
Michael Brown was not qualified for the position and it was his incompetence, which directly led to delays in aid being sent to those affected by the hurricane. Nearly immediately, the race card was thrown on the table by those on the left. It wasn’t ineptitude, but racial bigotry which caused the delays. They claimed the administration fail to act because the population was predominately poor black. This is not true; it wasn’t bigotry, but stupidity and disorganization. The dialogue that followed could have easily be found on a grade school play ground as each side blamed the other. Both sides verbally threw rocks at each other as the demands for resources from the people on the ground continued to go unanswered. As in many cases, the racial card was thrown not because it was true, but to rally the troops to the cause- -only the cause wasn’t to help others but to keep an individual or group in power.
Poverty is also a way to divide us from them. If an individual can’t afford the necessities of life, it this the person’s fault for not working hard enough or making wrong life decisions. It is so easy for those who have to point the finger at those who have not and blamed them for their lack instead of looking at the underlying reasons for the situation. There are many variables that contribute to an individual’s economic situation. Personal decisions or responsibility play a role, but are not the sole reason for poverty. Educational opportunities, physical strength, intellectual capacity, and location are major factors, but even the most able person wouldn’t be able to find a job if there are none to be had. Even in the United States, there are areas where a good education is officially available, yet the resources are so beneath the current standards as to limit how much the student can achieve.
The conservatives’ stance is that more money will not help the public school system; they claim the public school systems have more than enough money to educate because they have more money per student than ever before. To compare monetary expenditures of the past to the current cost is a folly. The technical equipment, such as computers, cost more than a number two pencil. In order for students to be able to adequately compete in today’s market place they need the most current tools and resources.
No longer are a wrench and screw driver able to fix the modern car engine. Not only do they need the knowledge of combustion engines, but of electronics and computer software. Without the proper training, students are limited to what jobs they qualify for. Physical, intellectual, and emotional limitations also factor into what jobs a person can work. Those with limitations are prevented from working jobs that are beyond their capacity, leaving them with low income jobs as their only option. A society is judged not on their best and strongest, but how they care for who are weaker and less able. Should those who are incapable for whatever reason, go without food, shelter or medical care because of their limitations? In addition, different industries and parts of the country prosper under different circumstances. Some jobs are lost through out-sourcing, while others become obsolete as new technology becomes available.
Yet the one type of employment disappears others are created. But getting the new jobs are always easy as some people claim. Frequently it takes specified training or moving to a new location. Training takes time and the money to live on during the learning process. Moving to a new location meaning leaving friends and family, which further splinters the family structure. When it comes to dealing with poverty and all the domino effects from it, there are still those who totally blame the individual for their economic situation. While on the other side totally absolves the individual from any responsibility. Both sides make promises to each of their constituency to keep their loyalty. The right promises cuts in social services; the left promises more benefits. Both sides paint the other manipulating the facts in order to substantiate their position.
So who is us and who is them? We are one country. Those who divide us for their own personal gain are the ones the country should be wary of. They do not care who they hurt or how their manipulations hurt the country as long as they remain in control. So how does the one take back their individual power? To put it simply, face your fears. Ask questions and do the independent research. Don’t be afraid to stand up for what you believe, however remember that others have the same right.
Just because others look, believe or live different lifestyle doesn’t mean they are evil or out to destroy what you hold dear; it simple means they are different, Change isn’t evil, but stagnation is.
When members of a society are unwilling to grow and change, it begins to die. When the masses give into irrational fears of uniqueness or individuality and try to enforce the status quo, they lose the best part of their country. It is the blending and the ability to grow that makes a country strong.