by Travis Irvine
I’ve often thought of modern democracy as a stool. No, not that kind of stool – a stool you sit on while getting trashed at a bar. Stools usually stand on three legs – just as democracy stands on three delicious, low-fat branches of government. But what if you add a fourth leg? Well, that stool would be far sturdier, my friend, and could hold up your drunken tookus all night! Maybe for days! Woo! I heart drinkin’!
Likewise, I’ve always considered media as our democracy’s fourth delicious branch. Media can keep checks and balances over all the branches and there’s no limit as to how large it can get. It could potentially create the biggest, fattest, most beautiful stool the world has ever seen!
But lately this leg has been cut shorter than the rest, and our democracy is all kinds of wobbly bobbly. If you tried to sit on our democracy at a bar, you’d fall and look silly in front of all your friends. Mainstream media in America are missing their mark, though they’re certainly not missing their audience. In 2005, the most popular stories amongst the public didn’t focus on the federal government. Headlines were flooded with reporters’ ‘bravery’ in New Orleans, or were running away with runaway brides. And that whole Terri Schiavo deal made me want to gag and vomit until I choked!
Meanwhile, news sources from the Internet and overseas gave more focus to FEMA’s costly shortcomings, the 100,000 dead civilians in Iraq, and the overall historical incompetence of an administration and the Congress that’s supposed to check it. There was even occasional reports of how lobbyists slowly beat democracy into a bloody pulp – but no matter how many good stories you’d hear from an independent source, its quality couldn’t make up for the lack of people its message reached.
I’ll tell you what else wasn’t missing from 2005 – sports! Sports were everywhere in the media! All kinds of sports! You got sports with sticks, sports with water, and best of all, sports with balls! I love goin’ to my favorite bar, drinkin’ beer, sittin’ on a stool called democracy and watchin’ grown men play with balls! Woo! I heart drinkin’!
And let’s not forget about the entertainment world…who could ignore Hollywood’s hottest couple, Brad and Angelina, getting’ down and dirty after they made that one movie with bullets and explosions! Man, dirty celebrities, bullets and explosions are almost as sweet as sports!
Look, I love movies and I love sports. Really. I’m just questioning if the outlets of our modern media – Internet, television, radio, newspapers, magazines, etc. – are really doing all they could to inform citizens about their own democracy. Think of media once more holding the political clout they did during the American Revolution – except bigger. Instead, they’ve sold out for cheap, immature profit derived from mindless consumers who don’t know any better. And the reason these buyers don’t know is because nobody is informing them on a mass scale. Hmmm, who could possibly have the power and means to mediate this important, democratic information to the teaming masses? Who, I ask, who?!
Perhaps I judge too harshly. Television is still young and immature – barely in people’s homes for forty years. In fact, radio hasn’t even been around for one hundred years. Movies barely popular for seventy-five. And internet? Please! Internet has only been in the hands of the public for twenty years, tops! Internet is a baby. A high-powered, all-knowing little baby.
Only newspapers and magazines have been consistently a part of major societies’ social aspects for centuries. Since the dawn of the printing press, civilizations entered a new time period, that in the future will be known as A.I. (After Ink). But even this invention, the largest attributer in human history to aid social advancement, has only been in human hands for a fraction of the time humans have been on Earth. Though the oldest in the group, written mass communication has yet to mature.
I just hope that media will mature soon. Until then, our democracy will remain just a wobbly little stool, floating around, awaiting another great American Revolution to come about and flush it down. Perhaps the media will have a hand in this. Add a few bullets and explosions – someone might even watch. •
Showing posts with label Issue 17 - Jan. 2006. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Issue 17 - Jan. 2006. Show all posts
Feb 19, 2008
Here comes Alito...
by Mike Ludwig
If you listen carefully, you can hear the screams echo from every progressive meeting, email list, and web blog within fifty miles.
AAAAAAAAAAH!
Be afraid little activist, be very afraid. Alito is coming. He is going to bomb women’s clinics with judicial activism and give anybody who listens to Ted Nugent a semi-automatic to play with. He’ll search every 10 year-old-girl for dope, spy on your uncle for sporting a Veterans Against Bush bumper sticker, and even scale skyscrapers to grab unsuspecting blondes from their penthouses.
Yes, Judge Sam Alito’s nomination could be the Bush administration’s worst attack on our shared values since, well, damn near two weeks ago. But wait, there’s hope! Remember wondering what y ou are going to do with your degree that’s costing way too much? Well, its time to meet Prominent-DC-Liberal-Think-Tank-Hey-Wanna-Hang-out? Guy! He just wants to be friends with everybody and then give out FREE super-cool glossy flyers and pamphlets about stopping Alito. The kids in the Marxist groups would totally have to pay for these. Even better, he’s got the only job your Integrated Degree in Political Arts and Linguistics Communication will ever land you, whatever it is, so you can get some great tips on having a future.
As it turns out, our options in stopping this neo-con nut are groundbreaking. At one meeting I attended we discussed the possibility of a candlelight vigil, and even tabling at College Green with all the sweet FREE stuff we get from Prominent-DC-Liberal-Think-Tank-Hey-Wanna-Hang-out? Guy. Plus, there is no way our loyal representatives in Congress could confirm Alito after their mail boxes fill with sweet FREE pre-made dissent notes signed by their college age constituents.
Now there is a problem. How are we going to get enough people to sign our sweet FREE stuff? There are thousands of students who would agree, but they are all to busy drinking and caring about other things than politics. Don’t they understand the urgency of this situation?
