Every action must have an equal and opposite reaction. Haiti’s worst earthquake in over 200 years has taken the lives of tens of thousands and threatens millions more in the aftermath. Out of the darkness of the rubble there must come light.

The forces of nature have devastated the people of Haiti. It is up to us to react and respond.

As Haiti suffers its worst earthquake in over two centuries, it brings out the best in America. Thousands of people are flying into action – from relief workers to the military, from our current President to former ones, from celebrities to average citizens – seeking ways to help.

In disasters such as these there are several waves of activity. There is first the shock and grief and horrid loss of life. There is a search and rescue phase. Then there is the aftermath, the struggle to meet basic human needs amidst the devastation of infrastructure and supply methods. This second phase is critical to avoid the massive loss of life subsequent to the initial catastrophe.

One organization poised to make a difference – with a very strong presence on the ground in Haiti – is the Pan American Development Foundation. My advocacy communications agency, Interlex, develops campaigns for the PADF – a DC-based non-profit organization affiliated with the Organization of American States – which provides economic development, human rights and disaster relief throughout the Caribbean and Latin America. The PADF has over 150 staff members on the ground in Haiti. They’ve been in the midst of this tragedy since before it began. Additionally, the PADF’s field team in the Dominican Republic piled into trucks and drove overnight towards the Haitian capital to assist.

Given the logistics, the best way most Americans can share their generosity is via monetary donations, which can be made safely via the PADF at PanAmericanRelief.org or by calling toll-free at (877) 572-4484. Donations are tax deductible as the PADF is a 501 (c)(3) organization. Additionally, the PADF is able to work with corporations wishing to donate bulk supplies or services. Partners that have already stepped up to the table include: Chevron, Royal Caribbean, Moneygram, and MTV.

PADF is utilizing all funds and resources to provide food, water and shelter to Haiti’s people. Afterwards, it will also be a vital player in the rebuilding process, so all contributions will be put to good use in responding to Haiti’s crisis.

One of the PADF’s ongoing spokespeople for efforts to improve life in Haiti is Haitian actor Jimmy Jean Louis, co-star of NBC’s “Heroes.” Jimmy Jean, who also founded the non-profit Hollywood Unites for Haiti, is appearing in the PADF’s TV, radio, print and online PSA’s to mobilize the American public behind the relief effort. He is also planning to travel to Haiti to help search for his own family members. Jimmy told CNN: “I don’t think people have any idea how terrible this is because of the circumstances on the ground in Haiti and the lack of the infrastructure. There are no roads, and it is going to be extremely difficult for help to reach people.”

Despite his personal ordeal, Jimmy Jean Louis has made himself available to help rally American support around this cause, working to quickly shoot and record TV and radio PSA’s before heading home.

That said, in such times an effective reaction and response requires not only generosity but expertise to successfully deliver aid and save lives. As Americans search for ways to help respond to this catastrophic force of nature that has crushed the Haitian people, there may seem to be a glut of options for contributing support. The PADF is uniquely positioned as one of those options due to their hands-on experience in Haiti.

Michael Zamba, the PADF’s Senior Director of Communications, told me: “Natural disaster response is one of our three core competencies. In Haiti 18 months ago we reacted to two hurricanes and two tropical storms, helping hundreds of thousands of people. We have been in Haiti for 30 years. We are not just parachuting in; we already have a whole organization there. We are not hitting the ground running. We are already on the ground.”

America can help Haiti rise up from the rubble, climb out of the darkness into the light. Working together, contributing our support to proven organizations like the PADF, we can respond swiftly and strongly in a time of great human need. Overwhelming circumstances must be met with equally overwhelming power. Today, we can become a force of nature ourselves and help heal Haiti.

Rudy Ruiz has been hailed as a cultural visionary. A published author and multicultural advocate, Ruiz is an acclaimed multicultural communications entrepreneur. He founded Red Brown and Blue as well as Interlex, one of the nation’s leading advocacy marketing agencies ranked by Ad Age as one of the Top US Agencies across all disciplines. Prior to that, Ruiz earned his BA in Government at Harvard College and his Masters in Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School.

“People fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities — their race, their tribe, and perhaps most powerfully their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines. Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint — no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of one’s own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith — for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.”

His words remind me of one of my favorite movie lines of all time, when Robert DeNiro tells Mickey Roarke in Angel Heart: “They say there’s just enough religion in the world to make men hate one another, but not enough to make them love.”

While America’s Constitution calls for a separation of church and state and we have no official religion, preventing us from ever becoming a theocracy like those we have often dealt with in the Middle East, it is no secret we are largely a Christian nation. As Christians, should we not look to the teachings of Jesus Christ for guidance on our approach to attaining peace? After all he is often referred to as the “Prince of Peace.”

This is the first time I quote scripture, but as long as we’re on the subject of how religion drives conflict, why not? According to the New Testament, Jesus Christ once said during his Sermon on the Plain:

“Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.”
—Luke 6:27-31. NIV

So that’s what Obama was talking about. Yet, that’s not what America has ever done. After the towers fell in New York City on September 11th, we made a choice. Peace was not the choice. Perhaps only one of our cheeks is bloody, or perhaps rather than let another strike the flipside of our face, we chose to gouge it out ourselves. And when the President spoke at West Point recently to announce our expansion of the war in Afghanistan, again, peace was not the choice.

The Presidents’ Nobel speech closed with: “We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that — for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.”

Frankly, as war rages on in the regions where it always had, between Christians and Muslims and Jews as it has for over two thousand years, I’m not sold on our progress when it comes to peace. I believe that it is a story yet to be told. But I do agree that it is our challenge and that at some point we must stop “striving” and start “doing.”

Why do we even pretend or attempt to seek out peace if it seems so hard to reach? Why bother, when we seem to love conflict and drama so much? When even our own president acknowledged upon receipt of the highest peace honor offered in our world that: “War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease — the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.”

Perhaps, just like our spiritual instincts, it’s because something inside us tells us that while it’s not what we’re doing, it’s what we ought to be doing. Something intangible and invisible tells us that peace is good and that peace is better. Peace is safe and warm and happy. At times like these holidays, we often see, hear and even profess wishes of joy and peace to all. But do we mean it? We should.

Only by laying down our arms and seeking that common ground in our diverse faiths that Obama alluded to, will we ever achieve some semblance of peace on Earth. Only through tolerance, and each religion and its leaders desisting from convincing their flocks that theirs is the only path to enlightenment and the afterlife, might we attain mutual respect and empathy, supporting each other’s culturally unique pursuits of the divine rather than undermining those pursuits and descending into the hell of war.

Would it be worth it? Of course, it would. Peace on earth would free us to end suffering and elevate ourselves to a higher iteration of ourselves, an evolution. We could truly create a shared paradise here on this little planet, a preview of heaven. If only we could stop killing each other over religious differences and realize that what we agree upon is greater: that God wants humanity to live up to its potential and the only way to do it is to stop fighting and start working together.

After all, as my 5-year old son pointed out to me when he heard me discussing this topic: “God wants peace.”

Let’s start making it today.

Rudy Ruiz has been hailed as a cultural visionary. A published author and multicultural advocate, Ruiz is an acclaimed multicultural communications entrepreneur. He founded Red Brown and Blue as well as Interlex, one of the nation’s leading advocacy marketing agencies ranked by Ad Age as one of the Top US Agencies across all disciplines. Prior to that, Ruiz earned his BA in Government at Harvard College and his Masters in Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School.

Yes it’s true that unless you have experienced the exact same events, exact same reactions, and exact same outcomes, you can’t truly understand exactly how somebody feels. However, one of human beings’ greatest accomplishments is the ability to empathize. It doesn’t take the exact same experiences to empathize with someone. Not everybody has genial intentions all the time, but simply having a different background does not necessarily make a person insensitive to others’ concerns.

