I wish there were folders with blogger. If there are, I don't know about it yet. I have sort of begun to organize my writings by putting thoughts to my son titled with the preface "Bear:". Current thoughts/journaling, I sort of prefaced with "Personal:". Justice system topics with "Justice:". And Notes From The Nanny with "NFTN:". But then there's Wenatchee/local (where I live now) stuff to write about, and personal stuff can also be justice system related...So I don't think I have a good system yet. The NFTN's are clearly defined though. I like how I've organized this and kept this in good order. The rest of my thoughts...?!!?! It's an organization problem. Oh, and I like the Bear designations bc they can be picked out as being directly written to my dear boy (who will one day read this entire thing). I don't know how to organize the rest yet.
I plan to follow the NFTNs through my entire past, in linear fashion with a timeline, from the first family I worked for, to the next, to church experiences, to my friend dying in car crash, to being held hostage with roommates, to the assistant job with the Rabbi's wife, etc., and up through and into all of the shady things that later came up with lawyers, judges, justice system, FBI, media, monks, and catholic church. That will take me up, eventually, to the present and when the past and present meet,I will then continue my blog as up-to-date and IF things have died down or turned around with my life, then I will devote my spared energies to writing on behalf of others and their experiences. For some reason, I stumble into things, unwittingly, and I'm sure there are more people to meet, and to write for, whose experiences need a voice, whose stories need to be heard or publicized. Even while harassed, still, with certain things, by certain people, I have attempted to help others. I wrote a letter in support of Mr. Richard Paey, to the Florida governor, a few months ago, for his pardon, and he has been pardoned. Not that I did it alone, but I contributed. Once, in college, I changed my professors mind on the euthanasia issue by my persuasive arguments and writing, so said my teacher. I felt really good about that; that I had been able to bring new ideas to someone's mind that helped them to better decide for themself what they believed and what the pros and cons were. I said to God, in my early 20s, when I was praying once about what to do with my life for a career: "God, if you want me to be a writer, then give me something to write about."
Even now, events are occuring which provide excellent material to use in my writing. Even if they are not good events, at some point, they will be seen for what they are. It's sort of funny, bc now that I'm finally writing about things, I notice certain persons are working overtime to try to justify things that were done in the past.
I am reading a fascinating book right now. I can only read a small bit at a time bc I seriously feel like I have cancer sometimes, I'm so weak and have to manage pain issues (among other things), and have a son who is active besides, but it is called "Myth America: Democracy vs. Capitalism" by William H. Boyer. I HAVE to write about it soon in a post, because the insights about how corporations got their power, and how their powers have increased since our federal and state constitutions and bills of rights were in place, and every American should know.
I believe every citizen, in at least jr. high and high school, should not only take English, Math, Science, and History...but should be required to take Civil Rights. If public education is all about giving all students equal opportunity, why are the poor still deprived of education about due process, search and seizure laws, discrimination law, and the politics of government, corporations, and oligarchy of the rich? Keeping the public ed. students uninformed leaves them wide open to personal violation of their civil rights and blind to the hand behind it, and how they might organize and be able to effect change. Only the rich can afford lawyers. In criminal matters, the poor do not have access to the law and their defense when the public defender is lousy and making deals with the PA, and they're sitting in jail completely dependent on faulty defense. In civil rights matters, no one who is poor is able to hire a lawyer to advocate for their rights. Only the rich are, and they do not usually have the need as much because people do not trample the rights of those who have power and money to fight back. Since when do the poor oppress the rich? If all the public ed. kids learned about this stuff early on, the current system couldn't stand. Enough people would organize, be informed, get the right people elected, and change laws. Right now, all those kids are, as Boyer says, "grist for the mill".
Civil rights are inherent, but codified. If these kids knew the law and politics, and had people come in as guest speakers, they would have a better chance of knowing equal opportunity. If teachers made filling out a dummy FAFSA a requirement, and instructed them about preparation for college in jr. high, instead of leaving it to parents who may not have attended college themselves, kids would be informed and have a hands-on tutorial on how easy it is to do.
