altivo

Thanks to

animist for saving me the trouble of looking up this quote:

In Germany, they first came for the communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Catholic. Then they came for me - and by that time there was nobody left to speak up. --Martin Niemoller

Niemoller was a protestant in Nazi Germany, describing here the slow descent into hell that overcame the Weimar Republic under Hitler. This is going to sound impossible to some of you, but I say the present course of US politics will bring the same to pass. Already the news is reporting scattered incidents of over-reaction by "Homeland Security" (our new American SS) to absurdities. High school kids perform a Bob Dylan protest song and HS shows up to investigate. LJ writer says Bush should drop dead and HS shows up to intimidate her. Eleven states pass discriminatory hate legislation by ballot referendum. Michigan's legislature passes a bill explicitly permitting medical personnel to refuse to treat gays. ABC News (owned by Disney, remember) plans to air a documentary arguing that gay-killings are not hate crimes.

Welcome to the 21st Century in Amerika, where gays and lesbians are the fashionable hate targets, with the blessing of the church and the government.

Now I do not believe that the majority of US citizens agree with this stuff. Unfortunately, I do believe that most are remaining aloof because they think it doesn't affect them. Folks, it does. After they come for the gays, the pattern will be established and accepted. A new hate target will be needed to keep their power base, which is founded on paranoia and keeping us all divided and suspicious of one another. Who will it be? Arabs? Blacks? Episcopalians?

Current Mood: prophetic

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

From:

dakhun.livejournal.com

ABC News (owned by Disney, remember) plans to air a documentary arguing that gay-killings are not hate crimes.

I'd have to watch the 20/20 episode (Nov. 26) to know for sure. But what I've seen online suggests they will only argue that, for the specific case of the murder of Matthew Shepard, it was not a hate crime - not that it is not a hate crime in general. However, that case was the one that prompted Clinton to try to pass the yet-to-be-passed federal hate crimes bill. Presumably, the logic goes: if that case was not a hate crime, then there are no hate crimes at all. I shouldn't need to point out the logical flaw.

The two people who killed Shepard apparently lured him by pretending to be gay outside a bar. No, not sexuality related at all. And the argument apparently is that it was only a robbery. Yeah, only the kind of robbery where you take someone out of town, tie them to a fence and burn and slowly beat them until their injuries become fatal, rather than just taking their money in the first place.

From:

plushlover.livejournal.com

Things could be a lot worse. Know any gay furry muslims? I'll wager not. To islamists, it would be considered indecent enough for a man to have sex with another man, but to defile the human image with characteristics of animals - and especially to endow them with carnal attributes - such a person would almost certainly have this done to them. Oh yes. Things could be a lot worse.

If you think 'Amerika' in the 21st century is a bad place, just wait until it's an islamist theocracy in the 22nd century. Gays will lose all of their rights then - including their most fundamental right - the right to live.

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

The Shi'ite Islamic world has never had the least chance of taking over the US or Europe. Don't fall for the propaganda line that tells you we have to give up our own freedoms in order to save ourselves from that.

The evangelical "Christian" attitude, however, is a very real potential danger right now.

It matters not whose theocracy it is. The very idea means tyranny of the narrow minded bigots. Look to the history of Plymouth Colony to see what wickedness Americans are capable of doing in the name of religious righteousness.

From:

calydor.livejournal.com

Okay, Plymouth rings a bell with me, but I can't say why. Google searches don't seem to help much either. Care to elaborate what happened?

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

A lot of things. Some are told in William Bradford's account, Of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-1647. Bradford was governor of the colony started by the Puritans where Massachusetts lives today.

Among the many events to which I referred, the witchcraft persecutions and trials are the worst and most famous. The greatest of these occurred at Salem, but there were others. Innocent people were tortured, hung, and otherwise murdered in the name of religious zeal and purity. By Americans.

The incident of which I'm sure you've heard before, though, is told with great relish by Bradford. A teenaged boy was convicted of having sex with farm animals. The animals were led before him one by one and their throats were cut. Then he was executed by hanging. Once again, an atrocity committed by Americans in the name of religious zeal and purity.

These things have never stopped, throughout the history of the US. At times they have been less brutal. But lynchings and murders of innocent people for their race, religious creed, or sexual non-conformity are just as common in American history as they are in any "barbaric" Middle Eastern country.