During times of social change, it takes the compassion, empathy, and effort of people of the majority to help promote change for those in the minority. Regardless of their motives, whether they are for the greater good or self-serving, without the support of those in power, change would occur much more slowly, if at all. Martin Luther King, Jr. was partly successful because he did not only propagate social equality to the disenfranchised, but to all. I realize that, had it not been for the spilled blood and lives of many White people during the 1860’s I might not have the ability to lead a free life today.

I have participated in various movements, volunteered for years with youth, and tried to help them develop skills to cope with poverty, abuse, and other forms of injustice so that they might have a better chance to develop and obtain goals they might not otherwise have. Recently, I signed the marriage boycott to show my support of equal rights for the LGBT community. Although I don’t know what it feels like to have the exact same struggles, but I can empathize.

Last week a coworker and friend invited me out before I returned to America after several months working in Chile. We went to a small restaurant and discussed differences between the USA and Chile covering everything from governmental and work-related politics to geographical and cultural differences. We talked about how difficult it can be to manage the cost of living in Chile, specifically Santiago, where the cost of living is inflated. The typical workday starts at 9:00 AM, ends at 7:00 PM, and the wages are rarely sufficient to support oneself.  At that part of the conversation she said something that truly resonated with me. “Now you can forget about here.”

I asked her what she meant and why she said that. I explained that although the days were long and the wages were low, I didn’t regret going there. These kinds of experiences have their ups and downs, pros and cons, but ultimately have a major impact on our lives and paths. She replied, “You can go on and do big things. For me, this is it. I can’t move up anywhere from here.”

My friend is a secretary and has been working at the firm for three years. Because she was not given the option to go to school, her chances for advancement have been severely limited, and she sits by and watches as the very apparent class system dictates how far one can go in their career. She may know more about the legal processes than most of the new lawyers, but she’ll never have the chance to work in any other capacity as long as she is here. I’ve watched time and time again as people walk past her and other secretaries without acknowledging their presence yet treat me with the utmost respect.

Even after the volunteering, special interest groups, and reading texts about social mobility and class constructs, last week was the first time I truly identified with a privileged class—and that bothered me very much. Back home in the States I definitely wouldn’t describe myself as such, but traveling abroad literally brings a different world into focus.

When dealing with youth, it is much easier to see their situation as temporary—something that can be changed with a little intervention. To look into the dismayed eyes of an intelligent and driven adult who does not have access to upward mobility because of class restraints is completely different. Growing up, due to my socio-economic background, I always felt I was at a disadvantage and had to work twice as hard to gain access to the institutions and facilities that others felt entitled, but I never felt hopeless. I knew that if I put in 200% where others put in 100%, I could be successful.

I can’t honestly say I know what hopelessness feels like, but I can definitely empathize. Our backgrounds and identities should not be ignored, nor should they prohibit us from learning from one another. As we open ourselves up to that learning we may find ourselves not only better equipped for helping others, but also helping ourselves become more fulfilled in life. In America, the very fact that we have these opportunities is freedom we should never take for granted.

Michael Maine is dedicated to global communication, collaboration, and cooperation. Originally planning on utilizing his problem solving and strategic strengths in the corporate sector, his eyes were opened and life changed after taking his first Sociology class at Southwestern University, where he graduated with a bachelor in Business and minors in both Sociology and Communications.

Ok, I’m a circumstantial minority.  I’m a white guy in San Antonio, Texas working for a company founded, run, and predominantly staffed by Latinos. Living in this city for most of a decade and being surrounded by a people and culture not inherent to my background provides a perspective on certain things that I might not have developed elsewhere.  I find that unconditionally positive.  Living in the Alamo City, or living and working with its people, will never confer ethnicity upon me, though.  I am not, nor will I ever be, Latino.  I will always experience some of the aspects of life here as an outsider.

