Radical Avenue

India likes to call itself the world’s largest democracy. They are also one of the largest enablers of the Burmese general’s terrorist campaign against its own people. I hope the voters of India throw the bums out in the next election. India has no problem exploiting Burmese natural resources, but takes a “hands off” approach when it comes to the slaughter of innocent Burmese civilians.

Plainly stated, the Indian government is in it for the money. Burma has large natural gas deposits but no infrastructure to extract it. So India has graciously helped build the infrastructure so that it can extract this resource and transport it back to their country. Burma’s other neighbors, including Thailand and China; also exploit Burmese natural resources, thereby enabling the carnage in Burma. And of course the bloodthirsty Burmese generals are more than happy to sell out their country to the highest bidder.

When the Burmese people gain their independence, they will no doubt remember who supported their oppressors. The United States has learned this lesson many times over. Our country supported the Shah of Iran for years despite the Shah’s dismal human rights record. This led to the Iranian hostage crisis of the 1970’s. We have had poor relations with that country ever since.

India may realize some short term gains from its support of the Burmese junta, but they’ll pay for it in the long run. Democracies should not support brutal totalitarian regimes. It is hypocritical to allow freedom at home while actively supporting dictators in other countries. As the old saying goes: Lie down with dogs, wake up with fleas.

Here is a list of businesses currently doing business with the terrorist military regime in Burma.

Burma, Myanmar, Burmese military, democracy, Burmese revolution, India

The world’s religious leaders haven’t had much to say about the persecution of Buddhist monks in Burma. It’s difficult to imagine a more benign group than these young men in saffron robes. They stand for peace, personal sacrifice and spiritual enlightenment. Lately they have chosen to stand with Aung San Suu Kyi and the pro-democracy demonstrators in their home country. But the leaders of other religions will not stand with them.

If our government disagreed with the political ideals of Christians and decided to ransack churches and beat up ministers, Americans would be outraged. The backlash would undoubtedly be intense. But this is exactly what’s happening in Burma today and it is no less outrageous. By showing the world that they have no respect for the peaceful spiritual leaders of their country, the Burmese military has made it clear that they will do anything to stay in power. And the world has responded by looking the other way.

Everyone’s spiritual journey is little different. Many follow in the footsteps of their parents. Others seek their own path. Some people don’t believe in any religion. Regardless of the contours of the journey, everyone deserves the chance to make sense of their life. When government stops citizens from worshiping peacefully according to their own beliefs, it strips them of an essential human dignity. By attacking and humiliating Buddhist monks, the Burmese military has insulted all religions. It would be nice to hear spiritual leaders around the world speaking out in favor of protecting the sanctity of religious institutions.

Burma, Myanmar, Buddhists, Buddhist monks, Saffron revolution, Burmese military, democracy, Burmese revolution, Aung San Suu Kyi,

On June 12, 1987, Ronald Reagan went to the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin and uttered these famous words: “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.” The phrase cemented Reagan’s reputation as a strong world leader and helped bring an end to the Cold War. It became a defining moment of his presidency. President Reagan used that speech to apply political pressure to the old Soviet Union and its leader, Mikhail Gorbachev.

Mr. Reagan’s speech reminded many of when John F. Kennedy went to Berlin on June 26, 1963. President Kennedy wanted to express American solidarity with the free citizens of Western Europe. His speech included these words: “Ich bin ein Berliner.” In English this means “I am a Berliner.” By making US resolve clear in the face of ongoing communist threats, President Kennedy showed the world that America would not be intimidated by Soviet imperialism. Reagan and Kennedy both understood the power of political persuasion. When the US President speaks clearly and forcefully about world events, people listen.

In contrast, President Bush has been timid and disinterested when it comes to the ongoing genocide in Burma. He speaks incessantly about the “global war on terror”, but says nothing about the terrorist Burmese military junta. We’ve all heard Mr. Bush drone on and on about spreading democracy around the world, but he won’t lift a finger in support of the pro-democracy movement in Burma.