From:

favouritewindow.livejournal.com

Have you read Arther Miller's The Crucible? We had to read it in high school, and from what I remember it is quite fascinating. It is based on the Salem witch-hunts in the late 1600s.

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

Yes, indeed. In high school, again in college, and I've seen it on stage once and in a television production. A very powerful play, as are all of Miller's works.

The thing that often seems to escape audiences is the factual truth on which it was based. Those events really happened. The very people who fled England to seek religious freedom were unable to grant even the smallest degree of freedom to anyone who disagreed with them.

Worse yet, the witch trials showed that there are always people willing to bring false accusations in order to score a point or get even with a perceived enemy. And they are willing to pursue it even to the point of enforcing a miserable death at the hands of cruel and brutal authorities. Moreover, in order to seem one of the in-group, they will do this again and again.

In 1640, it was so-called "witches". In 1740, it was supposed French sympathizers. In 1840, it was runaway slaves and those who helped them. In 1910, it was blacks, period. In 1917, it was anyone thought to be of German descent. In 1941, it was anyone thought to be of Japanese descent. By 1945, it was blacks again, and moreover, anyone who dared to try to marry across racial boundaries (how you define the actual boundary I have no idea.) In 1952 it was "Communists" and Jews (actually anyone who criticized the federal government). In 1968 it was anyone who dared criticize the Vietnam policy of the government. In the 1990s it began to be Arabs and followers of Islam (and most people still fail to see the difference). Now, largely since the Supreme Court overturned all the state sodomy statutes as unconstitutional, and since high profile court cases concerning same sex marriage in Vermont, Hawaii, and Massachusetts, gays and lesbians have become the target. In fact, many have forgotten their hatred of "Arabs" in order to turn their poison against gays. But it's all made of the same cloth, the same "us" and "them" attitude.

From:

favouritewindow.livejournal.com

One of the biggest annoyances the Bush administration has introduced has been the security issues at airports. I don't know if you are aware, but every non-US citizen must have their fingerprints taken and details entered into an FBI database before they enter the US.

Now - I know I'm not alone in feeling this way - I want to visit the US, spend my foreign exchange on touristy things - but the US government is isolating me, and the other 96% or so of the world's population who aren't US citizens.

It's not entirely clear what the FBI is doing with this information, but if their intent is to open files on every single non-US citizen that enters the US, that's even more unacceptable. Some people argue that it's just a security measure, takes 5 minutes, isn't a major hassle, etc. But it is a major hassle in my mind - it's a major moral issue. It's unfortunate that one of the side-effects of the 9/11 disaster has been the passing of laws and implementing of policies that seem quite draconian, without much protest from the general public. People make excuses for it because "what if" it happens again, after all? Well, what if it doesn't happen again? Then you've been allowing your country to turn into a Big Brother state for nothing - based on a what-if fear.

From:

altivo.livejournal.com

I'm aware of it. Myself, I have refused to travel by commercial airline since about 1980 for other reasons having to do with the nature and behavior of the multinational corporations themselves. However, even for US citizens travelling inside the country it has become a hassle that I find utterly unacceptable. I do not understand why people are putting up with it. A 65 year old female friend of mine has been subjected to repeated strip searches, for instance, because she has an artificial hip that sets off metal detectors. She carries a passport and all sorts of documentation but they always refuse to believe her. I understand that nearly everyone is compelled to remove their shoes. My boss has been stopped because she had plastic knitting needles with her.

Big Brother has been with us here at least since I was born. Most seem blissfully unaware of it. They have no idea of the massive amount of information being collected about them without their knowledge. I have never committed a crime, never even had a traffic ticket, yet the FBI has a substantial file on me. Add to that the things kept by credit agencies, insurance companies, and even grocery stores and it's quite amazing (and appalling).

I feel an inward chill when I hear that a European like

doco has to file all sorts of official paperwork just in order to change residence, yet when you come down to it, the same is true here. The difference is that the information is often being filed surreptitiously, by the agencies and companies with whom you do business or have other contact.

When you come right down to it, though, I'm sure the average US citizen isn't at all concerned that outsiders may have trouble or inconvenience getting into the country. He or she will only become angry if, after crossing into Canada or Mexico, the US makes trouble about readmitting its own (which has now become common.)