Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsOpinion

Whispers That Destroy Nations

Urging people to spy on their neighbors can cause a deadly cancer.

Commentary

February 22, 2005|Mark Kurlansky, Mark Kurlansky's most recent book, "1968: The Year That Rocked the World," has been published in paperback by Random House.

I was sitting on a bench on a dimly lighted subway platform, waiting for the B train, when the announcement came. It was startling, first of all because the words were clear -- the first time I had ever been able to identify a syllable muttered through the PA system of the New York City subways.

The mysteriously discernible message asked travelers to be alert and report any "suspicious" person or behavior. A gray-haired woman next to me unleashed an expletive in a delivery worthy of a New Yorker. I smiled my approval. The other six people waiting for the train inched down the platform uncomfortably, and it occurred to me that the outspoken woman and I were being regarded as suspicious.

Advertisement

Similar announcements are made at train stations and airports and written on posters across the country. Right after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, we were supposed to be on the lookout for terrorists. But rapidly the U.S. government has turned us into the arbitrators of a more general condition known as "suspiciousness." This is problematic. Remember how, just after the attacks, Sikhs in this country were singled out by angry, frightened citizens as suspicious because they wore turbans, as did Afghanistan's Taliban rulers?

It is a tragic waste of historical experience that no one today wants to study the fall of communism. Communism was not defeated by the Cold War; it collapsed incrementally from hundreds of bad decisions. And one of those decisions was setting neighbor against neighbor, watching for suspicious activity.

After the Russian Revolution in 1917, with half the world plotting to overthrow the new Soviet government, Soviet security asked the people to be on the lookout for conspirators. Then, as now, there were probably some good reasons to be vigilant. But those officials also used an unnecessarily vague term -- "counterrevolutionary activity." The initial implication was there were people who were working with foreigners to overthrow the revolution. But quickly "counterrevolutionary" became anything that was not in lock step with the government. The government wanted everyone reporting on everyone, with the government deciding how to evaluate the information. Casual social encounters, play dates between children, conversations on banal subjects were reported and filed.

Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|