President Reagan and President Kennedy were world leaders. George W. Bush is the leader of the US Republican party. He treats Democrats as the enemy rather than as fellow Americans. He has an opportunity to lead this country in a cause that we can all rally around, but it’s clear that he’s not up to the task. Perhaps someone should tell Bush that the Burmese military supports John Kerry and MoveOn.org. Maybe that will wake him from his slumber.

Burma, Myanmar, Burmese military, democracy, Burmese revolution, global war on terror, President Bush, George W. Bush, President Reagan, President Kennedy, Cold War, Berlin

There are a lot of events occurring simultaneously in October as my friend Doug Robertson has noted on Current Events Watch. I’ve been discussing Domestic Violence for the past couple of days, but October is also Breast Cancer Awareness month. Breast cancer touches the lives of hundreds of thousands of people each year. Since 1996, Lee National Denim Day has raised more than $66 million for the fight against breast cancer. At 451 Press we’re having a “comfortable” day of blogging on October 5. This means that several of us are taking a break from our normal focus in order to write about whatever suits our fancy.

I have decided to write about one of my favorite novels, Mutiny on the Bounty. I had planned on flying off to Tahiti or perhaps Pitcairn Island in order to conduct some research on this topic, but that might melt the plastic in my wallet. Ouch. So I’ll have to use my imagination. What a tortuously difficult decision those seamen must have faced on that fateful journey to the South Pacific…

Well here comes Fletcher Christian and he’ll want to know where I stand. Hmmm, how shall I proceed? Do I stay here in a tropical paradise where the half naked locals treat me like a prince? Or do I cast off with Captain Bligh back to England where it’s dreary and cold and the local tax collector has just moved in next door? What a terrible dilemma.

(more…)

Before getting into this topic, I want to make one thing clear. I do not speak from experience. I grew up in a nurturing home with two parents who worked hard every day to give myself and my siblings the chance to enjoy happy, productive lives. I was one of the lucky ones. But domestic violence creates a tremendous burden on our society here in America. There’s plenty of opportunity for positive change and that’s why I talk about it. Also, as I’ve mentioned, October is Domestic Violence Awareness month and the bloggers of 451 Press have been writing extensively on this subject.

In reading interviews with people who’ve grown up in abusive homes, I’m struck by how often these individuals say that the only time their father paid any attention to them was when he was abusing them. In other words, these kids only got what they interpreted as love during a violent encounter. So they came to associate abuse with affection. It’s no wonder that they have scars which last a lifetime. When children suffer from sexual abuse, it’s even more toxic.

I fear that we sometimes overlook the obvious when it comes to identifying the causes of deviant behavior. Children take about 18 years to develop into adults. Kids who grow up in a nurturing environment adjust to adult life far more easily than do kids who grow up in an abusive home. If we want to tackle problems like drug addiction and violent crime, we should start by getting kids out of abusive environments and into settings where they are not living in constant fear.

(more…)

October is Domestic Violence Awareness month and the bloggers of 451 Press have banded together to highlight the problem. Violence at home leaves scars that last a lifetime. Kids raised in an abusive environment have nowhere to turn. They don’t have the physical or mental strength to fight back effectively. They can’t leave home and make it on their own. Other family members are typically powerless to end the abuse, and may not even be aware of it. So kids just curl up in a ball and take it. They are left to wonder why no one was there to protect them in their time of need. These children become ticking time bombs. And when the bomb explodes, more innocent people get hurt.

Violence begets violence. Children will come to associate brutality with reward if that’s what they learn at home. Our society could do a much better job of seeking out at risk kids and quickly getting them the help they need to live normal productive lives. Kids aren’t natural born killers. If they are acting out in violent ways at an early age, it’s a clear indication that something is seriously wrong. Juvenile delinquency programs should be a priority, not an afterthought.

