|
|
|
| A Larger View |
|
A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership |
| Volume VI Edition 6 |
November/December |
2001 |
Making Peace Work
What We need to do
In the wake of the attacks on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon we can't help but have many questions. Chief among these, perhaps,
is what do we do to answer evil acts? The great majority of U.S. citizens
endorse the President's answer of war. Increasingly, however, people here
and abroad are questioning war as an act that brings suffering to
innocent civilians and if prolonged risks engaging us in atrocities not
much different than those we withstood. It is natural, therefore, that in
these post Viet Nam days where globalisation means more than the ease of
world wide communications, talk of war calls forth talk of peace.
But what does peace mean in this instance? Does it mean we do not
believe in fighting terrorism and decimating it as much as possible? Is it
a refuge from our discomforts about the realities of war, realities we want
to distance ourselves from, from sacrifices we do not want to have to
make, from issues too painful to confront? Or is peace a set of optimistic
speculations, ideals based on a normative view of human nature, or an
idealized perception of one's behavior in the face of evil. Peace is
neither a refuge nor a set of speculations optimistic or otherwise. Peace
is a goal to strive for and one which is usually far harder to achieve or
work towards than a series of pronouncements no matter how well
intentioned. Terrorism such as that witnessed September 11th is evil and
"closing the door where evil dwells" as one prayer puts it, is part of our
human responsibility. And yet do those of us who talk of peace know what
to do to meet this responsibility? Do we know how to fight terrorism? Its
easy to find fault with what others propose, and even easier to cite apt
truisms such as the fact that the use of violence only breeds more
violence. But could we come up with viable solutions given the myriad
constraints? Could our programs decimate terrorism without adding to
either suffering or violence? But accepting the limitations of our stance
in this unconventional war does not mean we are to accept, resign ourselves
to or endorse current policies. There is much we can do. For example:
- Let's endeavor to think clearly, ascertain our fears and hopes and
what we really mean when we use words like peace, war and terrorism.
- Let's strive to be realistic. Other incidents or attacks will occur.
The past shows us that this is part of a pattern and we must prevent
future attacks and the harm they would cause. Somewhere in this dual track
of prevention and eradication our leaders will make mistakes, will say and
do things that we not only disagree with but that will prove to be in
error. It is doubtful anyone could handle a problem of this magnitude
flawlessly.
- Let's steel ourselves and let the good prevail. Much good is coming
out of this, the working together of many nations for example. As we
reshuffle our priorities nationally as well as personally we ought to
admit that we are better off, stronger without the superficiality and
trivia weve eliminated, and that this act of evil is eliciting from us a
good that can only strengthen us and the nations of the world.
- Let's tell our leaders what we think, and as we do insist that the
causes of terrorism be addressed. There is much discontent in the world
and that discontent if not causal is fueling underlying causes. Let's
insist as well that violent acts be last resorts and that humanitarian
efforts to counteract them be instituted. (Please note that our voices are
being heard; thus far this is being done). And too let's remember that open
debate does not mean our point of view has to prevail nor that theirs is
right.
- Last, let us remember that united we stand, and united we can stay
if while not allowing the consequences of violence to control us, we keep
a wise understanding of the limitations of asking for peace.
Rep. Barbara Lee - Lone Vote of Wisdom
When the 535 members of Congress voted to grant the President broad
authority to use military force in the war on terrorism after the September
11th attack, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Oakland) was the lone vote against it.
Many called her unpatriotic, some called her a traitor, one colleague even
called the vote a display of "supreme poor judgment and gross egotism."
To her the action was a way to act responsibly both as a citizen and as
a representative. "When you disagree," she says, "you are demonstrating the
beauty of this democratic system. And that's the true American way. I want
to bring the perpetrators to justice, and I want to see a peaceful world."
" I did not know going into it that I would be alone." She had discussed
the issue with many colleagues and she was not the only one feeling that
way. "I'd agonized over this vote" she continued "We're all mourning. We're
angry and frustrated. I felt that in this environment of grief {someone}
needed to say let's show some restraint in our response. Let's not do
anything that could escalate this madness out of control. Let's know the
implications of our actions, and let's make sure that our system of checks
and balances is maintained. We need to figure out a way to stamp out
international terrorism and bring these perpetrators to justice without
creating more loss of life."
Moral courage is often harder than sheer bravery. It's still rare
enough that it ought to be trumpeted whenever and wherever it is found.
