IN 2008 the handbook, The New Rwanda: Prosperity and the Public Good, conceived and edited by Sondra Myers, was published to provide the text for a National Conversation on Prosperity and the Public Good. The creation of the handbook was a result of a recommendation from a roundtable discussion endorsed by Hi s Excellency President Kagame that was held in April 2008 to address the question of what institutions of higher learning could do to strengthen civil society in Rwanda.

Since then the handbook and conversation have been introduced to educational institutions, NGOs and government agencies and there has been considerable interest in it. But the project reached a new plateau last month due to the joint actions of The New Times and Radio 10. The newspaper decided to serialize the handbook each Saturday starting on November 26 and in collaboration, Radio 10 launched a Sunday talk show, Rwanda Speaks, to be aired each week on the subject of the essay published on Saturday.

Some of Rwanda’s most distinguished leaders have been appearing on the show each Sunday from 2 to 3 PM to discuss the new Rwanda as they see it in the present and their goals for the future. Very soon the handbook and the conversation will be featured on the website www.igihe.com.

Media participation makes the dream of a national conversation a reality. Our aim is to have organizations and institutions as well as families, friends and businesses take the time to discuss the new Rwanda and its future. By doing so, people will not only observe the progress that Rwanda has made in the past 17 years, but recognize that they are its citizens—and therefore responsible for charting the course for and meeting the challenges of the future.
For a free copy of the handbook, individuals can contact now thenewrwanda@gmail.com. If you need a quantity of the books, they will be on sale at A_Z and IKIREZI bookstores, and shortly at CARITAS.
Sondra Myers

Editor: On 9/11 we lost our innocence, we felt our vulnerability, and we went on. We engaged in two unwinnable wars that helped to cripple our economy and our confidence in ongoing upward mobility. Our politics has soured, descending into a relentless blame game, shamelessly cheered on and inspired by frighteningly brazen right-wing hawkers of hate. To them, civility, liberalism, taxation, regulation and the public good are terms of derision rather than core values.

Is this the American dream come true? Mistrust in government is at once American and un-American. We have had from our colonial beginnings an aversion to strong centralized power. We took care to integrate into our Constitution the separation of powers and the sharing of power by national, state and local authorities. At the same time, we have embraced a pluralistic democracy committed to “government of the people, by the people and for the people.” It’s not complicated to define what that means:  government is in the people’s hands and is for the people’s good.

Sometimes I wonder if we can save ourselves from ourselves, but then, let’s look ahead, as we must. We have seen a ray of hope in what is often considered the most troubled and troubling part of the world – the Middle East. The craving for democracy has now been articulated throughout the region by peaceful demonstrations – in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain – and most recently in Israel, which is a democracy, but one which is not answering the needs of all its citizens. We see citizens insisting on the right to be responsible for their own destinies and for the public good – a right that we enjoy -and at times forget. My hope is that we will take inspiration from the spirit of these actions and remember who we are.

SONDRA MYERS
SCRANTON

Nero fiddled; Rome burned. Are we following his playbook? Our Congress fiddled—at enormous cost to our nation. To date we’ve lost face, we’ve lost status and we’ve lost faith. Hope has been our long suit; we have to search to recover it—but recover it we must. This episode of our history shall pass but it will take much longer than it might have if we did what so many economists encouraged us to do: increase the stimulus –invest in our brain power and our crumbling infrastructure, provide much needed education and training and desperately needed jobs—and insist that the wealthiest among us take part in our recovery. There is arguably nothing more dangerous to our society than a growing number of disaffected, unemployed people coupled with a depressed economy. It is a recipe for disaster—there is the rioting and looting that we are seeing now in the UK —and as bad if not worse, the potential attraction of the angry crowds to a charismatic despot.

While pundits psychoanalyze our president, the stock market sinks and we stand by. We’ve got to do what citizens do. We are not bystanders; our country needs us more than ever—not just to respond to polls but to tell our leaders that we demand enlightened, effective action.

Tea Party members and others signed a pledge to refuse to raise taxes. They treat that pledge as sacred—even though its rationale is invalid and its consequences immoral. The Republican Party declares resolutely not to support the president and not to consider any revenue solution to the problem. What kind of society do they want? Are they speaking for their constituents? Do they believe that paying taxes is a socialist plot? Can we get over the fiddling?