Some schools still have Home Ec., or Shop as electives, but yet matters that affect their lives every day, are left unaddressed. Civil Rights should be a requirement for students and it should be for at least 4 years. Which would include law, politics, civil rights and rules, legal procedure, visiting the courtroom and following a case, debating topics, writing arguments, and organizing political or social fundraisers and rallies. If I had my way, it would not only be for the last 4 years in high school, but for jr. high as well. 7th, 8th, 9th, grade. Some kids drop out in high school, and knowing more about their rights and the laws, and the structure that may be working against them, and how to find a way to get things working for them would probably be an incentive to stay in school.
Students who wish to pursue law should have mock LSATs, though not required for all Civil Rights students. They should also have a chance to pass the Bar exam, if it's permitted in the state. The monopoly of law school over the justice system, which is simply another example of corporation and money-making should be abolished in all states so that it is not mandatory to pay hundreds of thousands. If law is taught in public school, students could be fully prepared to take the Bar at graduation, by attending a special emphasis class or elective with this sort of prep. What is 3 years of law school to 7 years of "law" in jr. high and high school, plus elective for emphasis? And at least everyone else will know enough to be motivated to effect change.
But...Who wants to raise up a bunch of lawyers and activists within the public school system? Law schools would fight it, and they are the lawyers and employers; the government might fight it, for fear of too many informed citizens causing an "uprising". And there are many who do not want anything that would threaten the status quo. Police wouldn't like it because it would be a check against their powers, and Judges wouldn't like it because then every citizen they face in a courtroom would know civil procedure, and just where to file their complaint regarding judicial fitness. Lawyers wouldn't like it because citizens wouldn't need them as much and it would be competition. Corporations would hate it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Although I never thought that the day would come that I might say or write this, we need more attorneys. Those civically minded in any case. Better still may be your suggestion to teach this at length while in school. This thought has occurred to me as well as I see so many, myself included, waver a bit on exactly where the lines are related to civil rights. Just when are people being taken advantage of by law enforcement, our own government(key word OUR)or others.
The past few months alone we have had to sue our government for our right to protest in Washington. More than one person has been harassed, threatened or tazared even! by law enforcement for speaking out. It is our right to do so. One woman on a plane was required to fly with a blanket wrapped around her dress because an airline attendent requested this. The dress was not remotely inappropriate (although legally this should not matter either) the flight attendents request was a violation of the womans rights. The airline was Southwestern. We no longer have the right, as of this year, to watch news directly from other states and sometimes even other counties within a state. The local broadcast. The news must come from one of the major networks. A law passed prohibiting cable and satellite companies from offering this option and we were never informed! These are the smaller abuses but they chisel away at all of our rights and lead to the larger ones. This makes protecting our rights, if one can find and afford an attorney, that much more difficult. Why? Who's running this country? The people supposedly have elected a government to do the job and gaurd our rights?
So yes, I very much agree that our rights and other legal issues including more in depth information regarding the workings of our governments, federal, state and local should be taught and made very clear as early as possible within our education system. Without being overly dramatic, many people have died over many years defending these rights and they are being challanged and stripped away without nearly enough protest. We have a responsibility to teach them to everyone.
What a great post and great idea.
Thank You!
Hello JT,
Thank you so much for your informative and encouraging comments. I didn't realize some of these things were going on, right now, in Washington (I assume you mean Washington state and not D.C.). As you say, small rights add up.
In regard to the media and the new law passed in Washington, preventing cable and satellite viewers from seeing other state or county coverage...I found out about this in a roundabout way. I moved out to this orchard, and one has to have cable or satellite for television access (no reception otherwise). I was looking into getting Barney, a kids' show, for my son, and it was available through PBS but not locally, only in Spokane. They told me I could have local PBS from King county and Yakima, but not Spokane. I thought, how odd, that we are restricted by location, and wondered the same thing, about current events...How could someone trying to follow current events in Oregon or Spokane bypass this regulation? I was told I would have to apply for a special "exception" from the PBS group itself, in Spokane, if I wanted that program or station. Who knows how much that would cost, if it could even be done. I do think it's strange that the public were never notified, and secondly, that we have no choice but to be isolated from news of current events in other areas. There's news online, but not everyone has a computer in their household; the mainstream public still gets their news from television. Which means, an attorney, or public analyst, for example, who may wish to follow events occuring in another area, and examine the reach of the media on a topic and the public reaction, cannot do so. One could go online and get some news, but they would remain uninformed as to what the mainstream public, in another area, are absorbing through their local television. Being isolated from eachother is never good, and especially where civil rights violations are concerned. So in your small example, about a small right, it actually works in a variety of ways, to deprive the public or those who would serve the public, from access to information, not to mention depriving them of notice or right to protest in the first place.
