American independence, coronavirus, and racial justice

 

Other items in today’s column include:
*Political bytes
*Recommended reading

By Donald H. Harrison

SAN DIEGO — When we talk about the Declaration of Independence and the freedom it envisioned for the people of the United States, our conversations are likely to turn to the two great issues facing our country today: the coronavirus pandemic and the racial justice movement.

When our businesses are closed down in order to protect public health; when our children are required to stay home instead of in school; when we are told to physically distance ourselves from others, and to wear face masks, it doesn’t feel much like freedom.

And yet these mandates are perfectly appropriate. Through the decision making of our elected representatives, our society has the right and the obligation to protect itself from mass death and illness. As we’ve seen with the recent spikes in coronavirus cases and deaths, ignoring these public health rules causes harm not only to those who flout them but potentially to everyone who comes into contact with the rule defiers.

The battle against the coronavirus has been likened to a war into which all citizens may be drafted, like it or not. Why? In times of national emergency — which the coronavirus pandemic surely is — the rights of one individual must necessarily be subordinated to the rights of all the individuals.

One individual may not want to wear a face mask, considering that to be an imposition on his or her freedom. But spreading the virus to others is an even more serious and potentially deadly imposition on the rights of others. It’s a matter of common sense that a person’s rights should be inviolate when he or she isn’t causing hurt to others. But there is never a “right” to harm another person. There may be a defense for why it was necessary, but there never is a right.

The movement for social justice — reignited May 25th by the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer — has prompted within our country a necessary reexamination not only of our system of justice, but also of the underlying assumptions that have guided the enactment and enforcement of a variety of laws. To what degree were various laws put on the books to enforce a system of racial discrimination against non-Whites? What assumptions have been built into our language that perhaps on an unconscious level reinforce discrimination? Why are negative things — for example, “blackmail,” “black-hearted,” “blackened reputations” — associated with the color Black? Why are good things — “white knight,” “fleece as white as snow,” — associated with the color White? From the earliest age, are we being taught that White is good, Black is bad?

I take heart that once we realize our shortcomings, we have the freedom and the liberty to go about correcting them. I sincerely believe we are in that process now, and that our world will be better for the self-examination.

My email has brought to me the thoughts of other members of our community about American Independence Day. For example, Rabbi Josh Dorsch of Tifereth Israel Synagogue messaged: “As we prepare to enter Shabbat and celebrate the 4th of July, I have been thinking a lot about the idea of independence. One of the most iconic phrases from the Declaration of Independence, passed 244 years ago, guarantees us all the right to “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” I feel tremendously happy to live in the “land of the free and the home of the brave.” We live in a time and a place where as a Jew, I have been granted more rights and freedom than at any point or in any place in the history of the world. This Independence Day, I have a lot to be thankful for. Yet given the realities of the world around us, it is important to acknowledge that is not the case for everyone. The murder of George Floyd and so many instances of injustice have shed light on the fact that these unalienable rights, are not universally granted to everyone.”

*

Political bytes

*Cory Briggs, a candidate for San Diego City Attorney, says much of the workload of the City Attorney’s office should be turned over to the San Diego County District Attorney’s office, at a cost savings to the City of San Diego. “San Diegans already pay taxes to support the district attorney’s work. There is no good reason to pay twice. My proposal would free up at least $15 million a year for libraries, parks and other community services and amenities without compromising public safety.” However, his plan was derided by Dan Rottenstreich, an aide to incumbent City Attorney Mara Elliot, who said: “The announcement was a desperate effort to divert attention from his failing campaign for City Attorney by pretending the office is unnecessary and he never wanted it in the first place. Briggs took just 23.3 percent of the vote in the March primary, while first-term City Attorney Mara W. Elliott won 67.9 percent. Since then he was worked to prevent voters from ever again choosing a City Attorney, first by changing what has been an elected position for 89 years into a City Council-appointed position, and now by turning over its prosecutorial functions to County District Attorney Summer Stephan. As a result, the city would lose its only independent official who acts as a check on mayoral and council power and is accountable solely to the public, not the politicians.”

*

Recommended reading

*Club Z, the Zionist Youth Movement, has promulgated a Jewish Student Bill of Rights to protect their fellow Jews from anti-Semitism in the schools.

*Ken Stone of Times of San Diego reports an unidentified man has been driving around with a Nazi banner filling the back window of his vehicle.

*
Donald H. Harrison is editor of San Diego Jewish World. He may be contacted via donald.harrison@sdjewishworld.com. This column is dedicated to the memory of my father, Martin B. Harrison, whose 110th birthday falls on July 4th.