I confronted one of my politically apathetic friends about this issue, and even gave him one of my glossy pamphlets from Washington.
“Man, this is messed up,” he said.
“I know dude, now do you understand why I am so worried about this stuff all the time?” I said.
“Yeah, but you get stressed out because you spend so much time on it. You go to all these meetings and make a bunch of copies of stuff, but in the end some old dudes you don’t even know are going to make these decisions for you. Maybe they’ll care what you say, but probably not.”
But our flyers are so glossy…
My friend has a point.
We work far too hard to ensure our leaders make the right decisions for us, but get little in return. This can be frustrating and cause people to burn out of grassroots activism. We could be putting this energy into solving our problems on our own, but instead we throw pebbles at the institutions that attempt to solve them for us.
Samuel Alito’s appointment could be the breaking point in the Supreme Court during a crucial time in American politics. He could decide what is taught in our schools without ever meeting a student. He could make a drastic choice for millions of women, even though he is a man and has never held another life in his body. The consequences of his discretion, and those of his elite colleagues, could enter into a million nameless lives on any given day.
Perhaps this explains my friend’s attitude. It’s not apathy that keeps him from action, is hopelessness. It’s not worth it. They are too many, we are too few. They have the bombs, we have television. Sit down and go back to work.
Fortunately, we don’t all feel that way. Those of us who believe in a better future know that good things take time. Perhaps one day our wish for control over our own lives and communities will be fulfilled and we won’t have to waste our time fighting some old rich guy we’ve never met. Until then we should reconsider our habit of simply reacting to oppression, and instead take action that reduces our obedience to the top-down structure that allows it to happen in the first place.
I hope this piece made you laugh a little, for it is our ability to laugh at ourselves and our world, to admit that no one is above criticism or comedy that proves our potential. Our minds and movements are free to evolve as we discuss, disagree, overcome, and learn from each other and every passing moment. Relax. Samuel Alito’s ascendance through the ranks of the Right may give him a seat of unreasonable power, but it’s just that, unreasonable. At least we will still know what it’s like to be human. •
If you listen carefully, you can hear the screams echo from every progressive meeting, email list, and web blog within fifty miles.
AAAAAAAAAAH!
Be afraid little activist, be very afraid. Alito is coming. He is going to bomb women’s clinics with judicial activism and give anybody who listens to Ted Nugent a semi-automatic to play with. He’ll search every 10 year-old-girl for dope, spy on your uncle for sporting a Veterans Against Bush bumper sticker, and even scale skyscrapers to grab unsuspecting blondes from their penthouses.
Yes, Judge Sam Alito’s nomination could be the Bush administration’s worst attack on our shared values since, well, damn near two weeks ago. But wait, there’s hope! Remember wondering what y ou are going to do with your degree that’s costing way too much? Well, its time to meet Prominent-DC-Liberal-Think-Tank-Hey-Wanna-Hang-out? Guy! He just wants to be friends with everybody and then give out FREE super-cool glossy flyers and pamphlets about stopping Alito. The kids in the Marxist groups would totally have to pay for these. Even better, he’s got the only job your Integrated Degree in Political Arts and Linguistics Communication will ever land you, whatever it is, so you can get some great tips on having a future.
As it turns out, our options in stopping this neo-con nut are groundbreaking. At one meeting I attended we discussed the possibility of a candlelight vigil, and even tabling at College Green with all the sweet FREE stuff we get from Prominent-DC-Liberal-Think-Tank-Hey-Wanna-Hang-out? Guy. Plus, there is no way our loyal representatives in Congress could confirm Alito after their mail boxes fill with sweet FREE pre-made dissent notes signed by their college age constituents.
Now there is a problem. How are we going to get enough people to sign our sweet FREE stuff? There are thousands of students who would agree, but they are all to busy drinking and caring about other things than politics. Don’t they understand the urgency of this situation?
I confronted one of my politically apathetic friends about this issue, and even gave him one of my glossy pamphlets from Washington.
“Man, this is messed up,” he said.
“I know dude, now do you understand why I am so worried about this stuff all the time?” I said.
“Yeah, but you get stressed out because you spend so much time on it. You go to all these meetings and make a bunch of copies of stuff, but in the end some old dudes you don’t even know are going to make these decisions for you. Maybe they’ll care what you say, but probably not.”
But our flyers are so glossy…
My friend has a point.
We work far too hard to ensure our leaders make the right decisions for us, but get little in return. This can be frustrating and cause people to burn out of grassroots activism. We could be putting this energy into solving our problems on our own, but instead we throw pebbles at the institutions that attempt to solve them for us.
Samuel Alito’s appointment could be the breaking point in the Supreme Court during a crucial time in American politics. He could decide what is taught in our schools without ever meeting a student. He could make a drastic choice for millions of women, even though he is a man and has never held another life in his body. The consequences of his discretion, and those of his elite colleagues, could enter into a million nameless lives on any given day.
Perhaps this explains my friend’s attitude. It’s not apathy that keeps him from action, is hopelessness. It’s not worth it. They are too many, we are too few. They have the bombs, we have television. Sit down and go back to work.
Fortunately, we don’t all feel that way. Those of us who believe in a better future know that good things take time. Perhaps one day our wish for control over our own lives and communities will be fulfilled and we won’t have to waste our time fighting some old rich guy we’ve never met. Until then we should reconsider our habit of simply reacting to oppression, and instead take action that reduces our obedience to the top-down structure that allows it to happen in the first place.
I hope this piece made you laugh a little, for it is our ability to laugh at ourselves and our world, to admit that no one is above criticism or comedy that proves our potential. Our minds and movements are free to evolve as we discuss, disagree, overcome, and learn from each other and every passing moment. Relax. Samuel Alito’s ascendance through the ranks of the Right may give him a seat of unreasonable power, but it’s just that, unreasonable. At least we will still know what it’s like to be human. •
Fair court alliance Ohio: a coalition to stop Alito
by Kelsey McCoy
Confirmation hearings for the nomination of Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court began on Monday, January 9. Alito is a 55 year old conservative jurist on the federal appeals court. Alito would potentially bring a conservative judicial philosophy to the Supreme Court. And with justices serving on the Supreme Court for life, Alito could be shaping American law for at least the next thirty years.
In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito wrote in dissent that a woman should be forced, by law, to notify her husband if she decides to have an abortion, restricting privacy rights. In U.S v. Rybar, Alito argued in dissent that banning possession of fully automatic, repeating machine guns is unconstitutional. In Public Interest Research Group v. Magnesium Electron, Alito sided with a corporate polluter, erasing their $2.62 million fine for violating the Clean Water Act 150 times.
A coalition has come together to oppose the nomination. Fair Court Alliance Ohio includes InterAct, Students for Peace and Justice, College Democrats, Open Doors, VOX, the OU chapters of the Sierra Club and ACLU as well as student organizations at Ohio State and Cincinnati State. The group has worked to draw media attention to the issue through tabling three or four times a week. At the tables, coalition members took pictures of students for a photo petition.
The photo petition visually exemplifies opposition of students across the country. The petition is legitimate, but is intended more to draw attention from the media, as well as students. The photo petition includes pictures of students holding signs that say why they oppose Alito’s nomination. The signs include things like “My body, my choice” and “Prevent Alit-opression”. You can check out the petition online at www.alitosamerica.org.
The coalition is just getting started, but VOX (a pro-choice group run by Planned Parenthood) has been working on a campaign since the confirmation of Chief Justice Roberts. VOX representative Alyssa Jerzyk said that Planned Parenthood is careful about the decision to oppose a Supreme Court nominee. “The fact that we opposed Alito right out of the gate illustrated just how terrible Alito is for women’s rights,” Jerzyk said. The VOX campaign includes distributing signature cards that will be sent in mass to Senator DeWine, urging him to “oppose any Supreme Court nominee who does not believe the Constitution protects a woman’s right to choose”.
This article is being published close to the vote for confirmation. To write Senator DeWine, send letters to: Sen. Mike DeWine, 140 Russell Senate Building, Washington, DC 20510. The photo petition will be available at tables on campus weekly. For more information, visit www.alitosamerica.org.
Confirmation hearings for the nomination of Justice Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court began on Monday, January 9. Alito is a 55 year old conservative jurist on the federal appeals court. Alito would potentially bring a conservative judicial philosophy to the Supreme Court. And with justices serving on the Supreme Court for life, Alito could be shaping American law for at least the next thirty years.
In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Alito wrote in dissent that a woman should be forced, by law, to notify her husband if she decides to have an abortion, restricting privacy rights. In U.S v. Rybar, Alito argued in dissent that banning possession of fully automatic, repeating machine guns is unconstitutional. In Public Interest Research Group v. Magnesium Electron, Alito sided with a corporate polluter, erasing their $2.62 million fine for violating the Clean Water Act 150 times.
A coalition has come together to oppose the nomination. Fair Court Alliance Ohio includes InterAct, Students for Peace and Justice, College Democrats, Open Doors, VOX, the OU chapters of the Sierra Club and ACLU as well as student organizations at Ohio State and Cincinnati State. The group has worked to draw media attention to the issue through tabling three or four times a week. At the tables, coalition members took pictures of students for a photo petition.
The photo petition visually exemplifies opposition of students across the country. The petition is legitimate, but is intended more to draw attention from the media, as well as students. The photo petition includes pictures of students holding signs that say why they oppose Alito’s nomination. The signs include things like “My body, my choice” and “Prevent Alit-opression”. You can check out the petition online at www.alitosamerica.org.
The coalition is just getting started, but VOX (a pro-choice group run by Planned Parenthood) has been working on a campaign since the confirmation of Chief Justice Roberts. VOX representative Alyssa Jerzyk said that Planned Parenthood is careful about the decision to oppose a Supreme Court nominee. “The fact that we opposed Alito right out of the gate illustrated just how terrible Alito is for women’s rights,” Jerzyk said. The VOX campaign includes distributing signature cards that will be sent in mass to Senator DeWine, urging him to “oppose any Supreme Court nominee who does not believe the Constitution protects a woman’s right to choose”.
This article is being published close to the vote for confirmation. To write Senator DeWine, send letters to: Sen. Mike DeWine, 140 Russell Senate Building, Washington, DC 20510. The photo petition will be available at tables on campus weekly. For more information, visit www.alitosamerica.org.
AAWC continues to foster local activism
by Emily Hanlon
After organizing the largest local demonstration against the Bush administration and the Iraq war this past November 2nd, the Athens Anti-War Coalition (AAWC) is preparing winter quarter to work further on the ongoing effort across the country to end the war. Formerly named the Athens Can’t Wait Coalition, the group changed names after completely breaking ties with the national office of the World Can’t Wait. The name change and broken ties have done little to change the dynamic of the grassroots activist group, as they continue to function locally and govern themselves democratically. “Even when we were affiliated with the World Can’t Wait we were independent and carried out our own things not associated with the national office,” said coalition member Damon Krane.
An important strategy to end the war being utilized by the AAWC is counter-recruitment; the main purpose of the demonstration that occurred November 2nd. By disrupting local recruitment centers the enlistment numbers go down, thus making it more and more difficult to keep the war in Iraq going.
This strategy has become of interest to the Department of Defense, which has been surveying local anti-war movements across the country over the past year. NBC news leaked a report compiled by the Department of Defense, and among the names in the body of the report was AAWC member, Will Klatt. Given the broadness of the report, the coalition has reason to believe that their actions have been under surveillance. The AAWC sent out a press release January 9th stating, “The Defense Department’s focus on counter recruitment efforts confirms the very real threat our activism poses to the Bush administration’s illegal war on Iraq.”
Along with Interact, the AAWC plans to bring the Pittsburgh Organizing Group to Athens for a presentation on the Counter-Recruitment movement. POG came to Athens on October 19th, covering campaign development, media relations, interactions with recruiters and legal defense. The AAWC plans to meet with parents sympathetic with the coalition’s desire to provide other options to high school students who are considering enlisting. The AAWC also may be involved in organizing a protest March 19th, the two-year anniversary of the war in Iraq. Nationwide protests and demonstrations are being orchestrated by United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of more than 1,300 local and national groups across the country. A website for the AAWC is currently being constructed that will include past projects, coverage of November 2nd, and contact information. Those interested in becoming involved with future projects can contact the group at athensantiwar@hotmail.com.
After organizing the largest local demonstration against the Bush administration and the Iraq war this past November 2nd, the Athens Anti-War Coalition (AAWC) is preparing winter quarter to work further on the ongoing effort across the country to end the war. Formerly named the Athens Can’t Wait Coalition, the group changed names after completely breaking ties with the national office of the World Can’t Wait. The name change and broken ties have done little to change the dynamic of the grassroots activist group, as they continue to function locally and govern themselves democratically. “Even when we were affiliated with the World Can’t Wait we were independent and carried out our own things not associated with the national office,” said coalition member Damon Krane.
An important strategy to end the war being utilized by the AAWC is counter-recruitment; the main purpose of the demonstration that occurred November 2nd. By disrupting local recruitment centers the enlistment numbers go down, thus making it more and more difficult to keep the war in Iraq going.
This strategy has become of interest to the Department of Defense, which has been surveying local anti-war movements across the country over the past year. NBC news leaked a report compiled by the Department of Defense, and among the names in the body of the report was AAWC member, Will Klatt. Given the broadness of the report, the coalition has reason to believe that their actions have been under surveillance. The AAWC sent out a press release January 9th stating, “The Defense Department’s focus on counter recruitment efforts confirms the very real threat our activism poses to the Bush administration’s illegal war on Iraq.”
Along with Interact, the AAWC plans to bring the Pittsburgh Organizing Group to Athens for a presentation on the Counter-Recruitment movement. POG came to Athens on October 19th, covering campaign development, media relations, interactions with recruiters and legal defense. The AAWC plans to meet with parents sympathetic with the coalition’s desire to provide other options to high school students who are considering enlisting. The AAWC also may be involved in organizing a protest March 19th, the two-year anniversary of the war in Iraq. Nationwide protests and demonstrations are being orchestrated by United for Peace and Justice, a coalition of more than 1,300 local and national groups across the country. A website for the AAWC is currently being constructed that will include past projects, coverage of November 2nd, and contact information. Those interested in becoming involved with future projects can contact the group at athensantiwar@hotmail.com.
The silence on Sudan
by Tracy Fehr
In American society today our media controls not only what we see as a nation, but also our reality of the world. If something occurs and is not covered in the mainstream media then for most Americans the event never happened. This is why the silent role the media has played in the Sudan genocide and in the current Darfur conflict is so paramount.
South Sudanese villages are raided by the northern militia—which is supported by the Sudanese government—because of the “Jihad” or Holy War of the northern Arabs.
In 2005 Amnesty International said that over the past 21 years of fighting in Sudan, an estimated 2 million people have died and 6 million have been displaced from their homes. In addition, thousands of women have been raped and thousands of children have been abducted in the south and taken north to be sold into slavery.
“There is perhaps no greater tragedy on the face of the Earth today than the tragedy that is unfolding in Sudan”, said U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell to the House International Relations Committee in 2001. Although even at that point the tragedy had already been unfolding for some time. Our own president referred to the situation in Sudan as“genocide”, and the United Nations have called the Sudan bloodshed, “the Worst Humanitarian Conflict on Earth”.
So if Sudan is such a major crisis, then we have to wonder why do we not see it covered more in the media? Well, some could argue the recent lack of coverage is due to the Comprehensive Peace Accord—signed on January 9, 2005, to establish peace in south Sudan—but it’s not. Although this agreement helps to try to secure peace is one area, the rest of Sudan is still suffering. According to the UN News Service, the Darfur region of Sudan is experiencing attacks which have killed 180,000 people and displaced 2 million since that area’s fighting began in 2003.
The Sudanese government has gotten away with supporting militia against their own people for as long as the conflicts have been occurring in south Sudan and Darfur. Recently, the Sudanese government has made it increasingly difficult to obtain a visa for Sudan and has added difficulties for journalists once they arrive in the country. “Those reporters awarded visas are required to get permission to travel to Darfur, and once they get them, must be accompanied there by a government escort. Even then, soldiers can limit access to pillaged villages or displacement camps,” said Kenneth H. Bacon, President of Refugees International.
“There is such a small group of us [journalists] covering it [Sudan]. When we don’t go in, it means Americans don’t see what’s happening here,” said Washington Post reporter Emily Wax during an interview with Sherry Ricchiardi of American Journalism Review.
