why should the united states' taxpayers fund propaganda against the castro regime? we allow dissenting voices here, within our borders, but we deem spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to vilify the government (and economic system,) of a tiny, neighboring, island nation worthwhile?
please click on the header, (title of this post,) and read the news story about "journalists," who have been paid by our government to write stories slanted against castro and the cuban government.
the most important aspect to consider about this story is the effect of these articles and op-ed pieces. as americans, we tend to discount propaganda. individually we think ourselves above it. we think we are too smart or too canny to be swayed by untruth of any variety.
an apt parallel for this is how we tend to think money does not affect elections, despite how often the candidate who spends more wins and the fact that only candidates with access to large amounts of cash, (usually supplied by corporations which dole it out to would be friendly lawmakers,) can even be considered.
the truth is, we are influenced. most people do not have the time to sift through the mass of information they may process in a given time frame or cross check facts. furthermore, this is not the fault of the individual. instead, we rely on ethics. in this case, journalistic ethics. schools teach them. news outlets should teach and enforce them. individual journalists should hold them as sacred.
by and large, most journalists likely do adhere to them as best they can and consider these ethics hugely important in executing their job, (their role in our free society as watchdog.) those who do not, should be frowned upon by the public and certainly fired by their employers.
in the known cases cited in the referenced article, those journalists were fired or cut off by their superficial employers.
the next question to consider is why our government considers these payouts a worthwhile expenditure for american taxpayers. the obvious, (and again superficial,) reasons are because of cuba's proximity to our border and because of the stark contrast of their values.
the cuban government is socialist. castro led a successful revolution against a corrupt, (though friendly to the interests of the united states,) dictatorship some 47 years ago. in the time since, the people of cuba have seen great accomplishments in the face of even greater odds.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outposts_of_tyranny
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Cuba
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_of_Cuba
these four links to wikipedia articles outline the treatment cuba has been subjected to by the u.s. the first one details the origins of trade embargos that were put into place shortly after castro assumed power and continue to date. the second cites language from u.s. secretary of state condoleeza rice depicting cuba as an outpost of tyrrany. the third outlines cuba's accomplishments in education and the fourth does the same for their efforts in the field of modern medicine.
ultimately, cuba represents a nation and a people who have chosen a different tack than our own as americans. (that tack being socialism.) as a socialist nation, and despite the odds they face in the form of embargos opposed by every nation in the united nations except for four, (the u.s., the marshall islands, palau and israel,) cuba has succeeded. (it should be noted the reasons the other three nations oppose cuba are strictly a means to cotton to the u.s. and the marshall islands in particular, has recently been a hotbed of human rights violations linked to the corruption scandal of jack abramoff and several republican lawmakers.)
as a capitalist nation, the u.s. has an obscene amount of poverty and infant mortality. we have created an industry of imprisoning our citizens and rank as the leader in the western world, incarcerating at a rate three to eight times higher than that of western europe or canada. currently nearly 1.4 million americans are incarcerated. the move to privatize and thereby create the prison industry is a poignant example of class division wrought by capitalism. (in our society we glorify the winners of capitalism but we hide away the losers, in prisons, homeless shelters, mental institutions and the like.)
despite the fact much of the wealth of the united states has been built on the backs of populations who were taken advantage of, (i.e. the slave trade, native americans, migrant farm workers, etc.) pointing out the worst parts of our system is not meant to be a diatribe against capitalism. rather, it is important to realize there is more than one viable way to build a fruitful society.
cuba has chosen a way different from our own. it should not be seen as a threat to us. the embargos we have in place against that country should be halted immediately. we should see the people of cuba like we see the family down the street who has a different skin color than our own or who adheres to a different religion. and we should not finance propaganda meant to color them as evil or a blight just because they have chosen a different path.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Sunday, September 03, 2006
andre again
It's over. andre agassi's professional tennis career bowed, blew a kiss, and eased behind the curtain of time as so many others have before.
his departure was a bittersweet moment. it was bitter to see it end, to know center court would never again behold that particular set of skills that is or was, andre agassi. it was sweet though, to see his emotion at the end of the defeat, and to hear such a classy and poignant speech.
the end of the match was rather sudden. throughout most of the fourth set, it looked like agassi would force a fifth one against 25-year-old benjamin becker. it was becker who hobbled a bit and tanked when agassi served. but then with andre serving at 4-4, becker broke agassi's serve with ease, firing returns into corners where andre was not. next game becker served out the match and the men were shaking hands at the net.
then the most interesting stuff started happening. andre took his seat courtside and the crowd of new yorkers stayed standing and continued cheering. they clapped in unison, as if being cued, and hollered a bit for about 10 minutes. all the while andre fought back emotion, rubbing his face like a child and dabbing his eyes.
did andre cry because of adulation lost? did he cry because his ego would miss the affections of so many courtside tennis fans?
andre is a man in the way whitman and emerson were men. he is graceful and open. his retirement is a gift to all who witness it because it is of our nature.
like andre's career, we end. and this is why andre cried, even if it was on an instinctual level, even if it was subconscious. our mortality may be at the root of all of our laughter and tears but today's event crystallizes that idea.
