It is a time of freedom and fear, of Gaia and of borders, of many paths and the widening of a universal toll road, emptying country and swelling cities, of the public bought into privacy and the privacy of the public sold into invisible data banks and knowing algorithms. It is the time of the warrior's peace and the miser's charity, when the planting of a seed is an act of conscientious objection.
These are the times when maps fade and direction is lost. Forwards is backwards now, so we glance sideways at the strange lands through which we are all passing, knowing for certain only that our destination has disappeared. We are unready to meet these times, but we proceed nonetheless, adapting as we wander, reshaping the Earth with every tread.
Behind us we have left the old times, the standard times, the high times. Welcome to the irregular times.
Friday, August 23, 2002
Looking at all the proposed plans for what to do with the site of the former Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, I'm struck by only one thing (otherwise the proposals are predictable and unexciting): all of the buildings proposed for the site are significantly shorter than the Twin Towers were.
Now, I know that all the security experts are saying that it would be foolhardy to erect new towers as tall as the Twin Towers were, but isn't it remarkable that the United States of America is now allowing the speculation of security experts to restrain the physical expression of our society's vitality through monumental structures?
To rebuild the Twin Towers of the World Trade Centers would be an act of resiliance. To build a single tower on the site stretching even higher, to be the tallest tower in the world, would be an act of non-violent defiance and a reassertion of the power of democratic, cooperative construction.
On the other hand, to replace the mighty Twin Towers with a collection of smaller, low-profile buildings in order to feel safer from future attacks that might take place demonstrates just how much destruction the attacks of September 11 have caused to the confidence of Americans in strong democratic leadership. Where once we were proud in our freedoms, now we are holding ourselves back, making our country less proud and less free, just in order to protect ourselves from an attack that probably will never come.
Almost a year after the attacks, Americans are building smaller, living smaller, thinking smaller. We're willing to accept less freedom in order to feel a little bit more secure.
We have lost the war against terror.
Mother Davis shivers slightly as she reports,
Yesterday, a group of unarmed American citizens protesting George W. Bush's plans to extend his War On Evil (W.O.E. for short) to Iraq were beaten and attacked with pepper spray by the police sent to guard the President. Is this what George W. meant when he talked about a war between freedom and fear?
Frightened for the future of our democracy,
Wednesday, August 21, 2002
Riffing on Mother Davis' comment below:
5. 8/20/02: Dubya spokesman Ari Fleischer condemns the takeover of the Iraqi embassy, saying "At all times the American position is to support the rule of law, the rule of international law. ... It is not acceptable to have takeovers of other nations' embassies. That is not consistent with the rule of law and that is why we have an unequivocal position that this action is unacceptable, even against a regime that is as evil as Iraq's."
6. George W. continues to support a takeover of the same nation's government, the invasion of the same nation's territory, and the killing of the same nation's soldiers and civilians.
So let's sum up:
Invasion and overthrow -- OK
Occupation of an embassy -- NOT OK
Does that make this triplespeak?
- Theodiclus Lock
Mother Davis staggers, drunk with the irony:
1. We're supposed to be going to war against Iraq, because the Iraqi government is a terrorist government, and, as George W. loves to remind us, terrorism is evil
2. A group that opposes the Iraqi government occupied an embassy in Germany yesterday, injuring two people and holding others hostage during an hours-long standoff.
3. Taking hostages to gain political attention is considered a terrorist act, and caused George W. to send soldiers to the Philippines to hunt down a rebel group there
4. Is George W. now going to order U.S. troops to go fight the evil terrorist anti-Hussein rebels?
HOLY DOUBLESPEAK! You're either against us or you're against us!
Astonished to consider that the world may not be so easily divided into good guys and bad guys...
Return to the Irregular Times Main Page
Read our Blog Archives