If a group of people could collectively go through Kubler-Ross’s stages of grief, I wonder where our nation would be in terms of 9/11? Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance? Certainly not real acceptance? Would a group that had reached the stage of acceptance continue to allow the Bush administration its continuing use of the event for warmongering and jingoism? Or would they instead look for real understanding and peace? Seven years later we are still hearing Bush’s battle cries of “Evil doers” and “war on terrorism,” without any concrete or even slightly substantial evidence that continued war is actually protecting us or bringing us or the rest of the world any closer to peace. A day of remembrance is a good thing, because, hopefully, remembrance also means reflection. But as I listen to the speeches of politicians and the pontificating of pundits on the news, I don’t hear any real reflection, or even true remembrance of the lives lost. I just hear more of the same thing I’ve been hearing for the last seven years: We’re gonna get them! You’re with us or against us! Let’s get them before they get us again! (This is paraphrasing of course.) They say that they are remembering the lost, but then they say aren’t we glad we went to war. Is that really remembering? Could a nation still caught up in these rallying cries be said to still be in the anger stage?
Sheryl Gay Stolberg, from the New York Times, wrote this about the President’s speech:
“Mr. Bush’s speech was short, just seven minutes, and the president used it to declare the memorial ‘an everlasting tribute to 184 innocent souls,’ and to remind his audience that ‘there has not been another attack on our soil in 2,557 days.’ His words served as a parting message, of sorts, from a president who, after two wars, believes fiercely that he has done what was necessary to keep the country safe."
Obviously, there is still more on his agenda then remembering the victims of 9/11. I don't necessarily agree with her wording that he "believes fiercely ." It should be he "appears to believe fiercely."
1 comment:
The US population has been very deliberately and scientifically conditioned to:
1. Experience chronic vague fears, the kind of anxiety that can be conveniently shifted onto any source the rulers want to attack at that particular moment.
2. Only have confidence in violence as the answer to any problems they or the country faces.
This is the formula explored in Orwell's 1984. It has its roots far back in history, but with the advent of scientific propaganda utilizing mass communications (basically TV), the rulers feel, with some justification, that they can control the whole show and maneuver events to their own interest. This is actually insane, but people inside this delusion are compelled by an obsession to "create history," and like any delusional system of thought, be it by individuals or groups, banishes reliable reality testing. People who insist on running around in total darkness (no reality testing) with sharp objects will meet a predictable end. With the increasing use of veiled, and not so veiled, threats to use nuclear weapons ("all options remain on the table") the only real question is whether this cabal of crazy people will end up taking the rest of us to oblivion with them.
Post a Comment