from the simple to the complex

Is everything connected to everything else, as with the proverbial butterfly's wings in Asia affecting the weather in North America? Even if true, are things often so complicated and the connections so tenuous that we must disregard them? And where do we draw those lines? It is possible to view events over the past thirty years in the Middle East as the struggle of those peoples to break free of Euro-American domination and take control of their own destiny. Today is the 25th anniversary of Ronald Reagan's inauguration during the Iranian hostage crisis. The Iranians overthrew the Shah and its repressive, murderous regime. Their secret police had the acronym Savak. Since the US had supported (perhaps installed) that regime to the end, the Iranians did not view us fondly, and their revolution took an extreme and anti-American path. They still haven't "calmed" down. The US supported the Shah in pursuing nuclear energy; today they want the bomb.

When, in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume, among the Powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

It seems doubtful that we can control the atttitudes and actions of other countries and their leaders. We seem to have more than we can handle just trying to influence our own leaders. Is it possible that foreigners view us as nothing other than the world's bully? And what are we to make of our government's spying on us? An article in today's New York Times states that even the Justice Department's legal rationale for this spying is mostly classified. The fourth amendment to our Constitution says:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It seems pretty straightforward to me; it's basically a definition of privacy and security. Though even "strict constructionists" may falter in understanding this. As in Darwinists (enviornmentalists?) vs. Fundamentalists (exploitationists?) it can be hard to know where people's allegiances fall. But at a minimum, how are we to exercise democracy if we don't even know what's being done in our names and with our money? Shouldn't we have the same rights "we're" trying to export throughout the world? Being Mr. Star War's anniversary it's odd to recall that at the same time Reagan was supporting Solidarity in Poland (remember Lech Walesa and the shipyards in Gdansk?) he fired all the Air Traffic controllers here in the US for going on strike. Wouldn't it be nice if our government thought of us as citizens and not just consumers?