A letter to my friend in peace studies:

Dear friend, life gets busy and it has been too long since we have talked, perhaps this letter can start a dialogue.


I was with my family in Georgia 2 weekends ago. We were down there to visit my parents, my sister and her family, and to attend the demonstration to close the School of the Americas. I think you know my father is politically left, well informed and thoughtful.

Through several conversations with him I came to develop some thinking about how the peace movement might progress in the Obama era. You seemed like the ideal person to share these thoughts with.

The gist of the argument I would like to make is that the goals we have regarding US foreign military involvement might be considered separate from some specific programmatic goals of the peace movement. While we can hope for change on both fronts, we may have greater power to achieve programmatic goals.

To begin with certainly the election of Obama is an opening for the peace movement, but in no way should we assume that this means world peace is soon at hand. Even withdrawal from Iraq remains an open question. While we might want an end to military involvement in Afghanistan and incursions into Pakistani this is highly unlikely in the short term. We might want a radically different position on Palestine and Israel, however, it seems naive to expect much more than greater involvement in negotiations.

I have to acknowledge that from my perspective, under the Bush administration protest came to seem almost ridiculous in its futility. We are again entering a place where public expression may make a greater difference. Still, regarding actual fighting and war, I think that things will most likely play out more according to the dictates of Real Politics and within the framework of American foreign policy as it is today. Perhaps the best we can do is to keep Obama on track regarding the military departure from Iraq. We can hope that the risk of an attack against Iran is off the table for the moment. But a quick withdrawal from Afghanistan is highly improbable. To have much effect on issues of Israel and Palestine would require numbers and coherence greater than the peace movement's present scope.

Beyond Iraq, foreign policy is probably the area where Obama's positions are most disappointing to the left, and to the peace movement. All this is not to say that we shouldn't make noise about these important issues, but that we should anticipate that the peace movement will not have much power in the short run to influence foreign policy events.

I think another set of issues have a greater potential to be effected by organizing and action. Let me call them programmatic goals. Although they are less direct and urgent than stopping a war, they may be more important. Success with these could help to shift the framework of American foreign policy. And I believe the potential for success is grater.

The campaign to close the School of the Americas is an example of what I mean by a programmatic goal. This campaign is about 20 years old, often seemingly myopic in it's single issue focus. Now, with the recent change in the composition of congress the possibility of successis almost at hand.

There are several other campaigns that I believe now might make greater headway. Obama has promised to close guantanamo, and to stop US torture. Then there are international treaties that most of the world embraces but the US is not party to. The international treaty to ban land mines is an important example. Nuclear disarmament may again be a possibility. There is a growing international movement to close American bases in other countries. If successful this movement could begin to reverse American imperial reach. Kuciniche's proposal for a Department of Peace also needs a grassroots push. I believe that with all these programs and others like them there is now a greater potential for success.

While many grassroots efforts are underway all are limited in there scope, even the Close the SOA efforts seem to be mostly populated by a small sub culture of the peace movement. The busloads of students from small catholic colleges I've never heard of who show up at Fort Benning always amazes me. Some networking or linking of these programmatic campaigns might give strength to all of them.

So this brings me to why I am writing you. You have spoken of wanting to develop an international peace organization like greenpeace is for the environment, or Amnesty international is for human rights . I wonder what thoughts you might be having about that organization these days.

marriage & democracy

I went to one of the many rallies held around the country today in protest of Californian's Proposition 8 which takes away the right to gay marriage. Considering the weather the turn out was great, my quick estimate put the crowd at about 150. The anti marriage amendment creates a lot of paradoxes.

First Obama's turn out probably contributed to the amendments success. Even at the rally speakers talked about how bitter sweet election night was.

Then there are the anti democratic sentiment that this vote stirs up, I have herd people complain about voting about issues of right, even the very concept of initiative voting is questioned.

This brings up political theory so I will digress. Ballot initiative are probably the most directly democratic procedure in the American political system. I prefer direct democracy to the representative form. There are things that can make direct democracy better, like political education. Even ahead of direct democracy is a system that includes principals of autonomy and consensus. Essentially decisions should be made by those who are effected by them, and then the participants should seek solutions that all parties can live with.

The main response to Prop 8 is to seek justice in the courts, and political struggles for liberation need to use the political tools available, but liberties won by democracy are preferred, it is better to win hearts and minds that to force a position. I understand the principle of equal protection but still...

