I was disturbed by the contents of a perspective entitled ‘Protest show liberals’ arrogance’ by Julia Bainbridge, published in the March 24 edition (pg. 8). The perspective shows several misinterpretations. First of all, most protesters around the nation are not against the nation as a whole, but against the present government’s policies.
Julia writes: ‘What I don’t like is the mindless anti-American, hate-Bush, hate-America, we’re-all-bad kind of nonsense such as always emerges in crowds at times like these (particularly crowds full of leftists, whose default mode seems to always be protesting against us).’
I haven’t seen a single banner, a single pamphlet or anyone shouting ‘I hate America’ during the war protests. Naming a crowd as being ‘full of leftists’ is not only an absurd generalization but also an example of political profiling, so inadequate in a society where the freedom of political choice is granted by the Constitution. It is intriguing that to Julia’s view, the ‘crowd of leftists’ is protesting ‘against us.’ Us who? Aren’t they part of ‘us,’ that is, a component of our society?
Also, I believe saying that protests are ‘giving comfort to the enemy’ is indeed a corrupted vision of the real purpose of anti-war demonstrations. No one is cheering for Saddam, or standing on the Iraqi side, nor is anyone in favor of the use of weapons of mass destruction. I am afraid that ‘speed[ing] the war to a successful conclusion,’ something Julia advocates, may cause even more civilian casualties than what both countries can afford. Furthermore, a ‘successful’ outcome for this war may be pursued by the present administration just as a political tool for reelection.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