“The war in Sudan may be ‘invisible’ to Americans and others in the world, but to us south Sudanese it is a constant and painful experience,” said Francis Bok author of Escape from Slavery. Bok is a former slave who was abducted into slavery at the age of seven, when his south Sudanese village was raided by the north government-backed militia.
Although the Washington Post and the New York Times have slowly been setting the precedent for increased Sudan coverage, the television news remains drastically behind. In the year 2004, the three nightly newscasters—ABC, NBC and CBS—aired an insufficient 26 minutes on the Darfur and Sudan crisis. A television news analysis conducted by the American Progress Action Fund studied the amount of collective coverage Sudan received during the month of June 2005 on the ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC networks. Sudan’s coverage was 12 times less than the collective coverage on Tom Cruise and 50 times less than the coverage on Michael Jackson.
Placing more priority on celebrities’ lives than on an international crisis affecting millions of lives is an injustice not only to the people of Sudan, but also to the viewing public of America. It is time for the American public to speak out against the increasing celebrity and domesticated media and to demand appropriate coverage for the most significant news stories—especially regarding Sudan. The mainstream media will only continue to ignore international conflicts and sensationalize domestic stories and celebrities as long as its viewers allow it to.
According to Harvard Research Fellow, Ethan Zuckerman, more press coverage on an international conflict leads to more public awareness on the issue and more pressure on the government to act. Thus, the amount of media attention an international conflict receives is positively correlated to the likeliness of peacekeepers and aid being sent.
Perhaps the seriousness of the incredible lack of coverage on Sudan can be summed up in a quote by Rabbi Irving Greenburg, chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, in a Washington Post opinion editorial: “…the horror that afflicts Sudan is staggering…Remembering of the Holocaust has instilled in us a profound appreciation for the cost of silence.”
At this point of the Sudan struggle, we can only hope to cut that cost of silence and finally bring a voice to Sudan.
In American society today our media controls not only what we see as a nation, but also our reality of the world. If something occurs and is not covered in the mainstream media then for most Americans the event never happened. This is why the silent role the media has played in the Sudan genocide and in the current Darfur conflict is so paramount.
South Sudanese villages are raided by the northern militia—which is supported by the Sudanese government—because of the “Jihad” or Holy War of the northern Arabs.
In 2005 Amnesty International said that over the past 21 years of fighting in Sudan, an estimated 2 million people have died and 6 million have been displaced from their homes. In addition, thousands of women have been raped and thousands of children have been abducted in the south and taken north to be sold into slavery.
“There is perhaps no greater tragedy on the face of the Earth today than the tragedy that is unfolding in Sudan”, said U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell to the House International Relations Committee in 2001. Although even at that point the tragedy had already been unfolding for some time. Our own president referred to the situation in Sudan as“genocide”, and the United Nations have called the Sudan bloodshed, “the Worst Humanitarian Conflict on Earth”.
So if Sudan is such a major crisis, then we have to wonder why do we not see it covered more in the media? Well, some could argue the recent lack of coverage is due to the Comprehensive Peace Accord—signed on January 9, 2005, to establish peace in south Sudan—but it’s not. Although this agreement helps to try to secure peace is one area, the rest of Sudan is still suffering. According to the UN News Service, the Darfur region of Sudan is experiencing attacks which have killed 180,000 people and displaced 2 million since that area’s fighting began in 2003.
The Sudanese government has gotten away with supporting militia against their own people for as long as the conflicts have been occurring in south Sudan and Darfur. Recently, the Sudanese government has made it increasingly difficult to obtain a visa for Sudan and has added difficulties for journalists once they arrive in the country. “Those reporters awarded visas are required to get permission to travel to Darfur, and once they get them, must be accompanied there by a government escort. Even then, soldiers can limit access to pillaged villages or displacement camps,” said Kenneth H. Bacon, President of Refugees International.
“There is such a small group of us [journalists] covering it [Sudan]. When we don’t go in, it means Americans don’t see what’s happening here,” said Washington Post reporter Emily Wax during an interview with Sherry Ricchiardi of American Journalism Review.
“The war in Sudan may be ‘invisible’ to Americans and others in the world, but to us south Sudanese it is a constant and painful experience,” said Francis Bok author of Escape from Slavery. Bok is a former slave who was abducted into slavery at the age of seven, when his south Sudanese village was raided by the north government-backed militia.
Although the Washington Post and the New York Times have slowly been setting the precedent for increased Sudan coverage, the television news remains drastically behind. In the year 2004, the three nightly newscasters—ABC, NBC and CBS—aired an insufficient 26 minutes on the Darfur and Sudan crisis. A television news analysis conducted by the American Progress Action Fund studied the amount of collective coverage Sudan received during the month of June 2005 on the ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC networks. Sudan’s coverage was 12 times less than the collective coverage on Tom Cruise and 50 times less than the coverage on Michael Jackson.
Placing more priority on celebrities’ lives than on an international crisis affecting millions of lives is an injustice not only to the people of Sudan, but also to the viewing public of America. It is time for the American public to speak out against the increasing celebrity and domesticated media and to demand appropriate coverage for the most significant news stories—especially regarding Sudan. The mainstream media will only continue to ignore international conflicts and sensationalize domestic stories and celebrities as long as its viewers allow it to.
According to Harvard Research Fellow, Ethan Zuckerman, more press coverage on an international conflict leads to more public awareness on the issue and more pressure on the government to act. Thus, the amount of media attention an international conflict receives is positively correlated to the likeliness of peacekeepers and aid being sent.