Hispanic Heritage Month is being celebrated in the United States right now, having started on September 15th and ending October 15th.  As someone without a corresponding experience to compare , I recently asked some of my friends and coworkers how they felt about Hispanic Heritage Month.  Were they happy?  Proud?  Embarrassed?  Insulted?  Did they view it as an important and honorable recognition of the Hispanic contribution to our American culture, or did they feel it was an empty gesture that people used as an excuse to get drunk on margaritas and stuff themselves with burritos?

Unsurprisingly, I was given different answers.  A few of the people I spoke with said that it seemed ridiculous.  That it was hypocritical, given the critical eye cast upon many Hispanic Americans wrongly suspected of being “illegal.”  One of my friends suggested that the month was celebrated so that whites didn’t feel guilty for treating Latinos poorly for eleven other months of the year.  One person told me that she thought singling out Hispanics for one month reinforced the idea that they were a subculture deserving of marginalization.

Growing up in south-eastern Virginia, I often heard similar statements regarding Black History Month from black kids in my classes.  It was also common during my southern youth to hear white people speaking their own opinions on the occasion.  I heard people asking why it was necessary to focus only on black people for an entire month, when the rest of the time was divided amongst all races.  I heard complaints of “unfair” because there was no corresponding “White History Month” in which we could celebrate our racial pride while excluding all others.  Clearly, these critics missed the point of the observance.  I mean, we’re on all of the money.  You know what I’m saying?

A Latino friend here in San Antonio shared with me his positive opinion of Hispanic Heritage Month, and I think his opinion applies also to the observance of other culturally-centered celebrations.  He said that even if it is only for a month, it’s a spotlight on the contributions and accomplishments of a specific group, and that may help someone within that group to feel inspired.  The more pieces of yourself that you find in your heroes, the more likely you are to see greatness in yourself.

Hispanic heritage is an integral part of American history.  The Age of Discovery launched ships from Spain and Portugal that brought Europeans to the shores of this continent, and began (for better and worse) the blending of Spanish and Native cultures throughout.  Perhaps more direct acknowledgment of the Spanish and Spanish-American contribution to the national fabric is in order, and maybe that acknowledgment will come to life as our nation steadily grows a few shades more brown.  I think, though, that Hispanic Heritage Month is not about equal time.  It’s not about a need for fairness.  It’s an opportunity for all of us, Hispanic or not, to look at the accomplishments and examples of those who came before us, and to find parts of ourselves reflected back.

I find sometimes that the reflection is a little different than I would have imagined.

As an outsider, I’m pretty comfortable with that.

Jake Negovan strives to shine a light on truth and hypocrisy when the mainstream media overlooks those small details. “…For the People,” Jake’s column, is his platform to address the issues that our country faces as we continue growing toward a society of equality.

As part of that principle, there comes a corollary requirement to forgive those who disappoint.
I have been feeling a great deal of disappointment lately. Though I have remained steadfast in my insistence on not being surprised, I’m having more difficulty with the forgiveness part. So, before I begin my criticisms of the poor behavior I’ve witnessed, let me take a moment to embarrass you fools who clicked into my post solely for the title, believing this would be another outlet to reinforce the hateful and barely masked racist attitudes you’ve promoted. You’re not going to find what you want here. I do hope you’ll stick around, though. It will be good for you.

I’m disappointed in our President. I feel that President Obama has squandered a tremendous amount of political capital and good will, just as his predecessor did. The people in our own country and throughout the world looked at the election as a graduation from our own past. Because our national history is riddled with inhumane transgressions against people of non-white races, to see a brown-skinned man elected to the highest office in the land gave all a sense that we were moving on, and the change in attitude towards race was interpreted as a signal of further and greater changes to come. Our President and the newly-empowered Democratic Congress have unfortunately demonstrated a tendency to stay the course, and follow in the footsteps of the “leaders” who participate in a puppet-show of political debate while allowing and assisting in quiet Constitutional erosion. But, to borrow a common quote from our Chief Executive, “let me be clear.” My complaints about Obama and the Democratic Party are based in reality. Comparing Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler, or shouting the word “socialist” every time a piece of legislation is designed to benefit all Americans (not just the rich ones) is nothing but hateful, lazy, and uninformed fiction.

