BY DAN GOLDRICH
Hope Amidst Chaos
Many eyes and hearts have opened.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Below is the text of Dan Goldrich’s presentation to the peace
rally held Sept. 24 at the Federal Building in Eugene. Goldrich was one of numerous
speakers before the crowd that filled the plaza and spilled over across the streets.
I
speak for Progressive Responses today, somberly
and with renewed hope. Somber, for obvious rea-
sons: the U.S. dead and the thousands of Iraqi
dead, the deepening cruel insurgency, the continu-
ing ideologically driven intransigence of the admin-
istration in refusing to renounce permanent bases
or control of Iraqi oil, the faces of those abandoned
in New Orleans, the aged and infirm left to die be-
cause the week before Katrina, the U.S. government
was busy trying to delete from the general principles of
the U.N. the phrase, “Respect for nature.”
What do we owe these dead, these victims? I refuse to think
we owe them more dead and more victims in the service of lies, illusory imperial ambi-
tion, ignorance of history, and denial that nature is our home. I choose to think that
we owe the victims taking their loss so extremely seriously that we dedicate ourselves
to do better in the face of daunting challenges.
What are those challenges? Global climate change is upon us, it’s present, and re-
quires courage merely to contemplate. Have you read Elizabeth Kolbert’s three-part
articles in The New Yorker, April and May, on this? Growing social polarization, locally
through globally, opulence and impoverishment. Growing extremist, often fundamen-
talist violent movements in many places. See Mark Danner in the New York Times
Magazine, (Sept. 11) on how U.S. policy has made this worse, particularly by making
war on Iraq, and continuing cases of states using terror against their people.
Above all is the challenge: How do we want to live as we confront these aforemen-
tioned tremendous challenges? What have we been learning about meeting these
challenges?
• That broad, global cooperation is required to confront global warming: to restruc-
ture our economic base for sustainability, and to meet the needs of the environmen-
tally displaced, the environmentally vulnerable.
• That the challenge of violent movements and states using terrorism requires new
international law and new international police institutions. U.S. security requires
global security. No response will work to elicit the needed broad cooperation of gov-
ernments and peoples unless it is based on fairness, on equal justice.
• That either we will succumb to police states and the fearful war of each against
all others, or we will make community globally and locally, taking care of one another
and of our home, the Earth, in a way that down through time has provided a funda-
mental sense of connection, of transcendent meaning.
O
bviously, the Bush administration sees the world differently on all those
scores. Most influential Democrats have opted for silence or carping around
the edges.
So how can you or I feel hope and rising energy at this moment? Because at great
cost, in Iraqis and U.S. soldiers dead and maimed, and in Gulf Coast devastation, many
eyes and hearts have opened. Many are seeing the need for a new national and global
effort to sustain life, and to do so decently.
The debate is finally on — how and when will the U.S. withdraw from Iraq? (See
CommonDreams.org and truthout.org for powerful analyses countering the claim that
we can’t leave Iraq to chaos.)
The call by such organizations as the Apollo Alliance for a new, appropriate devel-
opment strategy based on energy conservation, efficiency and sustainability is gain-
ing implementation in city after city and state after state, including Oregon and
Portland.
Despite the neo-conservative imperialism and ceaseless spin of the Bush adminis-
tration, U.S. public opinion tends strongly to support a more globally cooperative for-
eign policy, the International Criminal Court action on Darfur, and greater U.S. effort
to limit greenhouse gases. There’s growing and now majority public awareness of the
scientific consensus on global warming.
S
o I am imagining the political possibilities as more leadership arises on these
critical matters, in response to demands from the base, all over the country.
As you and I look around at those assembled today, we see so many young
people demanding something better. Inspiring. Life goes on. Political life goes on.
You young ones need to know that there are many elders with you in spirit and ac-
tion, elders who see life itself under grave threat and who will not yield to that threat.
So we can find the energy and inspiration to go on, and organize a community-based
movement strong enough to hold leaders to account regarding life’s agenda.
Dan Goldrich of Eugene is a retired UO political science professor and a member of Progressive Responses, a
group of academic leaders who came together in response to 9/11.
4 OCTOBER 13, 2005
TO THE EDITOR
MASQUERADING?
I read with interest the recent letter to the
editor (10/6) from Bill Smee accusing me of
masquerading as a moderate after years of
being an “extreme right-wing, anti-labor ac-
tivist.” I admit to getting on in years, but I’m
honestly having trouble remembering exactly
when I was an extreme right-wing, anti-labor
activist.
Was it in 1990 when, as a Lane County
commissioner, I opposed Ballot Measure 5?
Was it in 1992, when I opposed and actively
campaigned against Ballot Measure 9, the
OCA’s anti-gay statewide ballot measure?
Was it in 1994, when I publicly opposed the
measure that would have repealed Oregon’s
prevailing wage law?
Was it in 1995, when as Oregon labor com-
missioner I joined Gov. John Kitzhaber and
Attorney General Ted Kulongoski in signing
an amicus brief with the U. S Supreme Court
successfully supporting efforts to overturn
Colorado’s anti-gay initiative?
Was it in 1996, when I debated Bill
Sizemore more times than any other elected
official of either party in opposition to
Measure 47, further limiting property taxes
for schools and local governments?
Was it in 1997, when I was the only
statewide elected official to publicly testify in
favor of the Oregon Employment
Nondiscrimination Act outlawing discrimi-
nation based on sexual orientation?
Was it in 1998, when I was running for re-
election as labor commissioner and Bob
Shiprack, executive secretary of the Building
and Construction Trades Council was co-
chairman of my campaign and I received en-
dorsements from labor unions representing
electricians, plumbers, steamfitters, cement
masons, ironworkers, operating engineers,
bricklayers and others?
Was it in 1999, when I reversed the ruling
of my predecessor and held that transgender
and transsexuals are protected from discrimi-
nation under Oregon’s disability law?
Was it in 2000, when I made television
commercials (along with Kitzhaber) oppos-
ing Sizemore’s ballot measure effectively
prohibiting public employee unions from en-
gaging in political activities? Was it in 2002
when I was the only Republican gubernato-
rial candidate to support collective bargain-
ing rights for farm workers?
Admittedly, I don’t expect to find a lot of
philosophical soul-mates among readers of a
publication that is already questioning
whether Mayor Kitty Piercy is a “real” pro-
gressive. I do, however, think it is not too
much to expect a modicum of respect for the
historical record even when attempting to
smear someone whose politics you dislike.
Jack Roberts, executive director
Lane Metro Partnership
POLICE EXCESSES
Why did six Eugene police officers re-
spond when my daughter’s friend did her a
favor by jumping a fence to retrieve the bike
lock that she had dropped? Why was it neces-
sary for the police to use a pain compliance
hold on this young man? Why did they hand-
cuff him and frighten him before ticketing
him?
After years and years and years of com-
plaints against the Eugene Police
Department, why do they continue to over-
react, particularly when responding to situa-
tions involving crowds, young people, or
people of color? When will the EPD learn to
stop abusing the people for whom they work?
The next time the Eugene Police Department
asks the voters for money, I will vote “NO!”
David P. Johnson, PhD
Eugene
CHRONIC WHINING
Regarding the letter “This Paper Sucks”
(9/29). I am so sorry that when the writer
moved here there wasn’t a newspaper waiting
just for him. I read your paper every week. I
don’t agree with some of your articles, explo-
rations of musicians and artists I’ve never
heard or heard of.
I also disagree with his use of “hip” in ref-
erence to a city where I was born and raised. I