Now then there is the very institution of marriage not one of my favorite institutions, it's origins, it must be noted, involved the selling of women. nonetheless I was at the rally chairing for marriage. When the chant went "fee fie foe fun, Marriage is for every one", I couldn't chant along. some don't have any use for marriage.

I would personally prefer civil unions for all legal matters, a contract easily entered in to and easily ended. Leave Marriage as a strictly religious commitment.

My beliefs and the meaning of the presidental election

I hold the belief that at their core all humans are good, including an inherent tendency to care about others, a capacity to respond to situations with great intelligence, and something alive inside that is of great worth. Regrettably when I think about politics, too often I set aside this important understanding of human nature.

Often it is the Presidents of the United States towards whom I have the hardest time holding this view of core goodness. Make no mistake I find the policies of the Bush administration intolerable. But between policy and person there can be a great divide. Even if his goals and objective have short comings, underneath those are real human feelings and needs no different from yours or mine, and feelings and needs, I believe, are innocent, only in the misdirected attempt to meet his needs do problems emerge.

This brings me to the first thing I admire about our president elect Barack Obama. In his campaign for the presidency he was clear that he held nothing against John McCain, rather he focused criticism on the policies that Senator McCain supported. I can’t claim that the Obama campaign always took this high road, but Obama reached for it. From my view he did far better than most politicians in this regard.

I belief that there is something transformative in the power of really listening. Perhaps Obama’s greatest character strength is that he is a good listener. Reports from his role at the Harvard Law Review indicate that his administrative style is to listen to a variety of opinions which he would actually consider, and then he would make a decision. We also know that Obama worked as a community organizer because, as he told his peers, change comes from the bottom up. Community organizing and bottom up change is participatory democracy. In other words he has held the perspective that listening to the voices on the bottom matters.

We could only benefit from leaders who practice the politics of listening. There is talk of the organizational efforts from the campaign continuing. This makes sense from the perspective of a community organizer. This would be a big step towards the participatory politics of listening.

My favorite image from the entire campaign was the footage of Jesse Jackson in Grant field with tears streaming from his eyes. And hats of to him for all the steps he took to help us get to where we are now. Another belief that I hold is that cathartic is one of the most genuine and healing expressions of emotions.

Of course many of us cried when we learned that Barack Obama was elected. People will say tears of joy but I think that our tears ran deeper. We are crying because this election reflects a contradiction to the despair that many of us have felt around politics, race and the future for so long. Race, of course, is at the top of that pile of despair. In spite of the unconscious racism that most of us still have (https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/Study?tid=-1 an interesting test you can take that makes the point), and the more overt racism that still too often runs our politics, we as a country in overwhelming numbers elected a President who is not white. This does not eliminate racism but it gives hope that we can overcome. Around the world people have celebrated this electoral victory, and have expressed great hope for what this may mean for our world and for peace. This outpouring may be overly optimistic but to take a moment and share in that global optimism and desire for peace is a deeply emotional experience. I have noticed this week that I continue to break into tears as I think about what has been accomplished, or when I hear some hopeful sign in the news. When I reflect my crying I see that it comes from the possibility that the despair that the world has faced for so long might be overcome. Now it is not so grim and I can cry for the despair, and as well for the joy.

To the President elect, Barack Obama

Avaaz, The Global Peace & Justice Email group called for signitures and comments on a wall that will go up in DC to congratulate Barak Obama and encourage him to keep some committments to us. . My comments to our new president are here:

I joined your movement, worked to get you elected, traveled to ohio on election day to canvas & get out the vote. Like many when you were elected I cried tears of joy.
Now I would like to give you a warning: be careful of who you surround yourself with.
I hope you will continue to align with our movement for global peace, justice and environmental restoration. Please also work to reverse the doctrine of preemptive attack, we need great peace making in Afghanistan. I don't believe a war can be waged on a concept even if the concept is terror. If we can reverse american military belligerence, if we can create a fair and tolerant social and economic system, if we can preserve what is left of our beautiful & scarred earth, when compassion and love become political concepts, then I will cry , I will weep for joy, please exceed our greats hopes for your presidency.

Could it come down to a prayer?

Why It seem that Bush stole the last two presidential elections? Probably because he did. But perhaps all those religious zealots praying for him did something too. What ever else you can do for the campaign on election day (I'll be in Toledo) pray for an Obama victory. Pray, visualize, imagine, meditate, send good vibes. Believe that we can win.

(....I told you I would make a difference)