Perhaps the seriousness of the incredible lack of coverage on Sudan can be summed up in a quote by Rabbi Irving Greenburg, chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, in a Washington Post opinion editorial: “…the horror that afflicts Sudan is staggering…Remembering of the Holocaust has instilled in us a profound appreciation for the cost of silence.”
At this point of the Sudan struggle, we can only hope to cut that cost of silence and finally bring a voice to Sudan.
We don’t live in the world envisioned by Amnesty - but I wish we did
by Emily Miner
Many people, and presumably most of those who read this publication, have heard of, at least in passing, Amnesty International. Founded in 1961 its intentions were lofty – it wished to help create a world were everyone, regardless of nationality, race, gender or religion was guaranteed the rights enshrined in the United Nations 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (visit http://web.amnesty.org/pages/aboutai-udhr-eng to read the Declaration in full.) AI’s initial focus – and the cause that lead it to win the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977 – was the world wide problem of “prisoners of consciousness”: the men or women throughout the world arrested for the non-violent expression of their convictions.
But as the organization has grown (it now boasts a membership of over 1.8million) so has the breadth of the issues it has tackled in defense of human rights. Each year it releases a list of campaigns meant to focus on topics it sees as urgent in the fight for human rights. (See the full list of campaigns, and read about them in detail at http://www.amnesty.org/campaign/ ).
The brilliance of Amnesty is that it manages to maintain its idealistic principles while recognizing the areas it can be most effective. Sadly, torture and the act of a state sanctioned death penalty will probably not be abolished worldwide in any of our life times. But by exposing violators, writing letters, participating in protests and pressuring politicians, Amnesty and its members have on the most essential level – the individual level – influenced and in countless instances saved the lives of people threatened with torture or death.
At the same time, Amnesty is always at the forefront of pinpointing areas where it can affect large scale change. Since AI began to focus its attention on the Guantanamo Bay detainees, the US government has released 15 prisoners. In 2005, due in part to pressure from AI, the Violence Against Women Act was renewed in the United States for another 5 years. Prisoners of conscious from Mexico, Belarus and Libya, to name a few, specifically thanked AI after they were released from detention because of AI activist pressure.
For me, what I love about Amnesty is its ability to pinpoint one of the basic, unifying aspects of humanity. The twentieth century saw some of the most depraved and large scale acts of human rights violations the world has ever seen. And yet in the same century the world tried to codify human rights, to create institutions and organizations to defend them and to help those who are persecuted. Certainly our governments and the institutions we’ve created have not always been successful. But Amnesty has continued to not only embrace the principle of universal human rights but to allow millions of ordinary people the opportunity to influence the world around them. Due to its “urgent action appeals” it has made activists out of anyone with a pen, paper and stamps. And it has allowed people throughout the world to help others they may never meet and affect change in situations that might never affect them personally.
Amnesty International is an international watchdog; it is a diligent campaigner for the betterment of the rights and circumstances of people wherever they may live and it is one of the most important and vocal defenders not only of universal human rights, but of the dignity of each individual. We don’t live in the world envisioned by Amnesty – but I wish we did.
Many people, and presumably most of those who read this publication, have heard of, at least in passing, Amnesty International. Founded in 1961 its intentions were lofty – it wished to help create a world were everyone, regardless of nationality, race, gender or religion was guaranteed the rights enshrined in the United Nations 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (visit http://web.amnesty.org/pages/aboutai-udhr-eng to read the Declaration in full.) AI’s initial focus – and the cause that lead it to win the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977 – was the world wide problem of “prisoners of consciousness”: the men or women throughout the world arrested for the non-violent expression of their convictions.
But as the organization has grown (it now boasts a membership of over 1.8million) so has the breadth of the issues it has tackled in defense of human rights. Each year it releases a list of campaigns meant to focus on topics it sees as urgent in the fight for human rights. (See the full list of campaigns, and read about them in detail at http://www.amnesty.org/campaign/ ).
The brilliance of Amnesty is that it manages to maintain its idealistic principles while recognizing the areas it can be most effective. Sadly, torture and the act of a state sanctioned death penalty will probably not be abolished worldwide in any of our life times. But by exposing violators, writing letters, participating in protests and pressuring politicians, Amnesty and its members have on the most essential level – the individual level – influenced and in countless instances saved the lives of people threatened with torture or death.
At the same time, Amnesty is always at the forefront of pinpointing areas where it can affect large scale change. Since AI began to focus its attention on the Guantanamo Bay detainees, the US government has released 15 prisoners. In 2005, due in part to pressure from AI, the Violence Against Women Act was renewed in the United States for another 5 years. Prisoners of conscious from Mexico, Belarus and Libya, to name a few, specifically thanked AI after they were released from detention because of AI activist pressure.
For me, what I love about Amnesty is its ability to pinpoint one of the basic, unifying aspects of humanity. The twentieth century saw some of the most depraved and large scale acts of human rights violations the world has ever seen. And yet in the same century the world tried to codify human rights, to create institutions and organizations to defend them and to help those who are persecuted. Certainly our governments and the institutions we’ve created have not always been successful. But Amnesty has continued to not only embrace the principle of universal human rights but to allow millions of ordinary people the opportunity to influence the world around them. Due to its “urgent action appeals” it has made activists out of anyone with a pen, paper and stamps. And it has allowed people throughout the world to help others they may never meet and affect change in situations that might never affect them personally.