As a good friend and enthusiastic supporter of Liz Randol, I was, of course, disappointed that she was not chosen as one of the Democratic candidates for the county commissioner’s position. But at the same time, as a citizen of this region, I was elated by the strong support—well deserved—that she received. My hope is that Liz will take it as a sign that she can be elected in the future. We need elected officials like her who are willing to use their intelligence and integrity to serve the people. We need her to move us forward into a more promising future.

We tend to demean the public sector—seeing it as more corrupt and less effective than other sectors, but—trust me—libertarians who proudly proclaim their contempt for government take for granted the wide range of freedoms they have, ignoring the fact that we are about as free as one gets in this world; and that government—of the people, by the people and for the people—is what got us into this enviable position. Millions, at this very moment, are risking their lives, crying out for the kind of liberties we enjoy in this democratic state. Those who eschew the luxuries of privacy, leisure and wealth to run for office deserve our praise and support.

Liz has the qualities that we need in our leaders—she is informed about the issues, passionate about justice and equity, and undaunted by the rigors and challenges of public jobs. And though she had considerably less name recognition and money than her competition, she got her message across. I applaud Liz for her courage in taking on a difficult battle and I applaud the citizens of this county who were inspired by her spirit and her voice. I am confident that, in whatever public role she chooses and is chosen to play in the future, she will, in the words of Spike Lee, “do the right thing” for us. Onward, Liz!

It is wondrous and mysterious that Egyptians overturned over 30 years of oppressive rule in less than three weeks. It appears to be spontaneous solidarity, but we know that the frustration was decades-old and the new media helped to give voice -collective voice – to that frustration.

Still it is nothing short of miraculous that Egyptians of all ages, secular and religious, affluent and poor, rose together – on message, “Get rid of Mubarak,” and succeeded. What comes next is up in the air, but who can doubt that this brilliant collective gesture will be followed by a rational strategy for democratic transformation?

What appears to be spontaneous solidarity is reminiscent of the Solidarity Movement in Poland in the 1980s, although that was based on a simply stated but profoundly wise philosophy, “Act as though you live in a free society.” This very civilized form of dissent succeeded and became the forerunner of an era of democratic revolution in other Eastern European countries.

Both revolutions demonstrated unity, nonviolence and civil ideas. Both were inclusive and did not resort to hate-mongering. One was low-tech and one was high-tech, but both were high minded and promised the cherished freedom that we Americans enjoy.

We were not as helpful as we might have been. But the Egyptians, as other democracy seekers have demonstrated before them, showed us that democratic revolution depends less on the company one keeps than on a nation’s own stalwart determination to be free and its readiness to seize the moment. By its actions Egypt has changed the world and in particular, has changed the fate of the Middle East, by infusing its neighbors with hope and courage.

Editor: Egyptians want tomorrow – a new day – and they want it now. They want to be citizens - in charge of their own destinies and the destiny of their nation. It was the American dream over 200 years ago – the reason for our deciding that we  needed our independence – that we were not willing to be a colony, subject to the authoritarian rule of a distant land. It was the reason we were willing to compromise – to align ourselves with others with whom, on the surface, we had little in common; ultimately it was the reason for our greatness.

The tens of thousands of Egyptians in Cairo’s Tahrir Square today are religious and secular, old and young, rural and urban, economically and culturally diverse; but they are at one in their passionate desire to be free to make their own decisions about who should rule and who should not; about lifting themselves from the indignity of powerlessness to the pride and power of civic and economic responsibility.

They are engaged in a noble venture – peaceful dissent.

Yes, it is an awkward moment for our country, which has supported the Mubarak regime for so many years. But as the world’s oldest democracy we cannot turn our backs on those who want the kind of power that we enjoy – responsibility for our public and personal destinies.

We as a nation will, I trust, move cautiously forward to support a peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy in Egypt – to support the hopes and dreams of our Egyptian brothers and sisters who want the privileges and the attendant pride and dignity that we enjoy as citizens.

It is important for them – and for us as well.

Editor: The Arizona debacle is a tragedy that touches all of us. A cross section of people engaged in a discussion of public affairs in a public space – the quintessential democratic experience - were shot down by a deranged young man whose anger was fueled by the hate-mongering rhetoric of the times, and who had easy access to a lethal weapon.

Is that what democracy is about? Is that what the Second Amendment had in mind? I don’t think so. We cannot bring back the dead but we can learn something from this tragedy.

The combination of elements – the deranged man, plus the vocabulary of violence used by political leaders and media people alike, plus the access of all to guns which in this case are “weapons of mass destruction” – is indeed a recipe for disaster.

We give lip service to national security, but we are a danger to ourselves if we do not accept the limits of our freedom. Those limits give true meaning to freedom because they permit us to enjoy our freedom without infringing on the freedoms of others.

Why is it that the right to bear arms is so sacred that even the potential for death by a deadly weapon in the hands of a deranged person is not obvious? Why is it that people like Jared Loughner, identified as unstable and hostile by neighbors, friends and teachers, can buy guns and ammunition with ease?

Civility in a pluralistic democratic society that prides itself on diversity, tolerance and opportunity is not a luxury – it is a necessity. The greatness of our nation is based on that diversity and our commitment to making it work. Making it work requires civility – respecting the rights of others.

If we continue to coarsen our behavior and our attitudes toward people we consider not like us, it will be the end of our greatness. The cost of such behavior, exemplified by the Arizona murders, should speak volumes to all of us.

Editor: Edgar Gorke and I (Your Opinion, Dec. 29 and Dec. 19, respectively) are not the first and will not be the last to have opposing positions about our nation, its principles and the meaning of words.

Progressive and perhaps even progress itself are negatives in his view; taxation is robbery and support for those in need is enslavement. And just where does he think we have gone as a nation over the past century – downhill? Notwithstanding the present economic crisis, largely attributable to a relaxing of regulations on financial conduct, we have experienced a period of incomparable innovation, discovery and prosperity in our time.

The rights that we enjoy are precious, but we are citizens, and that implies responsibilities as well as rights. The most important right we have is the right to be responsible for the public good. We elect our leaders and we can also vote them out of office; we can and do create voluntary organizations that along with government provide services. Our taxes support roads and bridges, schools, Social Security and Medicare, which strengthen and provide a better life for those who are capable and hardy and for those who are less well endowed in their capacities or good fortune.

Aren’t these the characteristics of our nation that have made it a haven for people who live in oppressive societies – where they are not citizens but subjects or even victims?

One of the most dangerous pathologies we have in this country is the widening gap between rich and poor. As we are the world’s leading democracy, it is only fair that we narrow that gap. It is not only a matter of civic obligation; it is a matter of national security – of protecting “the rights and freedoms of its citizens,” which Mr. Gorke agrees is what government is for.

SONDRA MYERS
SCRANTON

Find the original op-ed piece here.

Free to succeed

Editor: Sondra Myers states in her Dec. 19 letter: “Many of us abhor the continuation of tax relief to the very richest people in our nation and we are right to abhor it – it is unspeakably unfair if we truly believe in the promise of ‘liberty and justice for all.’”

Liberty to work our butts off to make as much as we can and justice to keep what we work our butts off to make. That’s what I learned in Scranton public schools long ago.

HAROLD BRINK
EAST ALLEN TWP., NORTHAMPTON COUNTY

Read more

Lack of progress by progressives

Editor: Sondra Myers doesn’t have a clue which principals our nation was founded on. In her Dec. 19 letter, she states “the bottom line of government is the greater good.” This is simply untrue.

The rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence are the unalienable ones: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing is mentioned in the declaration or in the Constitution about the “greater good” or any other progressive ideals. The purpose of our government as established is to protect the rights and freedoms of its citizens, nothing more.

She ridiculously implies that letting citizens keep their own property is somehow “unspeakably unfair if we believe in the promise of liberty and justice for all.”

Liberty for whom? Over the past 80 years, progressives have enslaved generations of citizens by subsidizing their poverty and keeping them comfortable in it. They have also convinced millions that it is impossible to succeed in America without some wasteful federal program getting in the way.

What justice? If I take another person’s property, I am a thief – even if I give it to charity or claim it is for the greater good. Yet the state can take all they want under threat of jail. And the more I make the more they can take.

The founders abhorred the idea of the federal government taxing the people directly. They knew it would give Washington too much power and lead to the corruption we see today.

Progressives from both parties have been running things for the past century and you can see where it has gotten us. It is time for “we the people” to return to the principles our nation was founded upon.

