Printer Friendly

A Platform for a movement. (Commentary).

Both politics and religion lend themselves to absolutes--all too often even minor points of divergence are treated like uncrossable chasms. For starters, it's not easy to sort out the trivial from the substantial, for every judgment is accompanied by a nagging sense that you may be compromising your deepest convictions for the sake of a false unity.

Be that as it may, I will propose 10 planks of a platform around which we can build a movement, transcending our more trivial political and religious differences.

1) The intentional murder of innocents must never be justified, neither legally, morally, nor strategically (i.e. for some greater end). That's how we define a terrorist act, whether it is carried out by a political cell group or a nation-state.

2) Agents of terrorism must be held accountable for their crimes. The safety of innocents demands their apprehension; justice demands their punishment.

3) The U.S. government and its security forces are pursuing outlaws who have committed crimes against humanity. Using these events as an opportunity for extending global hegemony and economic self-interest will be obvious to the Arab world and will lead to continued instability and conflict in the region.

4) Osama bin Laden and his "base" network are not freedom fighters straggling against globalization, economic oppression, or Western imperialism. While these are indeed pieces of their ideology--and each of these forces has certainly contributed to our troubled times--bin Laden and his base are fundamentally motivated by a "holy war" that seeks to eradicate sources of social power not aligned with his violent religious ideology, including what he considers "apostates" within the Muslim community.

5) The people of Afghanistan and Iraq have suffered under violent conflict and fascist regimes for decades. They are no more responsible for terrorist cells than the accountant sitting at her desk on the 110th floor of the World Trade Center. Indiscriminate retaliation would be rightly considered a terrorist act.

6) World opinion, by and large, supports the U.S. government's pursuit of justice. The Bush administration wisely has sought to build as broad a coalition as possible to stand behind those efforts. But that moral high ground and political support will quickly fade away if the U.S. engages in vengeful retribution that imitates the acts of the terrorists--acts that would catalyze strong Arab antipathy toward the United States.

7) The Bush administration has unwisely painted potential allies into a corner by publicly polarizing their response: Either you collaborate with us or you are our enemies. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt have strong minorities of Islamic fundamentalists who use that rhetoric to build up opposition to more democratic forces. Our goal should be building up democratic forces, not choosing up sides for tug-of-war.

8) The spiritual practices of reconciliation and forgiveness are essential to reducing war and conflict. The United States must do everything possible to practice reconciliation between itself and Arab states and between the Israelis and Palestinians. In both cases, a great deal of forgiveness must be asked for, and granted. The United States had a one-sided allegiance to Israel and has been deaf to justifiable demands for Arab justice. Reconciliation requires each side--and the United States--to recognize that both Israelis and Palestinians have valid historical, cultural, and religious reasons for their existence.

9) All authentic adherents of the Abrahamic religions--Jewish, Christian, Muslim--must dig down deep to their own wells and stretch out far to their distant cousins to lock arms in peace and civic unity. Fundamentalist perversions of their respective traditions threaten the destiny of the planet.

10) Citizens of the United States understandably feel vulnerable after the attacks of Sept. 11 and have a heightened sensitivity for better security. But we must be careful not to forfeit essential constitutional rights out of fear. Much blood has been shed to win freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, freedom from persecution on the basis of ethnicity or religion, freedom of privacy. We must be willing to gamble on freedom rather than to be rendered a captive to our fears.

David Batstone is executive editor of Sojourners.


"Nonviolence is not inaction. It is not discussion. It is not for the timid or weak. Nonviolence is hard work. It is the willingness to sacrifice. It is the patience to win.'"

--Cesar Chavez
COPYRIGHT 2001 Sojourners
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2001, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Batstone, David
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Nov 1, 2001
Previous Article:For my son. (Poetry).
Next Article:The money defense shield: a little political honesty here, please. (Commentary).

Related Articles
The Role of the Physician Executive: Cases and Commentary.
I can teach any student to write opinion.
Institutional Trading Technology focuses on information and trading systems.
Editorial: Academic communities and the nature of academic discourse.
Penton Technology Media to launch "It Consultant" in February.
EHP Toxicogenomics. (ehpnet).
Making the case for the editorial voice. (President's Letter).
Education resources, left and right.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters