I took the liberty of analyzing and reflecting on a stereotype beyond the guided questions in this assignment (Action Item # 3). Stereotyping is one topic I can run wild with in identifying and discussing the various forms of stereotyping that I know to exist in contemporary American society. However, there is one stereotype that came to light in recent days from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano, who offended many Americans and especially, veterans after her April 7, 2009 DHS Assessment Report, “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” was made public.
The agency's intelligence assessment, sent to law enforcement officials last week, warns that right-wing extremists could use the bad state of the U.S. economy and the election of the country's first black president to recruit members. The assessment also said that returning military veterans who have difficulties assimilating back into their home communities could be susceptible to extremist recruiters or might engage in lone acts of violence. In her key findings (emphasis added), the Secretary wrote that there is, “No specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence…” (p. 2). The report also warned police across the nation to watch out for those who may have anti-abortion bumper stickers, claim the 2nd Amendment right of personal possession of weapons or express loyalty to U.S. Rep. Ron Paul or other third-party political candidates.
As an example of right-wing extremism, the secretary includes a known violent anti-government hate group, the white supremacists, as an example of the type of right-wing extremist people she is referring to in her report, “Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration (p. 2).” She, in effect, has stereotyped any American who disagrees with the current administration’s view on abortion, immigration, gun control, economic and social issues, and are susceptible to being recruited to radicalization, bent on organizing and plotting attacks against America. What a blatant and irresponsible stereotype placed on millions of Americans who simply express a conservative view on these issues, the current state of our democracy, economy, or our standing in the world. That’s not being a radical, that’s being American.
At the height of the debate over the adoption of the Constitution in 1787-88, a series of articles began to appear in a New York journal. Their authors, calling themselves “Publius,” urged the ratification of the new constitution, offering-in Thomas Jefferson’s words- “the best commentary on the principles of government which ever was written.” These eighty-five articles, commonly known as “The Federalist Papers,” were, in reality, the work of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Their purpose was to persuade convention voters and ultimately the general public, that the old government, as it existed under the Articles of Confederation, was defective and that the proposed constitution, with its three branches of government, was the best means of realizing the ideals of justice and individual rights (Wright, 1996). According to Napolitano, our Constitutional founding father would be among the radical right whose organized speeches and letters to the public would be considered threats to the government and national security.
Alexander Hamilton warned, “It may be said that it would tend to render the government of the Union too powerful, and to enable it to absorb those residuary authorities, which it might be judged proper to leave with the States for local purposes” (p. 167). Hamilton, like many strict-constitutionalists believe, much of government’s power lies within the states and not the federal government. As the current Obama Administration encroaches upon constitutional and individual freedoms, as some believe, Americans have a right and duty to speak out against its government and not to be marginalized and stereotyped as an extremists or radical, on either side.
This report has some asking if there really is a threat to Americans or is this a blatant attack on conservatism and an agenda driven left-wing smear tactic on individual liberties and our Constitutional guarantees? What forces contributed to this stereotype? Napolitano said, “Following the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, the militia movement declined in total membership and in the number of organized groups because many members distanced themselves from the movement as a result of the intense scrutiny militias received after the bombing (p. 4).” Many people, including “right-wing” extremists, completely disagreed with the terror act of Timothy McVey. Everyone, including right-wingers, viewed McVey as an Anti-American radical and not a non-violent activist exercising his Constitutional right to speak out against his government.
According to the Washington Times, the secretary was made aware of the inflammatory statements and issued the assessment, as is, in spite of the internal civil liberties watchdog’s objections, “Homeland Security Department officials disregarded warnings from their internal civil liberties watchdogs before releasing a security assessment of "right-wing extremism" that had Secretary Janet Napolitano apologizing to veterans Thursday. A spokeswoman confirmed that the department's Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties raised objections about some of the language in the nine-page report before it was sent to law enforcement officials nationwide.
The office "did object to a part of the document, which was not resolved before the product went out. This was a breakdown of an internal process that we will fix in the future (Hudson, 2009)”.
Napolitano’s stereotype would appear to be driven by a clear misunderstanding of whom and what conservative leaning people believe and think about government and its role in their lives. The view Napolitano has of some Americans is likely the result of her own political prejudices and biases towards strict constitutionalist conservatives and their ideology. It has been said that if you repeat a lie long enough, over time, people will begin to accept it as truth. As we learn new contradictory information, we incrementally adjust the stereotype to adapt to the new information. We usually need quite a lot of repeated information for each incremental change. Individual evidence is taken as the exception that proves the rule.
Whether you lean politically to the left or right, we should never characterize or stereotype anyone as an extremist or radical for simply expressing, through a bumper sticker, rally, street march, T-shirt, or an organized protest, the fundamental disagreements we have with our political leaders’ ideology or the positions they take on social or economic issues.
On April 16, 2009 Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano said she was sorry U.S. veterans were mentioned in a report on right-wing extremism. CNN said some veterans groups were offended by the departmental report and that Napolitano told the news network's "American Morning" the assessment was not intended to offend U.S. veterans. "I know that some veterans groups were offended by the fact that veterans were mentioned in this assessment, so I apologize for that offense. It was certainly not intended," Napolitano said (UPI, 2009).
The Assessment Reports are part of the department's routine analysis of intelligence information to give to law enforcement agencies guidance on possible security threats. In my view, Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano’s well-intended assessment should focus more on the real and immediate threats to our country’s security, such as the 35 radical Muslim compounds in the U.S. training its followers on how to kidnap and kill Americans, than the rhetorical. How about assessing the current and real threat from groups such as MS-13, the South American gang that claims to have a growing membership of more than 100,000 members in the U.S., which have terrorized and victimized American citizens? What about the well-organized gangs that have killed hundreds of people along our southern border, including immigration border agents and police officers, while smuggling drugs to be peddled on our streets. These are examples of the real threats we face to our democracy and our way of life. This negative stereotyping has only drawn attention away from the Assessment Reports intent and has focused more on the self-serving political agenda of its author. John F. Kennedy once said, “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.” It’s unfortunate but this apparent stereotyping, intended or not, has only perpetuated the generalizations and assumptions that feed the conflict between liberals and conservatives.
References
DHS Assessment Report (2009). “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment. Retrieved April 16, 2009, from http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/041609_extremism.pdf
Hudson, A. (2009) Washington Times.com. Homeland issued 'extremism' report despite objections: Napolitano apologizes to veterans offended by report. Retrieved April 17, 2009, from
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/17/homeland-security-got-internal-flags/
UPI.com (2009) Top News: Napolitano apologizes for extremism report. Retrieved April 16, 2009, from http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/04/16/Napolitano-apologizes-for-extremism-report/UPI-66131239896833/
Wright, B. (1996) The Federalist Papers: The famous papers on the principles of American Government. Barnes & Noble Books, Harvard University Press.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment