John F. left me a voicemail late on Friday. He's an Iowa United Nations Association Board Member also going to COP21. I was in New Orleans for the annual National Council for the Social Studies Conference. He referred to events in Paris that may have consequences for our trip. I had no idea what he was talking about but stopped dead in my tracks in the middle of the street to try and make sense of what he was saying. The news had not made it into the conference center, but it quickly became clear that terrorists had attacked. The next morning, Greg and I modified our presentation on the global citizen and human rights to include a discussion of the events. We engaged with participants in a lively and meaningful debate about human rights and global perspectives as teaching strategies.
Kat sent me an email saying she and Heather feared for my safety and that I should not go. John and I also talked about how the attacks would affect our trip. Several scenarios are possible: the University expresses concern about liability issues; CGRER expresses concern about our safety; each of us individually concludes the risks outweigh any benefits; COP21 is downsized; other attacks occur between now and the start of the conference. What we (each) ultimately decide will become apparent in the next week or so.
That John and I (and most likely many others) turned our thoughts to COP21 pretty quickly after hearing about the events seems, to some, callous. P.J. Gladnick, writing on the mrc NewsBusters website, lambasts Brian Williams for asking the same question of Sam Champion of the Weather Channel who is in Paris. Gladnick ends his short piece with: Gee, Brian. Perhaps people in both Paris as well as most of the rest of the world are a bit more worried about terrorism than climate summit messaging. However, Politico.eu posted a day after the attacks that the climate summit is still on: “The feeling is we should go on with business as usual, because you can’t give in to these terrorists,” a European diplomat said Saturday, adding that his prime minister will attend. “My feeling is heads of state will still go, unless they absolutely cannot.”
During our presentation, Greg noted that terrorists target everyday places in order to foment fear. A football stadium and a restaurant and a concert hall are neither political nor financial nerve centers. They are social and cultural polestars. People are enjoying themselves and have dropped their guard. Attacking such places arouses fear. People become wary. The attacker wins as we bunker down. But I think of the resilient people who still go out and live their lives despite the constant threat of (car) bombings in World War 2 up until today in Paris, in Beirut, Lebanon, and at Garissa University in Kenya. On my FB page, Eric, a friend who lives in Paris, noted, the bakery was open on Saturday morning, business as usual. Other posts talked about love conquering hate and not letting fear dictate immediate reactions and subsequent actions.
Eric Hoffer (an American moral and social philosopher) said: You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the means he uses. Dale Carnegie (an American moral and social philosopher) said: Inaction breeds doubt and fear. Action breeds confidence and courage. If you want to conquer fear, do not sit home and think about it. Go out and get busy. And FDR said: The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
The reactions to the Paris and Beirut and Garissa attacks need to go through the phases of fear, hate, disgust, and an overwhelming desire to take revenge. The actions that follow should not ignore the need for an appropriate response, though this may be of a political, financial, and/or military form. For ordinary people like me (and all those during the London Blitz and Nazi occupation), we go about our business and address climate change and meet deadlines at work. Most importantly, we walk resolutely to that restaurant around the corner for a meal, the grocery store for milk, the metro for a quick ride to the theater, and the park to pic nick with friends, weather permitting.
Kat sent me an email saying she and Heather feared for my safety and that I should not go. John and I also talked about how the attacks would affect our trip. Several scenarios are possible: the University expresses concern about liability issues; CGRER expresses concern about our safety; each of us individually concludes the risks outweigh any benefits; COP21 is downsized; other attacks occur between now and the start of the conference. What we (each) ultimately decide will become apparent in the next week or so.
That John and I (and most likely many others) turned our thoughts to COP21 pretty quickly after hearing about the events seems, to some, callous. P.J. Gladnick, writing on the mrc NewsBusters website, lambasts Brian Williams for asking the same question of Sam Champion of the Weather Channel who is in Paris. Gladnick ends his short piece with: Gee, Brian. Perhaps people in both Paris as well as most of the rest of the world are a bit more worried about terrorism than climate summit messaging. However, Politico.eu posted a day after the attacks that the climate summit is still on: “The feeling is we should go on with business as usual, because you can’t give in to these terrorists,” a European diplomat said Saturday, adding that his prime minister will attend. “My feeling is heads of state will still go, unless they absolutely cannot.”
During our presentation, Greg noted that terrorists target everyday places in order to foment fear. A football stadium and a restaurant and a concert hall are neither political nor financial nerve centers. They are social and cultural polestars. People are enjoying themselves and have dropped their guard. Attacking such places arouses fear. People become wary. The attacker wins as we bunker down. But I think of the resilient people who still go out and live their lives despite the constant threat of (car) bombings in World War 2 up until today in Paris, in Beirut, Lebanon, and at Garissa University in Kenya. On my FB page, Eric, a friend who lives in Paris, noted, the bakery was open on Saturday morning, business as usual. Other posts talked about love conquering hate and not letting fear dictate immediate reactions and subsequent actions.
Eric Hoffer (an American moral and social philosopher) said: You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the means he uses. Dale Carnegie (an American moral and social philosopher) said: Inaction breeds doubt and fear. Action breeds confidence and courage. If you want to conquer fear, do not sit home and think about it. Go out and get busy. And FDR said: The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
The reactions to the Paris and Beirut and Garissa attacks need to go through the phases of fear, hate, disgust, and an overwhelming desire to take revenge. The actions that follow should not ignore the need for an appropriate response, though this may be of a political, financial, and/or military form. For ordinary people like me (and all those during the London Blitz and Nazi occupation), we go about our business and address climate change and meet deadlines at work. Most importantly, we walk resolutely to that restaurant around the corner for a meal, the grocery store for milk, the metro for a quick ride to the theater, and the park to pic nick with friends, weather permitting.