Amnesty International is an international watchdog; it is a diligent campaigner for the betterment of the rights and circumstances of people wherever they may live and it is one of the most important and vocal defenders not only of universal human rights, but of the dignity of each individual. We don’t live in the world envisioned by Amnesty – but I wish we did.
Campus ministry winter break trip to US-Mexico border
by Melissa Wales
Over winter break, I had the pleasure and privilege of accompanying eleven Ohio University students to the US-Mexico border for a week to examine the impacts of US economic and immigration policies. We were hosted by BorderLinks (www.borderlinks.org), a faith-based nonprofit with nearly two decades of working on the border, beginning with Central American refugees in 1987 and continuing now with a focus on immigration issues and global economics. BorderLinks is committed to providing experiential education for people from developed countries.
We flew into Tucson and received a brief history of US-Mexico border relations and the history of BorderLinks by founder and current Moderator for the Presbyterian Church, Rick Ufford-Chase. He explained that in 1994, NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) resulted in increased pressure on the border with the establishment of free trade zones and a dramatic increase in US-owned manufacturing plants (maquiladoras). US Border Patrol stepped up to tighten the major cities along the border, pushing migrants into the inhospitable Sonoran Desert, presumed to be a natural barrier to illegal migration. But the push of poverty in Mexico and Central America and the pull of employment opportunities in the US have proven to be stronger forces than fear of the serious dangers of the high desert.
The results of what most would agree is a failed US immigration policy have been tragic and immoral: more than 2000 men, women and children have died while attempting to cross the desert in Arizona alone in the last 5 years. Recently, people of faith came together to struggle with how to respond to the crisis, and founded No Mas Muertes: No More Deaths (www.nomoredeaths.org) with three goals: 1) to provide water, food, and medical assistance to migrants walking through the Arizona desert; 2) to monitor US operations on the border and work to change US policy to resolve the “war zone” crisis on the border; 3) and to bring the plight of migrants to public attention.
Last summer No More Deaths received national attention when the Border Patrol arrested volunteers Shanti Sellz and Daniel Strauss, who were transporting three sick migrants to a medical facility. No More Deaths had been in continuous communication with US Border Patrol about their humanitarian work and their operations have followed a mutually agreed-upon, transparent protocol. But amid fear of “outsiders” in this post-9-11 political climate and a growing uneasiness about job security and the restructuring of the US economy, the US-Mexico border is becoming more and more militarized. “Humanitarian Aid is Never a Crime” is the campaign to drop the charges against Sellz and Strauss. At this point, no trial date has been set, and Amnesty International has declared that Sellz and Strauss will be designated prisoners of conscience if found guilty.
Perhaps the most memorable moment for me, in an intense week of many memorable moments, was meeting with Sarah, a 22-year old migrant from northern Guatemala who’d been traveling for a month and had just been returned to Mexican immigration after jumping the wall in Nogales (yes, there are walls, old landing strips from the Vietnam War, along many miles of the border). I’ll never forget her sitting small and afraid in the cement cell, offering up her story to us as tears streamed down her face. I’ll never forget her bravery: risking her life to provide for her impoverished family and her willingness to share her personal struggle with strangers.
We spent most of our time in Agua Prieta and Nogales, Mexico to get a better understanding of life on the border. We toured a maquiladora and met with an organizer from the Border Workers’ Alliance who educates and organizes workers about their rights. The maquiladoras offer the “best” employment at $40-$70/week (a wage that keeps people in poverty), and often times in unsafe working conditions. We participated in weekly vigil at the border to remember and honor people who have died in the desert. We walked along the wall separating a people from themselves and reflected on history, geography and a quote we’d heard from a resident of the borderlands, “I didn’t cross the border, the border crossed me.”
We learned that most migrants don’t want to leave their families and homes, but NAFTA and other forces of globalization have pulled the economic rug out from under many Mexicans, especially rural coffee growers. We visited a roasting facility for Just Coffee (www.justcoffee.com.), a cooperative coffee business owned by 25 families in Chiapas, a region in Southern Mexico that has seen a dramatic increase in out-migration when coffee prices fell in the early part of the decade. Just Coffee markets organic, high quality coffee while keeping the profits with the growers, who can then remain on their land and offer a more promising future to their children. Another great reason to buy fair trade products!
There are several hotly-debated immigration bills in the US Senate now to keep an eye on, with solutions ranging from building more fences to recognizing the reality of the US economy and pushing for the decriminalization of migrant workers. And President Bush (who happened to fly into Tucson the same day we did) is cautiously promoting a dubious guest worker program while weighing the very vocal concerns of border state politicians and vigilante ranchers with those of agribusiness, construction companies and other US employers who rely on an undocumented workforce to fill their low wage jobs.
Absent from much of the media’s presentation of the debate is the perspective of progressive people of faith, who have much to offer on the topic of US immigration policy. No More Deaths has outlined a proposal for immigration reform that can be found at http://www.nomoredeaths.org/faithbasedprinciples.html
The day we left, I picked up a copy of US News and World Report at the airport, with the cover story “Border Wars,” and tried to reconcile a perspective that portrayed migrants as mostly would-be terrorists and dangerous drug runners with our encounters with Sarah and others who are pushed to the border’s edge in desperate attempts to provide for themselves and their families. I thought of the migrant community in Southeastern Ohio, employed by large commercial farms along the Ohio River. Did their journeys begin in Chiapas or Guatemala, leaving family and friends and the only home they’d ever known? Did they pay thousands of dollars for a coyote to guide them through the desert with the promise of better wages and the chance to lift their families out of grinding poverty? The border is not “down there.” The border is here: picking our produce, slaughtering our meat, building and cleaning our homes, and caring for our children. We all have a stake in creating an immigration policy founded in compassion and justice.