One of the most egregious forms of abuse is also one of the most difficult to discuss: sexual exploitation. We don’t hear about it on the news much except when a particularly gruesome case comes along and then we hear about nothing else for weeks on end. This gives us a distorted picture, and feeds the stereotype of sexual abuse as a relatively uncommon problem carried out by strangers. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most sexual abuse victims know their attackers and are often related to them. News organizations that focus incessantly on the salacious aspects of one case without referencing the larger problem are also engaged in exploitation. It’s disgraceful.

(more…)

According to the dictionary, a terrorist is someone who uses violence and intimidation to achieve political objectives. That sounds a lot like the Burmese military, but no one in our government has labeled them terrorists.

If our country had a nickel for every time the president mentions the War on Terror, we wouldn’t have a budget deficit. But what does it mean? The Burmese people have been terrorized for decades. Their duly elected leader sits in prison and scores of innocent civilians have been massacred in the streets. When peace loving Buddhist monks led pro-democracy demonstrations recently, the Burmese military responded by ransacking the monasteries and beating the monks with canes.

Where is all the tough talk when in comes to the terrorist Burmese generals? It’s pretty clear that the War on Terror is nothing more than a political slogan. It was invented to gain support for an invasion of Iraq, even though Iraq had nothing to do with the 9-11 attacks.

Unlike the Iraqi leaders, Aung San Suu Kyi enjoys widespread support in Burma. She was elected in 1988 by an 80% majority. Of course George Bush did offer this statement about the situation in Burma, which he had his press secretary recite to the media:

“The world is watching the people of Burma take to the streets to demand their freedom, and the American people stand in solidarity with these brave individuals. We feel admiration and compassion for the monks and peaceful protesters calling for democracy. Every civilized nation has a responsibility to stand up for people suffering under a brutal military regime like the one that has ruled Burma for so long. I call on all nations that have influence with the regime to join us in supporting the aspirations of the Burmese people and to tell the Burmese Junta to cease using force on its own people who are peacefully expressing their desire for change. By its own account, the Junta has already killed at least nine non-violent demonstrators, and many others who have been injured and arrested as they seek to express their views peacefully. I urge the Burmese soldiers and police not to use force on their fellow citizens. I call on those who embrace the values of human rights and freedom to support the legitimate demands of the Burmese people.”

Riveting. Mr. Bush, you are right to call on others to support the legitimate demands of the Burmese people, but the Burmese Junta won’t listen to the secretaries and steel workers of America. With all due respect, only one person is Commander in Chief of the most powerful military force in the world.

What do you plan to do to confront these atrocities Mr. President? Perhaps it should be call it the War on Nasty Looking Arab Terrorists that We Can Reference in Political Campaigns to Scare the American People into Voting for Us.

Burma, Myanmar, Burmese Junta, War on Terror, George Bush, Burmese revolution

The citizens of Burma elected Aung San Suu Kyi to lead their country in 1988. But she was never allowed to take office. Instead that election led to her imprisonment. The Burmese military has kept her under lock and key ever since. She has tasted freedom for only a handful of days in the past 19 years. The Burmese generals obviously believe that democracy threatens the posh lifestyle which they have learned to enjoy.

Aung San Suu Kyi is the Mahatma Ghandi of our time. Like Ghandi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela, she advocates peaceful resistance to the illegitimate military rulers of Burma. She could ask her followers to take up arms, and many of them probably would. However this would allow the Burmese generals to use the pro-democracy movement in their propaganda campaign. The Burmese military leaders would love to say that they are in the midst of repelling an armed insurrection. Instead the world has watched as they gun down unarmed civilians and beat up Buddhist monks. This has made them the target of international scorn.

Aung San Suu Kyi has made many sacrifices on behalf of the Burmese people. She left her husband and children behind in 1988 and has not seen them since. Her husband was not allowed to visit her in prison before his death in 1999. And there’s no reason to believe that she has been treated with respect during her current confinement.

I have been writing regularly about the plight of the Burmese people because I consider their pro-democracy movement much more significant than the petty back and forth sniping of comfortable American politicians. People are dying today for the sake of democracy in Burma. Aung San Suu Kyi and her followers deserve our support.

Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma, Myanmar, democracy