I absolutely agree with your views, and thank you for your input. It inspires me to again consider the possibility of going to law school myself, in the future.
I also appreciate your emphasis on "OUR" government. I have, at times, like so many who do not see the point of voting, distanced myself and given up; or become angry at the system and felt "anti-American" as an American who has experienced the hypocrisy and civil rights violations firsthand. But I should remember that #1., I am not alone and should not act alone in this struggle--, and #2. WE really do have power to make changes, as it is OUR government. Isolation, apathy, and lack of information keep us from organizing.
Hi Mama,
The protest was in Washington D.C.
100,000 people from around the country marched from the White House to the Capital in protest of the war on September 15th. At the steps of the Capital people volunteered to lie down and be arrested, over 3000!, to symbolize those soldiers that have died in Iraq. A much smaller number were actually arrested. It was an incredible day. Very few knew this march had even occurred. Not a good sign. And, in part, due to the limited televised coverage of this event on a national scale and the inability of the public to view this through local broadcasts. If the protests, voices, are not heard in a peaceful demonstration -it was peaceful- what might we expect to happen next?
Timeliness for such issues is very important but at some point I will post photos. Men, women and children marched holding signs, some very creative, some that carried a message that quickly hit home because they rang so true. Some humorous and directly to the point.
A memorable moment - of which I greatly wish that I had the opportunity to collect more detailed information, it was not appropriate at the time - included a protestor of the war, a gentleman of middle eastern decent that had lost his son as a result of the war, and an anti anti- war protestor who appeared to be of military background. There were not too many pro war protestors that day.
They argued loudly with their opposing views to the point one might expect a more physical confrontation to occur. Then, the pro war protestor stopped. He recognized this middle eastern gentleman's grief over the loss of his son and instead reached out to comfort him. He said that he understood his loss. The middle eastern gentleman broke down and the pro war protestor comforted him, became very supportive and literally hugged him.
I have no idea if the pro war gentleman had suffered the loss of a family member or a comrade. I have no idea if this middle eastern gentleman's son was a citizen in Iraq, though it did not appear that his son was in the military.
What was clear, abundantly so, was that war and death effects everyone equally on both sides at the level of the soldier and civilian. Particularly, those who have actually suffered a loss. The common people pay the true cost. Our politicians, who may occasionally visit the entirely secure areas of a war zone, are a world away from whatever comprises a front line today and in most case have absolutely no fear of bodily injury to themselves or their families. It becomes easier from such a perspective to justify and clearly prefer a preemptive strike (absurd in itself) rather than discourse as a first choice in resolving differences. These gentleman appeared to know the true cost of such a decision. They chose to find common ground in their grief or differences, back off from the shouting that resolved nothing and reach out instead. An incredible moment.
Why the pro-war gentleman would argue against the anti war protestors to begin with I will never know. Perhaps he did indeed lose a son, daughter or friend during this confrontation and to believe that it may have been an unnecessary loss, the war may not be justifiable to begin with,
would be too difficult to acknowledge. Perhaps he has yet to realize, as with many of us, that we may have been very mislead regarding the true level of threat to this Nation that Al Queda or any terrorist organization actually presents. Has anyone actually seen an Al Queda member in their backyard? (There was not one Al Queda member involved with the 9.11 attack. Al Queda did not yet exist.) As importantly, other than to secure or borders, there will be little more that we can do militarily to prevent terrorism should one or a group be willing to sacrifice their lives to take the lives of others. Perhaps the pro war protestor simply realized that this was a real person before him that does not induce the level of fear that government propaganda has suggested.
Our politicians, specifically the members of this administration and those that support it, have prevented the public from viewing the death and destruction and kept the results of a 'military conflict' (coffins of our soldiers) well hidden. This has allowed, intentionally, the public to develop a laissez-faire attitude towards the war and made it easier to sell the notion of fear. Terrorism.
We, the public, have caught on however and the greater percentage of American citizens no longer support this effort. It has taken far too long to come to this conclusion but we have been intentionally mislead. Just maybe, we realized and protested in time to prevent escalating the violence into Iran without the proper discourse, sanctions if necessary and world support if possible first.
Although it may seem that I have drifted off on a tangent from our topic of civil rights, I have not. We have the right to demand that our government does not mislead us, we have the right to be properly informed, we have the right to be heard and acknowledged more timely than from one election to the next and we have the right for our informed opinions to weigh in more immediately on the decisions being made between elections.
Regarding your comment ‘WE really do have power to make changes, as it is OUR government. Isolation, apathy, and lack of information keep us from organizing.’
You are absolutely correct. I might add complacentcy as a key factor. Our lives have become so busy that we have allowed our government to continue on unchecked and we have assumed, taken for granted, that whoever may be in charge is actually acting responsibly, with our best interest in mind and in a fashion that represents the views of the mojority of our citizens. For the most part, this has not been the case. This is our fault. We looked away. We allowed this to occur.
It will not be easy, but We can also correct it.
It has been my experience that the far greater percentage of people (98%+) are not vastly different from one another. They have many of the same core beliefs and values. The differences within the states of our country, within the people of those states and the people from state to state is a perceived difference not an actual one. We may vary in opinion, that’s a good thing, but we are not nearly as divided as our Congress or that our Congress may suggest. Education, accurate information, defining and taking steps towards common goals with the ability to compromise along the way and a willingness to get involved will again make America a land of the people, allow us to refocus and point US in the proper direction.
Your comments also recognized that the inability to view the news broadcast from other states only further separates us and may lead even to apprehension of one another. The ability to watch may reveal differences that, once identified, may lead to common ground. Or it may show that we are all far too much alike! It is clear that this was done for a reason and the reason can not possibly be good enough to counter balance the harm that may be caused. The pessimistic side of me believes this to have been done so as to reduce communication throughout the states. For example in Connecticut not too long ago we 'ousted' our Governor for illegal activity. We held him accountable. This is a much more difficult thing to do in some areas of the country. This may plant ideas that some may not want planted. At the same time the news from some places in the south that has become public nationally has resulted in a public response and, I believe, in the best interest of these areas. While it is true that the larger events MAY be acknowledged in the news at a national level, why wait for the larger events? Why not address the smaller issues before they become larger ones?
It appears to me that some states have managed themselves into a position similar to the one that we see at a national level. This position being that the Government is running the people and not the other way around or the Government is acting on behalf of a small (although often very noisy) percentage of the population and not acting in the best interest of the whole.
It appears to me also that our current administration has brought with it the thinking and ‘the way things run’ from one state and attempted, far too successfully, to impose this at a Federal level without this way of doing things being accepted at this level.
It will be the internet and bloggers such as yourself that raise the questions, present the ideas and make the connections that may lead to linking us, is linking us, together throughout the U.S. like never before in our history. The internet and its effect on America is nothing short of the effect the Pony Express or the Continental Railroad had on National unity. It has the capacity to coalesce our thinking and bring us together.
Oops! Guess I should start my own blog!
Your comments have prompted so many thoughts it becomes difficult to stop writing!
Will be watching for your next comments.
Thanks again for your response.
JT
Hello JT,
I don't know if you're still paying attention, but thank you for this last post. I included it in a separate post, but right around that time, when I wanted to respond at length, I was having to fight one of my own personal legal/civil rights battles after my insurance co. said they wouldn't pay for my doctor's prescriptions for meds I require on a daily basis for chronic pain. I'm disabled without them, and have had to fight a strange battle here. I will continue the dialogue as it is possible!
Post a Comment