9/11–only an elegy?
9/11 is the date of several important anniversaries: the 5th anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center, the 33rd anniversary of the military coup against the Allende government in Chile; and the 100th anniversary of the first nonviolence campaign launched by Mohandas K. Gandhi.
The first two of these anniversaries are synonymous with deprivations of civil liberties, the last with their extension. I expect the NY Times will only comment about the first, ignore the second and the last as well.
Gandhi’s first campaign of nonviolent resistance was launched against racist laws in South Africa at a meeting in Johannesburg on September 11, 1906. The term satyagraha or “holding truth” was coined after the Johannesburg meeting to describe resistance and persuasion by means of nonviolence and respect. After success in South Africa, Gandhi applied the developing strategies of nonviolent resistance in India against the British occupation. The struggle in India lasted almost four decades until independence, a time frame wholly alien to the current US obsession with instant gratification.
Of course. the Times covered, but never emphasized, the role of the US in bringing down an elected regime in the South American country with the longest tradition of democratic rule. The Allende era in Chile is pictured as one of chaos, with no discussion of the progress made towards economic equity, social justice, a new deal for indigenous peoples, etc. The Times’ handling of the arrest of Pinochet in London a few years ago was not an occasion for an analysis of the crimes of Latin fascism.
In regard to the anniversary of the “War on Terror,” it is unlikely that the Times will stress the negative effects on our freedoms engendered by authoritarian politicians manipulating the fears of additional attacks. One or two of the columnists will, and maybe even the editorial page, but the “news” coverage is likely to feature photos taken by the staff of the tragedy (remember those endless pages the paper featured of snapshots of the immediate victims? they haven’t run any on the recent Iraqi innocent dead, I notice). Maybe there’ll be speculation on how his performance five years ago has boosted Rudy Guiliani’s chances of running for President. And maybe we might even get a piece noting the losses of the Bush administration in the courts as its unprecedented authoritarian policies are challenged .
The paper spent almost a week featuring attacks on the intelligence and professional demeanor of the Federal judge who ruled that one of these claimed to be justified by 9/11, the wiretapping without a warrant, was indeed unwarranted. This judge is an Afro-American woman, appointed by a Democratic President. The Times sent its reporters out to ask law professors to comment on the quality of her opinion (in a month which saw much sloppier reasoning by the Supreme Courts of two states on the subject of marriage equality, for which the paper did no law faculty surveys), despite the reality that it is her decision, not her opinion, which will be appealed. As an additional attack, even though no judicial ethics were violated, the Times featured a charge by a right-wing organization that the judge’s service on the Board of a charity was somehow suspect because that organization had made grants to one of the litigant organizations (for public education in completely unrelated fields). Subtext: unqualified affirmative action appointment of a liberal Black bitch out of control.
Tropes of the Times:
We determine what is and is not “the news”
We will feature right-wing views in order to show that we are not “liberal”