EDGAR GORKE
MOSCOW

Read more

Pursue principles in Preamble

Editor: Edgar Gorke, in his recent diatribe against Sondra Myers, reveals that he is supremely and totally clueless as to the principles upon which our nation was founded.

If his letter was not laced with so many incoherent statements it would be laughable instead of a perfect example of right-wing demagoguery.

One of his statements is that there is no mention in the Declaration or the Constitution about the “greater good.” Of course the Founding Fathers did not use the exact words, “greater good.” Instead, in the Preamble they spoke to the principle of “to promote the general Welfare.” They also addressed the idea of “establishing Justice” in the very same introductory statement.

Another incoherency is his claim that the “state can take all they want under threat of jail.” It seems as if he is completely unaware of the Takings clause of the Fifth Amendment which allows the state to take private property for public use with just compensation.

A third is the historically illiterate claim that “Progressives from both parties have been running things for the past century…” Once again he seems to have forgotten the three eras of conservative ascendancy over the same 100 years. For example, the 1920s when, after a succession of three conservative Republican presidents and Republican dominated Congresses, the U.S. entered the era that became known as the Great Depression. The other two eras, Reagan/Bush and “Dubya,” saw a stratospheric increase in our national debt. Not to forget the “progressive” Bush’s war of choice in Iraq.

It would be a frightful nightmare should “we the people” ever return our country to Gorke’s misguided, un-American principles.

A better idea would be to return our nation, as Ms. Myers suggests, to the six basic principles as expressed in the Preamble

GIRARD HISTED
ARCHBALD

Read more

Letter reveals cluelessness

Editor: In his Dec. 29 letter rebutting Sondra Myers as having no clue which principles our nation was founded on, Edgar Gorke then goes on to prove that it is actually he who hasn’t a clue of the ideals and principles that imbued our founding fathers and which underlie the founding of this nation.

He gets one thing right – he correctly attributes the phrase “common good” to the earlier Declaration of Independence, where the founders decry King George III, saying “He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.”

But then Gorke obtusely states that “Progressives from both parties have been running things for the past century and you can see where it has gotten us.” As if . . . what? That progressives have somehow ruined this nation’s economy by keeping us in a state of perpetual war for over 10 years now, or by letting the financial industry run absolutely amok, unregulated, and in effect, imposing a kind of “economic dictatorship” upon the “greater good” by forcing the commonwealth to pay for its naked greed and pursuit of untrammeled profit?

Ultimately, Gorke fails to recognize that the founders’ most basic principles were in fact profoundly progressive (or “liberal”), in that they believed in the basic equality of every man, and disdained the elitist favor of conservative economic policies which, since Ronald Reagan’s administration, have relegated the phrase “common good” to that of a cruel and cynical joke.

Our founders would be outraged at the conservative psychobabble that has attempted to redefine corruption, avarice, and an utter lack of compassion as some kind of noble ideals where capitalism without morality is the best that we have to offer.

This, in fact, was the essence of Myers’ original letter. She got it completely correct.

KARL LOGAN
AUBURN, N.Y.

Read more

Editor: Compromise is a highly charged word. Is it the essence of reason and the key to democracy – or is it a sellout of values – a capitulation? In fact we use the word both ways.

The art of compromise – the willingness to forgo some of what you believe in for the good of the whole – is the lifeblood of our pluralistic democracy. The bottom line in government is the public good. President Obama isn’t compromising with a party whose goal is to do him in because he is selling out to them, but because he is making the best of what could be a disastrous injustice to the American people.

As we thrash around, laying blame, calling names and threatening him with no support and no second term, let’s pause. Many of us abhor the continuation of tax relief to the very richest people in our nation and we are right to abhor it – it is unspeakably unfair if we truly believe in the promise of “liberty and justice for all.”

Is Obama a traitor and a cynic for agreeing to a compromise that includes those breaks for the rich? Not really; he is the kind of leader we need; not an ideologue but rather an idealist and a pragmatist – in the image of our founders.

Those men, in taking on the task of creating a democratic nation, did not address the subject of abolishing slavery because they knew that it would doom to failure their heroic project.

Let’s remember our founders, their vices as well as their virtues, and use similar standards to judge our president. Let’s pursue progress, though the course may be circuitous and packed with ironies.

Democracy is a messy business, but it’s our business – and who among us would prefer the tidiness of a closed society?

SONDRA MYERS
SCRANTON