I started posting my End of the Line columns after the following month's issue had come out, and, as with everything else on this blog, that had fallen by the wayside. But I'll start up again. This one was written in the wake of a decison by State College Borough Council to go on record as being alarmed by the Patriot Act...
Helen Hokinson was a cartoonist whose work frequently appeared in The New Yorker in the ‘30s and ‘40s. Most often, she poked gentle fun at what one might think of as garden club or book club ladies: frumpy, befuddled, upper-middle-class suburban housewives and society matrons. Recently one of her cartoons popped into my mind. In it, a zaftig, fluttery club president was addressing her organization thusly: "The vote is now fifteen to one that we deplore Mussolini’s attitude. I think it would be nice if we could go on record unanimously deploring Mussolini’s attitude."
The thing that brought that cartoon to the forefront is State College Borough Council’s resolution, passed unanimously on February 21st, to reaffirm the borough’s commitment “to the Freedoms Guaranteed by the U.S and Pennsylvania Constitutions.” The original form of the resolution singled out the Patriot Act as something that the council was concerned would “threaten civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution.” But after some State College residents protested, Council pulled out all specific references to the Patriot Act. Apparently these folks, strangely enough, thought that State College Borough had enough to worry about without giving the Feds a stern lecture on civil liberties.
No doubt Council members thought themselves quite courageous to speak up about these terrible threats to civil liberties, particularly in the current climate of government-inspired terror. You know: Karl Rove or Dick Cheney constantly listening in when you talk to Aunt Martha on the phone, neighbors disappearing in the middle of the night, being afraid to speak openly around the kids because you never know what they might repeat in school, FBI agents hovering nearby every time you visit Schlow Library… that sort of thing. And, of course, surveillance cameras on Beaver Avenue, watching every move you make. Let’s not forget those. Oh wait. Those were approved by State College Borough Council, so they’re okay.
But Borough Council has stared fear and persecution directly in the face and said HA! Fear this! And they have resolved to “join nearly 400 communities and seven states across the nation in expressing concern that proposed laws to fight terrorism,” (this is where, in its original form the resolution referred to ‘THE USA PATRIOT ACT and related measures’) “may threaten our civil rights and liberties guaranteed under the United States Constitution…”
And then it goes on to affirm that it will abide by the law of the land, preserving those rights and liberties, yada yada yada, as all good local bulwarks of freedom and liberty should do. And then it be resolved that a copy of the resolution will be sent to “all locally elected Federal and State officers, the Attorney General of the United States, and Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.” That’ll show ‘em we mean business, by golly!
Now before you go firing off a letter saying how it’s patriotic to dissent, and how it’s not un-American to protest, and all that, let me just say that I couldn’t agree more. Dissent is patriotic. Well, not by definition, it’s not, but there’s certainly nothing inherently unpatriotic about good old fashioned healthy dissent. That’s how we got this country in the first place.
But there is such a thing as a useless and empty gesture. And this resolution fills that bill. For one thing, they just express some vague “concerns.” There’s nothing concrete, nothing in particular, no concern directly addressed. And think about it for a moment: If Council members really did perceive a grave threat to their civil liberties posed by “proposed laws to fight terrorism,” would they still have the guts to pass such a resolution? If they really did think that perhaps their income tax records would be probed, their phone calls monitored, the books they borrow from the library kept in their permanent record, would they have come up with this resolution? Or would they have just kept quiet?
It’s also worth noting that the only thing I have mentioned here that we know is actually happening is those surveillance cameras on Beaver Avenue. And I sure have no problem with those; they’re there for a reason. And it seems they may be working. We’ve been several years now without a serious post-Arts Festival disturbance. Hey, we’ve also been without a terrorist attack on this country since 9/11. Not drawing a conclusion here, you understand, just saying.
In this particular case, it seems to me, State College Borough Council is every bit as high-minded as the Hokinson women who want to unanimously deplore Mussolini’s attitude. And every bit as silly.
