Committee Opposed to Militarism and the Draft (COMD)

: Rick Jahnkow; Articles Archive; 01 January 2002; Hits: 1030

Congress Plants Another Pentagon Virus in Public Education

From Draft NOtices, January-February 2002

— Rick Jahnkow

Another hole has been ripped open in the barrier protecting U.S. civilians from the influence of militarism. In December 2001, the U.S. House and Senate gave final approval to an education bill with a provision that severely erodes the right of local schools to control military access to campuses and personal information about students. The legislation, signed by President Bush on January 8, 2002, will go into effect soon as Public Law No: 107-110.

The military access law was part of a larger bill (H.R. 1) that provides various funds for local schools and programs to improve student performance. The bill also extends and changes programs begun under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

: Lorraine Demi; Articles Archive; 01 January 2002; Hits: 1328

Resisting the Pledge

From Draft NOtices, January-February 2002

— Lorraine Demi

Since September 11, 2001, schools across the U.S. have increased the recitation of the "Pledge of Allegiance" in an effort to enforce patriotism. Previously lax policies have become mandatory in many school districts, making students feel pressured to pledge allegiance to a country and a flag regardless of their personal, religious or political beliefs.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has advised many school districts in recent years on the constitutional rights of students wishing not to pledge allegiance. When students at Mark Morris High School in Washington State chose not to participate in the school’s daily recitation of the pledge, Washington ACLU Legal Program Director Julya Hampton wrote in a 1998 letter to the school: "In response to legal challenges brought by students, the courts have uniformly upheld their right to remain quietly seated during the pledge. . . . Students should not be compelled to participate in the pledge by the symbolic act of standing, or be compelled to leave the classroom because of their peaceful expression of political beliefs."

Breaking the Cycle of Violence: The Need to Move Beyond Revenge

From Draft NOtices, November - December 2001

— Molly Morgan

Why do people wish to exact revenge? What is it about pain and grief that spurs the desire to inflict the same emotional state on others? In the wake of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, collective revenge appears to have consumed the majority of people in the United States. Although there is official denial that direct retaliation is the reason for the bombing of Afghanistan, and although there are most certainly economic interests really driving the current military actions, the political support for engaging in them comes from a widespread feeling by the populace that the U.S. is entitled to avenge itself however it sees fit.

Bloody retaliation for harms both real and imagined has ancient roots in human societies. As has often been observed, violence is never a solution to a problem; it consistently begets only more violence. The steady escalation of war throughout human history has brought us to a precipice: now that we possess the capacity to exterminate our entire species — as well as most other lifeforms on the planet — there is great urgency to understand the vengeful tendency in human nature if we are to eliminate the cycle of warfare and violence and evolve into sustainable, peaceful societies.