Adolf Hitler is no longer simply a historical figure – a point of reference for those with an understanding of history. He’s the very opposite. He is a euphemism made possible by his wide recognition, and thereby becomes a simple and fast symbol to communicate negative characteristics to a populace without the time or inclination to think through such a comparison. He is a synonym for Darth Vader. Any person who dislikes another person can lazily invoke the name of Hitler as a slur and achieve some success at disparaging them. Just a partial list of the people who have been subject to that comparison includes Arnold Schwarzenegger, George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, the nation of Israel, Clarence Thomas, Martha Stewart, Bill O’Reilly, Pat Buchanan, Howard Dean, global warming, and vegetarians. It’s absurd. It’s wrong. It’s offensive.

When people discuss Adolf Hitler, is the major criticism that he wanted to ensure health care for all of Germany’s citizens? I don’t see that as Hitler’s defining characteristic. Socialism? There are many nations of the world that operate under socialist governments, yet we don’t label each of their leaders as another Hitler. Even if you want to label Obama as a socialist (and I’ll get to that fallacy in just a minute), I still know that the following conversation has never taken place:

“Class, I’d like you to get your text books and turn to page 213. Today we’re going to begin studying World War II, the Holocaust, and the evil of Adolf Hitler.”

“Mr. Professor, what made Hitler such an evil historical figure that he still evokes extreme disdain and nearly universal condemnation?” asked young Johnny.

“Well, Johnny,” said Mr. Professor, “He was a socialist.”

Never happened.

Comparing a fascist dictator responsible for the extermination of 6 million Jews to a democratically elected President attempting to make sure all Americans have access to health care is reprehensible in every way. It might be wiser instead to remember that Hitler came to power and outlawed opposing political parties, which brings to mind Karl Rove’s blueprint for a permanent Republican majority. He cultivated a populist base by exploiting xenophobia and racial pride, like the Republican “birthers” and the persistent anti-immigration platforms of the Grand Ol’ Party. Those today so vocally opposed to same-sex marriage might be reminded that Hitler was also interested in the sanctity of that institution, and banned marriages between Jews and Aryans. He was a proponent of war and military expansion and was uninterested in the stress those pursuits might put on the national economy, an attitude mirrored by the last three Republican Presidents, at least. So if we want to draw comparisons, let’s make sure we draw them all.

It’s less offensive but equally absurd to paint our President or the Democrats in Congress as socialists. First of all, socialism is not a terrible concept. Like many other parts of our language it has been turned into a pejorative by people who have poorly understood it and misused it. It doesn’t help that the word became guilty by association with foreign governments that were often opposed by our own in the last century, even though those governments were not actually socialist but rather fascist. Have you ever seen those dreams of the future from the 1950′s, in which all of our lives were made better by robots and computers? The fantasies of a 20-hour work-week made possible by advances in technology – technology which would eliminate manual labor, solve the social ills of hunger, poverty, and illness? Those were illustrations of socialism – the application of technology and resources for the betterment of all members within a society.

Obama is no socialist, despite contrary misconceptions. He still supports the American capitalist idea that you can start with nothing, work hard, be competitive, and have it all. He’s actually not a bad example of that concept. He believes in that idea, as many Americans do despite the fact that they’ll never achieve it because they’ll never really be allowed the opportunity. Americans cling to the notion of rugged self-sufficiency without recognizing the publicly supported advantages they already possess, and remain willfully ignorant that barely-checked capitalism in this country has allowed the rich to get richer while the poor become poorer; that the gap between the two groups grows ever more wide; that the laws and organizations of the nation are undermined by corporate interests; and, that most citizens and a growing number of corporations benefit from “socialist” services all the time. I wonder how many people that have bandied about the word socialist at town hall meetings or at the dinner table or on Facebook in relation to their disapproval of our President have ever driven on a road, walked on a sidewalk, visited a public park, checked a book out from the library, had a relative on Social Security, called the police, learned something at a public school, left trash at the curb for pick-up, been thankful to have a fire department, cheered for a sports team at a publicly-funded arena, or supported our troops. Those services and benefits have all been as socialist as a national health care plan could be.

