|
In that statement, Phil La Follette asked how it was that elected officials, who claimed they could not find the money to pay for needed programs to aid workers and farmers, found the billions of dollars that were required to fill the coffers of the corporations that reaped great profits during World War I.
The question had tremendous resonance Friday night. While we Wisconsinites gathered in Baraboo to recall our progressive roots, the Congress was allocating $15 billion to airline corporations that pay their executives tens of millions, even as they lay off flight attendants and cut service.
This was just one of the eerie reminders of similarities between the early days of the 20th century and the early days of the 21st. It was striking to listen to how many of the readings from Wisconsin progressive thinkers and leaders had to do with questions of war and peace, discrimination against immigrants and profiteering by monopolies.
Roughly a dozen readers rose to offer lines from our progressive past and, after each one finished, a rumble would go through the crowd of perhaps 100: "Things really haven't changed." "Same problems as now." "She could have written those words today."
In 1917, as Americans prepared to go to war following attacks on U.S. ships by German submarines, there was a great war fervor. But in Wisconsin, and especially in counties with strong progressive traditions such as Dane and Sauk, there was a great questioning about how best to respond to horrifying attacks on American civilians. Wisconsin developed its identity as an anti-war state in those days. But even then, the state was not so much pacifist as it was questioning.
The Wisconsin progressives always believed that the United States had a right to defend itself, just as most progressives do today. But they also believed in democracy, and they believed especially that democracy functioned best when debate and dissent pushed leaders to consider their actions.
In Baraboo Friday night, I heard echoes of those good Wisconsin sentiments. After the readings finished, we fell into long discussions about the complex questions that arise in wartime. Most folks thought George W. Bush gave a fine speech Thursday night, and they were pleased that the president has so far been cautious in his response to attacks by an ill-defined enemy.
There was plenty of discussion about the form that response should take. No one was expressing sympathy for Osama bin Laden or Afghanistan's Taliban leaders, but there was plenty of concern for the Afghan people - and genuine worry that they might be the innocent victims of a war that they did not ask to be a part of.
Armchair military strategists had some ideas about Special Forces strikes, which were definitely preferred to prolonged ground or air wars. Armchair diplomats proposed dramatic shifts in U.S. relations with Israel and the ruling families of various Arab oil states.
No one I talked with liked this new Office of Homeland Security - "sounds like the Soviet Union," one man said. And there was broad consensus that, while America needs airlines, Congress didn't need to give the airline corporations quite so much money quite so quickly. With all the concern about airline security, one fellow suggested, it would have made more sense to put the money into expanding the nation's railroad system.
Leaving Baraboo late on that calm, good Friday night, I was struck by the notion that George W. Bush and the Congress would be wise to sample a bit of the wisdom of Sauk County. As in the progressive era of the last century, wisdom still flows from the heartland.
© Copyright 2001 The Capital Times
###
| 
