#206 – Dick Bernard: Reflecting on the American Flag

/in , , , , /by

Monday of this week I delivered a 500 page family history to the printer. The history is of my Dad’s French-Canadian family, in North America since the early 1600s. That’s a lot of history. The 500 pages can only be a summary.
The last photo I selected and inserted was the one below, the dedication of a flagpole at the Apartment Community of Our Lady of the Snows in Belleville IL. The dedication was Memorial Day, 1998, six months after my Dad died. The flagpole was donated by we siblings to honor the memory of our Dad, Henry L. Bernard, and his brother Frank Bernard, who went down with the USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor, Dec. 7, 1941. The first flag hoisted up the flagpole – the flag pictured – had 48 stars. It had draped the casket of Dad’s Dad, another Henry, in 1957. Grandpa had served in the Spanish-American War in the Philippines 1898-99.

At Our Lady of the Snows, Belleville IL, Memorial Day, 1998


I have often seen the flag used as we used it in 1998: to remember somebody’s service to country. Whether the cause served was just or unjust (a very legitimate matter of debate), the question of service is less debatable.
In more recent years, particularly post 9-11-01, there has been (in my opinion) a reprehensible turn in the business of “Flag” as a litmus test of “Patriotism”. The Flag has become a weapon to be brandished against those with a different point of view. In the recent series, the “Story of US” as portrayed on the History Channel, I saw General Tommy Franks talking about the three F’s as basic American values: Family, Faith and Flag. The portrayal, and choice of portrayer – Franks – turned me off. It was definitely an “us vs them” portrayal; the primacy of military might, viewed through the flag.
Like it or not, military is part of every one of our family’s lives. I’ve been military myself. I didn’t go in to set about killing someone from somewhere else, or being killed, but that could have been my fate. I went in because I knew I’d have to go sometime (the Draft), and best to get it over with. Luckily, my decision to join when I did made me a Vietnam era veteran, when service in Vietnam was a coveted assignment…. Not all were so fortunate.
In the previously mentioned history, I noted that all of my male ancestors who came to Nouvelle France (Quebec) were in one way or another military people. They had other skills, yes, but what got them on the boat from France to to-be Canada was mostly related to military – to secure the new territory for France, and then protect it from intruders.
One of my first ancestors in what is now the Twin Cities joined the military unit whose job was to chase the Indians back across the Missouri River in 1863. He was the first ancestor to visit what is now North Dakota. His service record is about the only history I have of him. Luckily his unit was not involved in any massacre of the Indians, but nonetheless, he was part of the force that took the Indians land…and gave my ancestors theirs.
I’m sure the flag was involved there, too.
This little writing won’t dispose of the flag issue, or of the issues relating to War and Peace. At the same time, I think all sides need to think this issue through.
I close with a memory of a photo I took in a farmyard in Finland in June, 2003. We were on a cruise of the Baltic countries, a few days later we were in St. Petersburg, Russia, a month after George W. Bush had been there. This was not long after the war on Iraq commenced. One of the people on the cruise seemed a particularly belligerent America Firster. We were touring a Finnish farm, and the guy was there, wearing his American Flag jacket. The facial expression of the Finnish girl in the background, in context with what I saw before that photo, is priceless.

Finnish Farmyard, June, 2003


Have a good fourth of July

#205 – Dick Bernard: The Looming Twin Cities Nurses Strike: Apparently Settled

/in , /by

Overnight came a bulletin from the Minnesota Nurses Association, announcing a tentative agreement between Twin Cities Nurses and the Hospitals which employ them. The vote is next week, on the same day the strike was to begin. It is very good news, for everyone involved.
Having spent a long career as a teachers union representative in a state with the right to strike, my career included plenty of time dealing with, especially, ‘deaths door’ and extremely tense mediations to hopefully settle a contract in lieu of a strike, I “know the drill” – the public posturing, the reality faced by both the union and the management as they get closer to a strike. What the public has to chew on is usually “the tip of the iceberg”.
Among many items to deal with, both sides know well the multiple grim realities of walkouts. I know the Minnesota Nurses Association is a first-class union. The management team, whoever it was, knew it was time to settle, and did, to their credit as well. Oftimes, people on one side or the other get stuck in ideological cement, and the results are not pretty.
Until I read the news release, I really wasn’t positive which hospitals were facing a possible strike. Turned out one of them was Park Nicollet Methodist, which is the place I visited the patient on Wednesday (recounted towards the end of yesterday’s blog post . There was not a single indication, there, that labor and management were bracing for a work stoppage in a conflict over contract terms.
I would suspect that the tension is not over, nor will it be over after the expected ratification of terms and conditions next week. Both sides will be faced with ongoing hard work and difficult decisions.
Nonetheless, congratulations are in order!