My point is simple. I’m not mad at you, just disappointed. Grow up. If you have a disagreement, discuss it like an adult. Name-calling has no place in civilized debate. It just makes it appear that you don’t know your facts because your ideas were spoon-fed to you in the first place.

Jake Negovan strives to shine a light on truth and hypocrisy when the mainstream media overlooks those small details. “…For the People,” Jake’s column, is his platform to address the issues that our country faces as we continue growing toward a society of equality.

Upon initial assessment, it is easy to see the good in standing against these scourges. We’re talking, in both cases, about innocent lives being put in danger because of illegal activity. But let’s go against the grain of the mainstream media, and fight against the listen-without-thinking-or-analyzing-or-questioning tendency of our national ignorance to dig a little deeper. Come on – I’ll hold your hand if you need me to.

Guys in boats with machine guns who take hostages are bad. That’s pretty black and white. Let me remind you, though, that our world is not. We make cartoon villains out of every enemy we’ve ever had so that the government can sell us Cliff’s Notes on The Truth. The men who have become the faceless public enemy of the moment did not wake up one day and decide to become super-villains of the seas. The people of Somalia have endured over a decade of political and economic collapse that make present-day hardships in our country look like a vain inconvenience. Their economy didn’t recess, it practically vanished, and so did their government. As substitutes, they received first-class poverty and warring factions of self-interested opportunists.

Johann Jari, reporting for the San Francisco Bay Review in February, found that the “pirates” are not the bad guys in their own estimation. In fact, they feel just the opposite. They call themselves the Volunteer Coast Guard of Somalia. What exactly are they guarding against? Foreign criminals that have taken advantage of Somalia’s volatile political situation. Corporations that rob Somalian waters of seafood that they once would have had to buy, and dump waste – nuclear waste – into the waters off the Somalian coast free of cost or consequence. Those guys in boats with machine guns who take hostages are doing it to stop the environmental abuses poisoning their people, and to collect money in lieu of the cash that would have been legally and fairly traded if the pirates had been able to remain fishermen.

Now, what if those young men in Somalia struggling with poverty and witnessing the poisoning of their families had another way to rise above their circumstances? What if they could farm, with little investment necessary at the beginning, and turn their crops into profit? Wouldn’t that be preferable to piracy? Well, that is the choice made by some Mexicans who have found that they can break the perpetual poverty their families have experienced for several generations. They grow drugs, or buy them from growers, at very low prices. They can then sell the cultivated and prepared drugs to American users at remarkable profit. It seems to me that they have sat outside our nation and looked through the window at capitalism, and learned it well. The men who make up the drug cartels did not go into that work because of a desire to peddle poison, or a lust for blood. They did it to make more money than they could have ever hoped to do otherwise.

I’m not naive enough to think that every pirate on the high seas nor every Escobar-in-the-making is a good-at-heart victim of circumstance that might be town mayor if the reality of their economy was just a little different. I do think that people by nature would rather build than destroy, and that most would rather contribute to their world than live as a parasite on its skin. As much as our governments, our police, and (let’s face it) our wealthy corporate puppet-masters want us to believe these people are monsters, they are essentially poor people just hoping to have a life comparable to the one they see us living. Point at their guns and call them evil. But if you tell me that you’ve never compromised your principles to get more than you otherwise would have, I will look upon you with a skeptical eye. How far would you have to be pushed, how far into poverty would you have to slip, how many of your kids or parents or siblings would you watch starve or suffer before you were willing to go to work with a gun in your hand?

