We are not unfamiliar with the roots of such hatred.

I note that PBS is 'reviewing the century' of late, with several related programs, some general - some about history of education / the public schools, all along.

Merely look closely at the faces in the crowd, as the first black students are admitted to a local high school - and protected by armed forces sent by Eisenhower (in just one such episode) from the nearby mob. Look at the stark hatred - those facial expressions and gestures are recognizable anywhere. And the rhetoric was the same:

Kill. Them. (And in the South, they often did - I forget when the last lynching occurred, now - but I've seen photographs of *many* across decades). I do recall the first of the 'Freedom Riders' and their shallow graves -- Cheney? ~ Violet Liuzzo? may have been two of those. We forget the names after a while

Different 'them' and locale - that's all. And as the song in *South Pacific observes, "You've got to be carefully taught.. to hate"

* Anyone who wanted a license to do a production of South Pacific *had* to include that song, too - or no dice. Splendid device, I thought..

It's just the Tee Vee coverage of the Big Show du jour, but it's nothing remotely new. We have been there and done that. We tut-tut with the best of them. And many Muricans teach their children to despise, *that* religion, *that* race, *that* queer.. fully as effectively: we see many of those kids later, when they're old enough to act out their early conditioning.

(There is a "solution" of course, were there actual 'adults' in the world: Stop teaching children how to hate. Deal with your own aberrations but.. Don't Pass It On. Simple?)

Not for homo-sap. It appears that most Popular organized religions inculcate hatred, in varying degrees.. of 'dissing' all those who aren't members of That one ie. are Wrong. So I'd guess: fat chance of breaking this cycle. It may break 'us' first. I think it already has.

A.

America has the advantage of being much more diverse. Though there was much discrimination and hatred bandied before, during, and after the civil rights movement, there was a large section of Americans that crossed the lines. Indeed, when Medgar Evers and others were killed, they became martyrs for the cause of integration (though in some communities, they probably thought he was an uppity n*gg*r that got what was coming to him) and the perpetrators were widely villanized. I believe that the civil rights movement was successful because America has some sense of justice that can be tapped every once and a while - though it pretty well sits on it's collective arse most of the time.

The main difference, though, in the two battles is one of audience. The drama that was played out in the U.S. in the 50's and 60's had little to do with international press or spin. It was geared mostly at us coming to grips with our own sense of decency and fair play. We had the advantage of having a white class of citizens that did side with the southern blacks (though most were geographically removed). Of course, if the Civil War had ended differently, it would have been an entirely different century.

The tactics in the MidEast, however, have little to do with trying to change the minds of the immediate parties. Instead, there is the effort to get the Superpower(s) and other international concerns to take sides. Problem is, though, that when one doesn't have a direct stake involved, one tends to not pay attention. International politics has a whole different dynamic the national or local politics, and rarely goes beyond self interest.

Welcome to IWETHEY!