Perhaps the subject says it all; in case is doesn't... With almost any war or threat of war, some will brand anti-war protestors as traitors, etc. Or perhaps as jackasses. Over the last few days, I've found myself seriously wondering what it means when there are so many such complaints against anti-war protestors being aired today. Do the critics of anti-war protestors really want to live in a country where there is not a strong voice for peace?
Isn't going to war such an sigificant action that it deserves criticism as much as any other? A nation that enters war with little or no protest would be a very frightening thing, I think. And does that ever really happen unless those who would advocate for peace are afraid to speak up? This is one more domain in which I see a very bothersome trend -- people in disagreement whose rhetoric implies that their goal is to silence or otherwise get rid of those who disagree. (Of course, some of the more radical voices don't just imply it, they say it out loud.) When I discuss this, people tend to quickly blame the media for treating all issues this way, a trend toward cynicism that I lamented in "The Transparent Society." So this concern is not new for me. But poised on the brink of war, it comes home even more, as I see and hear what seems to be a large group of people who have no respect for peace advocacy. I'm not sure if war on Iraq is right or wrong. I am quite sure that if it is the right thing to do (or perhaps I should say the "best" thing), that wouldn't make disrespect for peace advocates right. I want to live in a country and community where that voice remains strong, right alongside the voices of those who are guarding our borders and security. Nick -- Nick Arnett Phone/fax: (408) 904-7198 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