#204 – Dick Bernard: The "War Parties"?

/in , , , /by

A recent e-mail conversation on my own e-list has been focusing on the general question: “poll [the others on the list] and see which branch of the War Party they belong to: the Republicans or Democrats…?”
So, I asked the question, and got a range of responses.
If only things were so simple as labeling a group and then dismissing everyone in the group because of the label stuck to it….
Since I opened shop on this blog in March, 2009, I’ve identified myself as a “moderate pragmatic Democrat”. So, what does this mean in my own real world?
Tuesday night I attended – and volunteered at – a very successful summer picnic for our local Senate legislative district. It was a gathering for Democrats, and there were several hundred of us there. Every major candidate for Minnesota state and local offices showed up at the picnic and spoke. Those who found themselves scheduled in two or three or more places at once (there were a couple) sent others to represent them. These candidates are impressive people, ready to do the adult work that governing our complex society demands.
You would have seen me around the picnic. I stood out for a couple of reasons: I was wearing my DFL Senior Caucus t-shirt (I’m active in that recognized Democratic Party caucus); and I was also wearing my Veterans for Peace cap (I’m a member of that group as well), on which is affixed a button saying I “vote in honor of a veteran“, in my case, “my vote honors” Uncle Frank Bernard, who went down with the USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor. At the Secretary of State’s website I have written tributes to two WWII veterans, Marvin Campbell and Lynn Elling.
But in my case, it would be pretty hard to typecast me (and I think I’m a pretty typical person, Democrat, Republican or otherwise.) I’m something of a typical Democrat, I guess.
I would never have learned about Veterans for Peace, had I not been among the 6% of the American public in October, 2001, who challenged our going to war against Afghanistan (I could see no good coming out of the bombing, and I still can’t.) Yes, I was part of only 6%…it was a very, very lonely time.
Yes, most Democratic Representatives in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives supported this War, probably because they were like most people back then. Their decision, while I think it was foolish, was born out of personal conviction that it was the right thing to do at the time. In addition, it was likely a political “death wish” to vote against War then…and even now…people aren’t very well educated for Peace.
Tuesday night, none of the speakers focused on, or even mentioned to my recollection, things like “war”, “terrorists”, the like. Mostly they focused on concerns that ordinary people have today: jobs, education, environment, health care. Things like that horrible catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico tend to divert attention from other issues…and there are a lot of other issues in addition to the War issue.
The next afternoon I visited with a friend who’s been hospitalized a long time, about to be moved to an extended care home for hoped for rehabilitation. While I was there, his sons came in, and talk got around to Peace issues – Verlyn is an old-school peace activist.
One son suggested that the risk of death for American soldiers in Afghanistan is less than getting killed in Washington D.C. and he was probably right. The other said today’s kids don’t have to risk being drafted, and they are constantly entertained, and not easily made to be interested in stuff like killing fields in far away places. Neither son was raising comments to ‘bait’ anyone; they were simply observations, which anti-War folks dismiss at peril. They gave me another insight about justifying war these days. If you can forget about collateral damage: never-ending psychological consequences of being in war, destruction of other peoples, destruction of our own economy, destruction of a sense of global good-will, war can be justified as relatively cheap and even safe. Plus, it is a good source of jobs. The anti-War movements marketing pitch needs to be very seriously looked at. Preaching to the choir is not good enough.
The War issue is, I would suggest, a very, very complicated issue…there are few around now who actively promote War, and similarly very few who think War is a useful way to resolve problems or assure our future.
But that picnic on Tuesday was full of people like myself, who either are veterans themselves, or know people in their own family or other circles who have served in the military.
I reject the notion that the Democratic Party is simply a version of the “War Party”.
The Republicans and everyone else can speak for themselves.
Posts for June 25 and June 27 directly relate to this topic.