humans are for seasons. our lives are marked by them, beginnings, middles and endings. the famous phrase says, "this too shall pass," and it describes everything. from the ignorance of our youth to the glory of our prime to the pain of twilight, they all pass and they can all be dissected into smaller parts but why we shed a tear in the privacy of our own living room while watching andre shed tears in front of a world of people is because we relate.
the career is over and time marches on. this is the melancholy of life, the negative within the positive, the proof of balance. we should not cry that it comes to an end, rather we should be aware of the temporal nature of it all and strive to make the most of it.
andre taught us this lesson with his actions today, which is of course the best way to teach. he spent his career straining to be the best tennis player in the world, not because, (and like so many,) he needed the glory and recognition, but because he always knew it would come to an end. instead of competing to pass the time or even to earn a living, andre competed to be the best, knowing the reward was in the work.
andre agassi was not the best tennis player ever. only for moments was he even the best in the world. and this may be the greatest aspect of his legacy. it was when he lost that andre showed us all the way. when the bigger and stronger pete sampras would break him in tiebreaker after tiebreaker of grand slam finals, andre flashed class and grace as he spoke well of pete and accepted 2nd place with aplomb. when federer soundly beat him at last year's us open, or when nadal beat him in montreal in the run-up, agassi smiled for the gift of being able to play tennis at this level and for a handsome living, spoke well of his opponents and accepted his place and moved on. today he shook becker's hand and wished him well and lived up to his own example of dignity.
andre gave a speech to the crowd and to all who watched on tv around the world before heading into retirement. he spent almost all of it thanking the crowd for their support. and that is as it should be. too many times we think public figures make us but they don't, we make them. (contrast and compare andre agassi to barry bonds for a vivid example.)
andre is beloved above sampras, above federer and above others from across the landscape of sport despite his record of having achieved a career grand slam but otherwise paling next to the achievements of others. this is grace. his grace, and ours.
like today's match, andre's career ended with a winning feeling.
"The scoreboard shows that I lost today," he said. "But what the scoreboard doesn't show is what I feel."
his departure was a bittersweet moment. it was bitter to see it end, to know center court would never again behold that particular set of skills that is or was, andre agassi. it was sweet though, to see his emotion at the end of the defeat, and to hear such a classy and poignant speech.
the end of the match was rather sudden. throughout most of the fourth set, it looked like agassi would force a fifth one against 25-year-old benjamin becker. it was becker who hobbled a bit and tanked when agassi served. but then with andre serving at 4-4, becker broke agassi's serve with ease, firing returns into corners where andre was not. next game becker served out the match and the men were shaking hands at the net.
then the most interesting stuff started happening. andre took his seat courtside and the crowd of new yorkers stayed standing and continued cheering. they clapped in unison, as if being cued, and hollered a bit for about 10 minutes. all the while andre fought back emotion, rubbing his face like a child and dabbing his eyes.
did andre cry because of adulation lost? did he cry because his ego would miss the affections of so many courtside tennis fans?
andre is a man in the way whitman and emerson were men. he is graceful and open. his retirement is a gift to all who witness it because it is of our nature.
like andre's career, we end. and this is why andre cried, even if it was on an instinctual level, even if it was subconscious. our mortality may be at the root of all of our laughter and tears but today's event crystallizes that idea.
humans are for seasons. our lives are marked by them, beginnings, middles and endings. the famous phrase says, "this too shall pass," and it describes everything. from the ignorance of our youth to the glory of our prime to the pain of twilight, they all pass and they can all be dissected into smaller parts but why we shed a tear in the privacy of our own living room while watching andre shed tears in front of a world of people is because we relate.
the career is over and time marches on. this is the melancholy of life, the negative within the positive, the proof of balance. we should not cry that it comes to an end, rather we should be aware of the temporal nature of it all and strive to make the most of it.
andre taught us this lesson with his actions today, which is of course the best way to teach. he spent his career straining to be the best tennis player in the world, not because, (and like so many,) he needed the glory and recognition, but because he always knew it would come to an end. instead of competing to pass the time or even to earn a living, andre competed to be the best, knowing the reward was in the work.
andre agassi was not the best tennis player ever. only for moments was he even the best in the world. and this may be the greatest aspect of his legacy. it was when he lost that andre showed us all the way. when the bigger and stronger pete sampras would break him in tiebreaker after tiebreaker of grand slam finals, andre flashed class and grace as he spoke well of pete and accepted 2nd place with aplomb. when federer soundly beat him at last year's us open, or when nadal beat him in montreal in the run-up, agassi smiled for the gift of being able to play tennis at this level and for a handsome living, spoke well of his opponents and accepted his place and moved on. today he shook becker's hand and wished him well and lived up to his own example of dignity.
andre gave a speech to the crowd and to all who watched on tv around the world before heading into retirement. he spent almost all of it thanking the crowd for their support. and that is as it should be. too many times we think public figures make us but they don't, we make them. (contrast and compare andre agassi to barry bonds for a vivid example.)
andre is beloved above sampras, above federer and above others from across the landscape of sport despite his record of having achieved a career grand slam but otherwise paling next to the achievements of others. this is grace. his grace, and ours.
like today's match, andre's career ended with a winning feeling.
"The scoreboard shows that I lost today," he said. "But what the scoreboard doesn't show is what I feel."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