The Rent-Wage Gap And Affordable Housing
The average U.S. worker must earn at least $13.87 an hour to pay the
rent on an average two bedroom apartment. This is almost three times the
federal minimum wage of $5.15 an hour and a little more than double that of
California at $6.25. The study by the Washington based National Low Income
Housing Coalition warned that such findings imply that more and more
people will be living in substandard housing. The problem is particularly
acute in cities where rents have risen above the national average.
California is hit particularly strongly. In Orange County, for example, a
worker would have to earn $21. 27 an hour, $21.00 in Ventura, $19.73 in Los
Angeles, $15.19 in San Bernardino and $14.31 in Riverside just to be able
to afford current rents.
Affordable housing has been a long standing necessity. When combined
with the fact that the current wage structure is not able to keep up with
the needs of the rental market, the problem becomes acute. In Southern
California alone some 500,000 people earn the minimum wage. If they do not
end up among the working and homeless, they stand to increase the rolls of
those forced to live with inadequate plumbing, exposed wiring and holes in
walls.
True, poverty in the United States for the year 2000 fell by 1.1
million people to 11.3% which means that 31.1 million people are now in
poverty. But recent economic trends point to downturns for 2001 and most
likely 2002, perhaps presaging a sense of urgency for addressing the
issue of the wage-rent gap.
It makes no difference whether we call addressing the wage-rent gap a
spiritual or an economic imperative, nor on what ground we justify it, it
just ought to be addressed.
Divorce Rituals - Breaking Old Barriers
Divorces even when amicable can be so taxing and difficult that
anything that stands to alleviate the emotional strain is welcome.
Although some churches and synagogues have been offering divorce rituals
for as long as 30 years, it seems a new idea for many. In fact Methodists
may add an official divorce ceremony into their book of worship, a book
that is reviewed every 20 years or so. Several other religious
denominations, Episcopalians, Unitarians, the United Church of Christ as
well as Reform Jews are now beginning the practice and all have adopted
special prayers or new liturgies in trying to aid those coping with the
traumas of divorce.
It is a ritual well suited to families with children providing a
sense of continuity, a time where the ending of the marriage can be seen
as a new beginning. The ceremony only works for couples who have been able
to transcend acrimony and bitterness. For those who can undergo it, it not
only concretizes both an ending and a new way to relate as a family but
also permits family units to experience a sense of wholeness regardless of
the divorce.
The practice is not limited to religious venues. There is also a
growing tendency among couples who are not religiously affiliated or who
do not want a religious ceremony celebrating their divorce to go ahead and
make up their own rituals or throw their own party.
The idea of divorce rituals has its detractors, those who say it is
anti-marriage and those who believe that marriage vows should remain no
matter what, people who are already critical or ambivalent about divorce.
Another criticism comes from the fact that given that many couples can't
be sufficiently free emotionally to benefit from it, the practice is still
for the few.
Too many of our thoughts about divorce or marriage for that matter are
subject to outmoded notions which are at odds with the deeper general
understanding struggling to emerge both spiritually and culturally. For
example, the idea of divorce as sin, or even as failure, needs to be
revisited and hopefully transcended. If we are to bring human institutions
more in line with the needs of the future, let alone those of the present,
we can welcome the idea of divorce rituals as a small and promising
step.
Web Site Of Interest: www. nolo.com
Law For All
The site claims to make law available to the people and it offers a
host of information enabling many to avoid a lawyer or at least to be more
conversant with certain issues in hopes of perhaps reducing the number of
billable hours. The legal dictionary, for example, explains many terms
from alimony to custody and from mediation to torts. The site has 18
different areas including divorce, landlord\tenant, small business and
employment. Each area is like an on-line mini-course defining terms,
issues and applicable laws. Since it is also the home page for Nolo Press
and its products the site has a full supply of do it yourself books, manual
and forms. Most of the forms can be downloaded, thus saving one much effort
in locating them in brick and mortar stationary stores.
The site's Democracy Project aims to streamline the legal system and
make it more available to average citizen, and in doing so carries the
spirit of its founder, Ralph Warner. In 1971 Warner then a public
defender, began Nolo Press in the attic of his home. In 1999 the company
moved to a former clock factory in Berkeley.
Another feature contributing to the site practicing what it preaches is
Ask Auntie Nolo, a dear Abby sort of on-line service where individuals
can ask legal questions and receive a personalized answer.
To Ponder On
"We have a great mass of humanity that is paid extremely low wages.
We've left two-thirds of humanity behind. We have to find some ways to
integrate them into the system without causing catastrophic change for the
one-third who already have high wages."
Edward E. Leamer, economist and
director of the UCLA Anderson Forecast
|
|