Over winter break, I had the pleasure and privilege of accompanying eleven Ohio University students to the US-Mexico border for a week to examine the impacts of US economic and immigration policies. We were hosted by BorderLinks (www.borderlinks.org), a faith-based nonprofit with nearly two decades of working on the border, beginning with Central American refugees in 1987 and continuing now with a focus on immigration issues and global economics. BorderLinks is committed to providing experiential education for people from developed countries.
We flew into Tucson and received a brief history of US-Mexico border relations and the history of BorderLinks by founder and current Moderator for the Presbyterian Church, Rick Ufford-Chase. He explained that in 1994, NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement) resulted in increased pressure on the border with the establishment of free trade zones and a dramatic increase in US-owned manufacturing plants (maquiladoras). US Border Patrol stepped up to tighten the major cities along the border, pushing migrants into the inhospitable Sonoran Desert, presumed to be a natural barrier to illegal migration. But the push of poverty in Mexico and Central America and the pull of employment opportunities in the US have proven to be stronger forces than fear of the serious dangers of the high desert.
The results of what most would agree is a failed US immigration policy have been tragic and immoral: more than 2000 men, women and children have died while attempting to cross the desert in Arizona alone in the last 5 years. Recently, people of faith came together to struggle with how to respond to the crisis, and founded No Mas Muertes: No More Deaths (www.nomoredeaths.org) with three goals: 1) to provide water, food, and medical assistance to migrants walking through the Arizona desert; 2) to monitor US operations on the border and work to change US policy to resolve the “war zone” crisis on the border; 3) and to bring the plight of migrants to public attention.
Last summer No More Deaths received national attention when the Border Patrol arrested volunteers Shanti Sellz and Daniel Strauss, who were transporting three sick migrants to a medical facility. No More Deaths had been in continuous communication with US Border Patrol about their humanitarian work and their operations have followed a mutually agreed-upon, transparent protocol. But amid fear of “outsiders” in this post-9-11 political climate and a growing uneasiness about job security and the restructuring of the US economy, the US-Mexico border is becoming more and more militarized. “Humanitarian Aid is Never a Crime” is the campaign to drop the charges against Sellz and Strauss. At this point, no trial date has been set, and Amnesty International has declared that Sellz and Strauss will be designated prisoners of conscience if found guilty.
Perhaps the most memorable moment for me, in an intense week of many memorable moments, was meeting with Sarah, a 22-year old migrant from northern Guatemala who’d been traveling for a month and had just been returned to Mexican immigration after jumping the wall in Nogales (yes, there are walls, old landing strips from the Vietnam War, along many miles of the border). I’ll never forget her sitting small and afraid in the cement cell, offering up her story to us as tears streamed down her face. I’ll never forget her bravery: risking her life to provide for her impoverished family and her willingness to share her personal struggle with strangers.
We spent most of our time in Agua Prieta and Nogales, Mexico to get a better understanding of life on the border. We toured a maquiladora and met with an organizer from the Border Workers’ Alliance who educates and organizes workers about their rights. The maquiladoras offer the “best” employment at $40-$70/week (a wage that keeps people in poverty), and often times in unsafe working conditions. We participated in weekly vigil at the border to remember and honor people who have died in the desert. We walked along the wall separating a people from themselves and reflected on history, geography and a quote we’d heard from a resident of the borderlands, “I didn’t cross the border, the border crossed me.”
We learned that most migrants don’t want to leave their families and homes, but NAFTA and other forces of globalization have pulled the economic rug out from under many Mexicans, especially rural coffee growers. We visited a roasting facility for Just Coffee (www.justcoffee.com.), a cooperative coffee business owned by 25 families in Chiapas, a region in Southern Mexico that has seen a dramatic increase in out-migration when coffee prices fell in the early part of the decade. Just Coffee markets organic, high quality coffee while keeping the profits with the growers, who can then remain on their land and offer a more promising future to their children. Another great reason to buy fair trade products!
There are several hotly-debated immigration bills in the US Senate now to keep an eye on, with solutions ranging from building more fences to recognizing the reality of the US economy and pushing for the decriminalization of migrant workers. And President Bush (who happened to fly into Tucson the same day we did) is cautiously promoting a dubious guest worker program while weighing the very vocal concerns of border state politicians and vigilante ranchers with those of agribusiness, construction companies and other US employers who rely on an undocumented workforce to fill their low wage jobs.
Absent from much of the media’s presentation of the debate is the perspective of progressive people of faith, who have much to offer on the topic of US immigration policy. No More Deaths has outlined a proposal for immigration reform that can be found at http://www.nomoredeaths.org/faithbasedprinciples.html
The day we left, I picked up a copy of US News and World Report at the airport, with the cover story “Border Wars,” and tried to reconcile a perspective that portrayed migrants as mostly would-be terrorists and dangerous drug runners with our encounters with Sarah and others who are pushed to the border’s edge in desperate attempts to provide for themselves and their families. I thought of the migrant community in Southeastern Ohio, employed by large commercial farms along the Ohio River. Did their journeys begin in Chiapas or Guatemala, leaving family and friends and the only home they’d ever known? Did they pay thousands of dollars for a coyote to guide them through the desert with the promise of better wages and the chance to lift their families out of grinding poverty? The border is not “down there.” The border is here: picking our produce, slaughtering our meat, building and cleaning our homes, and caring for our children. We all have a stake in creating an immigration policy founded in compassion and justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)