|
“Where’s your patriotism?”
demanded the hawker with an armful of clip-on flags as he pounded on my
car window while I was stopped at a traffic light.
“I don’t want my
window washed!” I barked back, pretending not to notice his true
purpose.
“Geez, this guy
doesn’t want to fly our flag,” the hawker hollered, sauntering
toward the car behind me the only other vehicle among a half dozen or so
at the busy intersection without something red-white-and blue hooked,
tied or glued to it.
Ah, the joys of a
society in the throes of unbridled national chauvinism, where the
ringing sounds of the holiday season often are jingoist bells. The owner
of a shop in my quaint Florida town is told by the Chamber of Commerce
that all store windows should be decorated in red-white-and blue for
Christmas this year; he went ahead and put up the purple and silver
ornamentation he had ordered months earlier. My sister in Louisville is
criticized for being the only person in her office to refuse to place a
company-distributed flag decal on her car. “I might have gone along
with it just to keep everyone happy, if my car wasn’t brand new,”
she says. “But now they’re threatening to march out to the parking
lot and paste one on for me. I don’t even want to put an AAA sticker
on it yet.”
Of course, she
shouldn’t have to put a flag on her Honda. No one should feel so
intimidated that they drape their doors in Old Glory bunting just
because everyone else on the block is doing it. But, these are trying
times in which all too many Americans are forgetting the very principles
upon which their country was founded.
It’s not easy being a
civil-libertarian right now. Not with so many radio talk-show jocks
harping that anyone who questions the Administration’s military
approach to terrorism is a “lily livered pansy.” Not with the
nation’s clever corporate giants demanding that we must buy their
products to prove we’re proud Americans. Not with John Ashcroft
salivating over his chance of a lifetime to increase the federal
government’s power over the people to pry into our computers and tap
any of our phones in the guise of searching for evil doers.
We’ve been down this
road before, with Joe McCarthy’s anti-Commie crusade in the 50’s and
pretty-in-pink J. Edgar’s spy campaigns against dissenters in the
60’s. It takes a long time to retrieve our personal rights once the
government has trounced on them.
Certainly, at a point
in history when a small number of madmen have attacked our shores, there
is a need for heightened security and the accompanying inconveniences
we’re all learning to tolerate at airports, concert halls and
ballparks. But the kinds of changes the Bush administration has been
pushing through Congress, giving federal agents more eavesdropping
powers, are broadly worded and pose very real threats to every one of
us.
“So much of the way
we communicate today is on cell phones or by computer, and we have a
right to privacy,” Alan Lunin, chairman of the American Civil
Liberties Union in Central Florida, recently told me during a discussion
of the real dangers facing our nation. “We can’t allow the
government to charge people [with a crime] for simply expressing their
thoughts. When I balance my checkbook on my home computer or when I send
an e-mail correspondence to an acquaintance, the government damned well
better have a search warrant before it intercepts my thoughts.”
Unfortunately, with almost no Congressional opposition, that’s no
longer the law.
Still, many people
argue that, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear. Not
so, says Lunin. “There’s a crucial principle at stake.” But he
admits that protection of our rights is a tough sell at this moment in
time: “The most important thing we can do is to keep reminding people
what it is we’re truly fighting for. We’re willing to fight because
we hold our rights so dearly. We shouldn’t be willing to give any of
them away too readily.”
America may well be
united on the need to protect ourselves from terrorists, but—after
even a few short weeks of military action—there are growing ripples of
dissent as to how to go about it. There are even those who in good
conscience believe that waging war is not the answer.
The number of people
who have questions about the administration’s policies will certainly
grow as the clock and the war wind on. The rising public debate will be
most appropriate in a free society, and no one should feel (or be)
threatened for letting his or her views known. It was a sad moment
during the recent concert at Madison Square Garden to honor New York
firefighters and police when a sizeable number in the audience roundly
booed actor Richard Gere for expressing the anti-war views of his
Buddhist religion. Likewise, it is disheartening to hear of
Arab-Americans and Muslims being insulted or attacked, peace
demonstrators being beaten, or newspaper writers being fired for opining
something not in accord with the new political correctness. (At one
publication I work for, a columnist has received several threats from
readers for reporting that there are reasons many people in the Arab
world don’t particularly like the United States.)
It is important for
those who boo at Buddhists or hurl epithets on talk shows or ridicule
their fellow citizens for not flapping flags from their car windows to
keep one thing in mind: Their right to be rude is protected because our
country is based on principles of free expression—even for those with
whom they disagree.
Usually at this time of
year, it’s appropriate to greet one another with warm wishes of Peace
on Earth. But, considering the pro-war temperament (and hot tempers) in
our nation, that kind of talk could get a guy in trouble.
Oh,
well. Peace on earth, and good will to all anyway.
|
Back to Top of Page 