The styles are radically different, but the thoughts amazingly parallel in these two postings that come in yesterday. -rkm @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 From: •••@••.••• (Joe Ferguson) To: •••@••.••• Subject: The State of the Union. Last night, in the car, I listened to most of President Clinton's State of the Union address. I was impressed with the oratory, with the leadership and with the great, relevant truths, like the exhortation to the families of the United States to "stay together" and to the men of the United States to care for their children and to provide not only financial support but love and guidance as well. Who could possibly argue with this? Who could possibly oppose this great leader? As I listened, I gradually became aware that this production was as polished as any Hollywood blockbuster; as smoothly persuasive as any Madison Avenue ad campaign. Soon I came to realize it in fact WAS a Hollywood blockbuster. It WAS a Madison Avenue ad campaign. There was no "Desert Storm" theme music, but it was a production. "The Great Saga of The 1996 United States Political Struggle Between The Great Democratic Party and The (slightly less) Great Republican Party" I soon came to realize was theater for the Great American Status Quo. It doesn't matter too much to the powers that be, whether the Democrats or the Republicans win in November. Either way, the agenda of the greedy multi-national corporations is safe. However, based on the staging of the drama last night, I feel the stage is slightly tilted, this time in favor of the Democrats. Their apparent empathy with the underpriviliged and vulnerable segments of our society will allow things to run smoothly with much less chance of an angry uprising of the masses. A bloodbath is, after all, not good for business nor public relations. Clinton really lost me, however, when he boldly stated his intention to escalate the War On Drugs by appointing a military man to the Drug Czar post and taking our war to "foreign soil." Mr. Clinton said that our policy against crime is working, and that the incidence of violent crime is dropping. I couldn't help but wonder at the reports I have heard that this is not true. I couldn't help but remember an online newspaper editor's doubt about how accurate is the body count in his Lost Angeles neighborhood. Mr. Clinton made a number of challenges to the people and the legislators of the United States. Now I would like to make a couple of challenges of my own. CHALLENGE # 1: Don't maintain America's drug problem, SOLVE it. SOLVE the drug problem. How? I'm not saying it's simple, but there are a number of harm reduction policies that have been proposed by reputable authorities in this field, any of which would be an improvement on our current stupid policies. Why did we repeal alcohol prohibition? I think we should think about the prohibitions that are putting harmless people in jail, turning our poorest neighborhoods into battle zones, boosting the cost of drugs, boosting profits for traffickers, corrupting policemen and politicians, and WASTING OUR TAX DOLLARS. Regarding the non-addictive, herbal drug cannabis, our policy is simply corporate welfare. There is NO LEGITIMATE reason to ban hemp in any form. Humans can not die from it and can not develop the severe liver problems associated with indulgence in alcohol. It is NOT addictive and could probably be used to TREAT nicotine addiction, but we'll not know that until the laws allow us to research it. The hemp ban protects Nylon from its most potent competitor. (Nylon was patented by DuPont within one year of the passage of the federal hemp prohibition legislation... hmmmm...) The hemp ban protects from a robust, natural, renewable, environmentally friendly competitor, the petro-chemical industries, the forest products industries and the pharmaceutical industries. The ban also helps bolster the drug testing and prison industries. What is the total dollar amount of all of these industries? Add that up, and take a tenth of it if you are skeptical, half of it if you are pro-hemp. Either way, does it seem to you like enough money to tempt someone to buy a law? I believe any Presidential candidate that does not oppose the War On Drugs in its current form is guilty of one of the following: A) He is corrupt and is profiting directly or indirectly from the huge black market in drugs; B) He is in the pocket of any number of powerful and corrupt people who profit directly and indirectly from the prohibitions; C) He wants to be elected too badly to do the right thing. Do you think any of the above apply to either or both of the two major presidential candidates of 1996? How about two out of three? CHALLENNGE # 2: END COVERT AGENCIES AND ACTION. The operation in Bosnia is, in my opinion, acceptable so far, if for only one reason: it is taking place in the light of day. If the United States really wants to act as a world leader in good faith, it is time to end our covert activities. Too many times have our supposedly "good intentions" been undermined and corrupted by covert action gone awry. Too often has our method of "the end justifies the means" abjectly failed as the end has been lost among the immoral means. Too often has the end been the same: higher profits for the wealthiest capitalists. Too often have we Americans had good reason to be ashamed of what our tax dollars, spent abroad, have financed. If the United States is not ready to abandon covert action, we are no longer just the most powerful nation in the world, we are a nation of bullies. There is no excuse to allow the abuses we have seen to continue. CHALLENGE # 3 is for the American electorate. WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE. Some