Earlier this year I had a strong leading, as we Quakers say, to do more writing for a specifically Quaker audience. This is a part, really, of the personal/spiritual journey that I’m on right now. It is not that I want to abandon the broader public sphere in which I’ve participated pretty vocally for, oh, more than 30 years now. It’s more that I want to try to bring things together: what I do in my fabulous spiritual home in Charlottesville Friends Meeting (i.e., my home Quaker congregation) and in other Quaker forums, and what I do in “the world”, as well.
So one thing I decided to do was write this article for Friends Journal, which is the monthly magazine published by Friends General Conference, the principle network for (mainly) liberal Quaker congregations across North America. You can find out more about FGC here.
The article is a little bit personal, and it also draws on a lot of what I’ve been writing about here over the years. In it, I try to make the point that the peace testimony that has been a cornerstone of Quakers’ witness ever since the Religious Society of Friends was founded in 1652 has more relevance today than ever. And certainly, my own professional assessment of the outcomes of recent “foreign wars”– Israel’s in Lebanon, and the US’s in both Iraq and Afghanistan– has also come ever more strongly to the conclusion that mere military superiority on its own cannot bring (and may well actually impede) the achievement of strategic goals of lasting value.
I guess for me, one part of the challenge is to try, when necessary, to keep my Quaker convictions separate from my professional assessments. But when they come together, as they do so strongly on this question of the utility or disutility of war, then I want to be able to claim that, too. I really do feel that a commitment to nonviolence and the nonviolent de-escalation and resolution of existing conflicts is more than ever, nowadays, a supremely pragmatic approach to the world.
Anyway, do read the article if you feel so led. I see there’s some provision for commenting over there. But I’m not sure quite how that “registration” thing works. You know you can always comment here…
3 thoughts on “My article on the post-9/11 world in ‘Friends Journal’”
Comments are closed.
That is a wonderful article, and so full of truth.
America is now a drug addict, and the drug is war. The $507 billion 2008 military budget, an increase of $40 billion, including 11 thousand earmarks worth $15 billion, is the lifeblood of every US congressional district which benefits from carefully dispersed armament sub-contracts. Ongoing wars cost more than an additional $15 billion per month.
Hillary Clinton in 2005 called for a military personnel increase of 80,000, and now the government will increase the U.S. armed forces by 92,000 people over the next five years – 65,000 additional soldiers for the Army, bringing the total to 547,000, and 27,000 additional Marines, bringing the total to 202,000. The troop buildup has an estimated initial cost of nearly $100 billion with a subsequent cost of $15 billion per year to maintain the additional forces. The Army’s fighting force will grow to 48 brigade combat teams from 33 in 2003, a 45% increase. Congressional delegations have been vigorously campaigning to get the additional troops assigned to their districts.
All of this has been done without debate, or even much discussion, at a time when the United States is not threatened by any military force.
Both Hillary and Obama – neither of which will get a vote from me at any stage of the proceedings – have declared their intention to significantly increase the size and budget of the military. A few months ago I posted here a link to an article from Alternet – sorry, I cannot seem to find it now – by a military analyst who pointed out that there is only one reason for increasing the size of the U.S. military and that is in order to be able to invade and occupy additional unwilling countries. It is clear, also, that neigher Hillary nor Obama has any intention of making a full withdrawal from Iraq. I believe that both intend to complete the imperial trajectory that has been pushed forward by the Bush I, Clinton I, and Bush II Iraq policies.
I am not suggesting that this is any kind of long-term plan that all three presidents consciously colluded in – I don’t believe these things happen that way. However, for eight years Bill Clinton acted like the picadors in a bullfight, brutally and effectively preparing Iraq for the coup de grace that was delivered by Matador George W. Bush. How fitting it would be, then, for Hillary to be the one to cut the ear from the bull and claim it as her prize.
LSSU issues annual list of words to be banished
On Dec. 31, 1975, former LSSU Public Relations Director Bill Rabe and his colleagues cooked up an idea to banish overused words and phrases and issue a list on New Year’s Day. Much to the delight of language enthusiasts everywhere, the list has stayed the course into a fourth decade.
This year, in a gesture of humanitarian relief, the committee restores “truthiness,” banned on last year’s list, to formal use. This comes after comedians and late-night hosts were thrown under the bus and rendered speechless by a nationwide professional writers’ strike. The silence is deafening.
In this spirit, LSSU presents its 2008 list, a perfect storm of overused and abused words and phrases that pops organic, to a post-9/11 world decimated by webinars.
POST 9/11 — “‘Our post-9/11 world,’ is used now, and probably used more, than AD, BC, or Y2K, time references. You’d think the United States didn’t have jet fighters, nuclear bombs, and secret agents, let alone electricity, ‘pre-9/11.'” — Chazz Miner, Midland, Michigan.