You Might be a Terrorist if...

When I wake up in the morning and take a deep breath of air, I can always look forward to a giant, steaming pile of governmental ambiguity to greet me. The most recent document released from the Department of Homeland Security concerning domestic terrorism is, for lack of better words, a giant pile of politicking, radical philosophical bull crap. The title, in and of itself, is enough to make any sensible person, regardless of political affiliation, cringe as the government, not the People, draw political lines amongst the populous: Rightwing Extremism:
Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.

This really doesn't have to do with anything current associated with my internship, but it has a lot to do with public administration. It doesn't affect the way we plan streets, sewers, water treatment facilities, parks, etc. but it is a stunning looking into the rhetoric and beliefs of one very influential government agency. I really must be sadistic, because I willingly read this literature (and I use the term literature lightly, as it borders more on the line of propaganda) to understand what the government is doing. One of the very first lines brings a great deal of clarity into their 'findings':

"The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment."

Interesting, so now we are basing heightened levels of national security against individuals of political leaning due to the mere possibility that issues concerning abortion, immigration, rising taxes, and the election of the first black president may cause recruitment into so-called radical hate groups? In my experience as a human being, creating broad accusatory statements and generalizations doesn't always bode well within the population. Lest we forget that these statements are concerning American citizens; we are not talking about foreign terrorists who are known to be in the country, but we are speculating on the recruitment activities of Freemen and other anti-governmental groups living out of trailers in Montana and Wyoming, including the creation of new 'hate' groups due to a heightened economic and political environments.

Are you concerned? Do you find this slightly disturbing? Or are you to the point where you just don't care anymore? It's interesting to note that today, being the dreaded Tax Day, that there are tens of thousands of Americans spread throughout the United States protesting, quite angrily, the steady increase and expansion of governmental powers and spending. It's not only 'rightwing radicals' but people of all political ideologies concerned about the course of government. In my opinion, we don't need 'rightwing radical groups' to see that government is obviously overstepping their boundaries, and they are continually approaching the American people for increased authority to garner more power into their coffers.

I feel that government has become out-of-touch with the American people. Many argue that government as been oblivious to the perils of the ordinary man for many years, while others will argue that the current Administration is to blame. I blame many years of governmental oppression coupled with the lazier-faire political 'activism' of the American people. Why is it that Americans only become concerned with their liberties when they are at the brink of losing them? Very few Americans, and politicians at that, understand that the Constitution was constructed on a foundation of distrust in government. We came from the ashes of tyranny and monarchy; the great American Experiment which fueled revolutions throughout the world and interjected millions with the spirit of self. However, government has progressively turned from its position of provider into the position of ruler. Politicians from both sides of the political fence are seeking increased authority and power to push America and its people into a direction they feel is correct. All presidential administrations have been guilty of this, but this piece of rhetorical political garbage excreted from the Department of Homeland Security has overstepped its bounds. What Liberals bemoaned Bush for his rhetoric of "if you're not with us, you're against us" is no different if you seek to label individuals who organize and protest against hot-button, left-wing political issues (i.e. same-sex marriage, abortion, illegal immigration) potential domestic terrorists. The blinding fog of political partyism is literally destroying America, as our government continually draws battles lines with every changing presidential administration between the American people.

Now, as for public administrators this gives us a clear insight into the importance of political neutrality. There is an entire argument to be had over moral obligations and remaining politically neutral, and it may be very easy to point out moral problems with this DHS document. However, imagine if (and this is a big if) the DHS remained politically neutral concerning the possibility of American grown, politically motivated domestic terrorism? We wouldn't be seeing a report simply about the 'right', but we would be seeing a broad report outlining how the current economic and political climates as a literal breeding ground of political discontent amongst all political parties. It appears that our government officials need a little refresher into the history and challenges of the American people, as many great leaders of the past understood the spirit of dissent:

"An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I consider to be the minimum guarantee of the First Amendment." Justice Hugo L. Black: (1886-1971) US Supreme Court Justice.

"The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

"The right to criticize: the right to hold unpopular beliefs; the right to protest; the right of independent thought. The exercise of these rights should not cost one single American citizen his reputation or his right to a livelihood... Otherwise none of us could call our souls our own." Margaret Chase Smith Biography -United States Senator from Maine (1897-1995).

The climate public administrators will have to operate is highly politicized and controversial. How can we operate in such an environment and still rightly uphold our values and serve the public? I think it is quite simple: allegiance to Nation and People will always yield ripe fruits when compared to the bitterness and discontent of political parties.