people who have been paying attention think that the next Vietnam will be fought in Central America when the liberation movements of indigenous people in Chiapas state and the adjacent Guatemala unite and threaten the status quo in that region. I think President Clinton declared the next Vietnam last night. It will be a militarized escalation of the War ON People, (oops I mean Drugs) on "foreign soil" (his words). This war will be fought by our children, nephews, nieces and neighbor kids. It will be finaced with our taxes and with their blood. Tens of thousands of innocent civilians in the target foreign regions will die in the battles. Wake up and smell the coffee here at home. Clinton said we are going to send more people to prison. This is a scandal. Prisoners of the drug war are increasingly being subjected to forced labor in our prisons. I'm not making this stuff up. American jobs in the private sector are being lost to cheap foreign sweatshop labor _and_ to cheap American prison labor. My parents' generation fought World War Two, but was brainwashed about marijuana as are many of my generation. The worst effect if all Americans smoked an occasional joint (as long as they didn't try to pilot vehicles or operate heavy machinery under the influence) would be that the effects of Madison Avenue would tend to be countered, and our materialistic over-consuming behavior patterns would shift. We would also be a bit less likely to be taken in by slick, staged political events. I was impressed with President Clinton's address last night. I heard it compared to Reagan's 1984 State of the Union address. I may even still vote for the guy in November, but if I do, it will only be to keep out a Republican, for whatever that's worth. It was a great speech, and the really excellent things said must not be forgotten just because the overall event may have been, at its core, phony. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 From: "•••@••.•••" <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: cj#437> (:>) The Man Who Didn't Know Who He Was When I saw the above subject line I honestly thought that it would introduce a snide meditation on the president as he appeared to at least a few Americans, including himself, last night. Was he Democrat or Republican, pacifist or war dog, sitting executive or campaigner, agnostic intellectual or evangelical yawper, father to the new country we dream of or grave digger for the old one we live in? I suggest that the last part of this question subsumes the others, deserving our paramount attention. It has taken a war-protester president to link up The War On Drugs{tm} with its own metaphor in the most blatant and unapologetic form, that of the bemedalled General McCaffrey. No doubt this man has TV charm and can turn a fine phrase, but make no mistake about what's basic: he's a cold-blooded killer, and one of his Cobra gunships can, on his Vietnam-bred conception of probable cause, turn your entire beloved neighborhood into a lifeless desert. Hold onto the car for one more year and get a few shoulder-fired Sting missiles instead. I'm not joking. Like another war, usually deemed over but still raging in VA wards, bars and homeless shelters near you, the drug war is a conflict that is regularly escalated without reference to its underlying premises; it is an application of engineering criteria to the pulpy ambiguities of human life, reacting to every stimulus by predictably moving further and further in the same maladaptive direction: a prescription for the death of any and all empires. American suburbanites, if queried on the run, might betray an indifference or discernible hostility toward the single ghetto growth industry that they fancy to be General McCaffery's single target. Wake up, people; you too are unpaid extras in this movie. There's dope reposing at no greater distance than the kids' bedroom, or in a backyard merging imperceptibly with that of your neighbor. And how many lazy synonyms for `dope user' can dance on a Pentagon pinhead: Black, Latino, Arab, artist, hippie, non-conformist, pacifist, agnostic, tree-hugger, free-choicer. Do I see any hands, class? The general, his Panama-based army, and his entourage of FBI acolytes, have hitherto been enjoying the free fire zone afforded by uninsured, non-industrial peasant villages, where hot pursuit of the dope devil justifies all. "Don't settle for nostalgia, boys; out with your Zippos!" A 2-year Huey ride down Memory Lane, paid for by a grateful citizenry, grateful, maybe, because this narco-Caesar hasn't crossed the Rubicon, yet! The war is coming home, people, perhaps pursuant to the tormented prayers of Amazon Indians and Altiplano shepherds. You can masochistically wallow in its violence, arbitrariness and intimidation if that will discharge your Vietnam guilt, but I think a far better homage to our victims of that war would be a studied emulation of the Viet Cong. This time you're on home turf, and the enemy looks and vibes now just as he did there and then. Chuck the goddamn TV, find out who your neighbors are and what they really think. If you sit around waiting for the next election, the next fiscal year, or some other irrelevant milestone, you may find it was one too many. So who or what is that man we listened to last night? He is a nothing, a pale shadow, a mere fluctuating pretext, but in the hands of his unseen masters he approximates a reason to hope, to wait, to expect and believe. He is a keystroke millennium on offer by a priesthood of currency hackers. valis @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland •••@••.••• | Cyberlib=http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use. ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Share: