The shameful undemocratic recess appointment of John Bolton as ambassador to the United Nations has led me to reflect upon what the world was like before the United Nations. One terrible event in particular stands out in my mind: The bombing of Hiroshima.
John Bolton, as a radical right wing ideologue, is eager to attack the United Nations, and George W. Bush seems quite willing to let John Bolton wreak havoc at the United Nations. We all ought to stop to consider the form of a giant mushroom cloud rising over the horizon before we join in the bandwagon to destroy the United Nations that the world worked so hard to establish after World War II.
In five days, on Saturday 6, 2005, it will be the 60th anniversary of the American nuclear bombing of the Japanese city of Hiroshima. There is no better time for us to rededicate our efforts to the universal abolition of nuclear weapons. Even now, President Bush and the Republican Party are pushing hard to build new generations of nuclear weapons – darkly, the Republicans call these new nuclear weapons “more efficient”.
The United Nations is not anywhere close to perfect, but its existence creates a mechanism for the people of the Earth to work together to establish international standards of behavior towards our fellow human beings. Those who attack the United Nations attack the best means we have of building a peaceful and prosperous world for all people.
Here in the United States, we have holidays to celebrate war, but none specifically dedicated to celebrating peace. In 1981, however, the United Nations did create a holiday for peace – the International Day of Peace on September 21. This year, the International Day of Peace will be quickly followed by anti-war protests on September 24.
At a time when an ideology of violence is firmly implanted in the Republican federal government, it is of particular importance that those of us who believe in the value of peace to re-enter the public debate in a serious way. August 6. September 21. September 24. Put them on your calendar.
I’m not sure that’s true. Memorial Day is meant as a time to stop and remember those killed in war (originally it was just for the Civil War); Armistice Day is a holiday to celebrate the end of World War I.
Take a look at what these holidays are operationally – they offer a veneer of civilized talk, but they value the experience of war and create martyrs out of people lost to even the most craven causes.
John Bolton is to diplomacy what Jack the Ripper was to surgery. – Ian Williams
JohnStracke,
Are you sure they’re more for the end of the killing than for the victory?
To be honest I always found the “respect for the dead from the wars” holidays to be a little odd, anyway… Sure, they died fighting, for a cause, but it’s all a tad more complicated than that. How many were actually nice people? How many were fighting for good causes? Etc, etc…
Thousands, maybe millions, of people die trying to help others every year. Billions of people die in situations that have nothing to do with fights or being a hero, and many of those deaths will be untimely and very unfortunate.
Shouldn’t all the dead be respected? Why do a relatively small set of people, most of whom most people know very little or nothing about, need to have a day put aside for them?
Maybe I’m missing something…