The War on Drugs is a failure, yet we continue to escalate that war. For 40 years we have thrown money and effort at the effects of a problem without trying hard enough to find the cause of the problem. We don’t have a problem because drugs exist, or because they’re easy to get, or because drug dealers are greedy. We have a problem because people want them, and making their acquisition illegal creates a dangerous trade environment. People aren’t going to stop wanting drugs. Know why? Because we’ve already agreed that sense-altering, potentially dangerous substances are fun and sexy. They’re called liquor and tobacco. You’ve seen the ads.

Here is an illustration of where the War on Drugs has gotten us. A week after Obama’s visit to Mexico, I listened to a report on NPR about a girl who was strip-searched at the direction of her middle-school assistant principle in an attempt to discover unauthorized substances. The event happened in 2003. The girl was 13. Let me repeat for emphasis that a 13-year-old girl was strip-searched at her school for drugs. What was the supposedly just cause? Another student was found with drugs and claimed to have gotten them from this girl. Now do you think it was justified? How about when I tell you the drug in question was nothing but one 400mg ibuprofen? This case went before the Supreme Court just days ago, with the school continuing to claim that this search was acceptable. After all, the school has a zero-tolerance policy on drugs.

On the other side of the world, what do we have to show for our military actions against Somalian pirates? We have one guy, one corporate employee (whose life was probably never truly in danger from those pirates) being hailed as a hero for reasons that I don’t buy. We have one teenage boy being brought to a circus trial in the United States for actions that, while wrong and misguided, I believe to be defensible. We have three young men, probably also teenagers, dead at the hands of American snipers because they took drastic action when no other acceptable action was available to them. We still have hundreds of sailors being held hostage by pirates, not harmed, and being treated well by most accounts. And we still have Somalia, ungoverned and unprotected, producing more lawless men as long as there is no law to help them.

The connecting thread of these two concerns is that we tend to apply heavy-handed and poorly-reasoned measures to problems that require finesse and consideration. President Obama seems to be making the mistakes of all those who went before him by acting on the symptom and not the sickness. A lot of us expect more from him than that. The key to combating the pirates is not to start the War on Pirates – that’s the Bush way. The key is to help the people of Somalia establish a legitimate government that protects the interests of the populace, and to help stop foreign interests from looting Somalia’s resources. If you do that, there is no longer any appeal in becoming a pirate. The “pirates” are just men who want money, and if able to earn a reasonable amount in a fair and legal way, are likely to do so. The same goes for drug dealers. Legalize drugs and you remove the violence of the trade. You stop putting people in jail and turning them into ex-cons upon release. You also improve economies by legalizing an industry that has operated unregulated and untaxed. Then, educate, as we have shown to be effective in controlling alcohol and tobacco use. Create a commercial industry and men will put down guns to pick up a suit and tie.

There was another war that we started just a couple of years before Nixon created the War on Drugs. It was called the War on Poverty. You don’t hear much about it. It’s hard to turn it into a sexy summer movie. But maybe if we had spent more time and effort on that one, both wars would be history.

Remember when we waged a War on Drugs? That War was supposed to not only hit the cartels that brought in the Supply. It was also supposed to attack the other source of the problem: the Demand. What happened? After all, if our culture were not so drug-obsessed, the destructive filth these ruthless criminals peddle would find no harbor near our homes. But it seems that War was long ago forgotten. Perhaps it was too difficult to wage. Perhaps the disintegration of the American family unit, the decay of our educational system, and our youth’s growing sense of futility leading to escapism at any cost were too harsh, too mind-numbing, too complex and too unpopular to tackle. So instead our attention was diverted, from the Gulf of Mexico to the Persian Gulf. When I studied International Relations at Harvard, I learned Rule #1 of politicians facing trouble at home has always been to divert attention outwards. Could the new Administration be playing the same game now? Trouble at home? Us? No, surely the foreigners are to blame. Saddam Hussein. WMD. Islamic terrorists. Afghans. Mexican Drug Cartels. Everyone. Anyone. But us. Let’s just pop a national Ambien/Xanax cocktail and go back to sleeping at the wheel.

So if not blame ourselves for the Drug War that’s raged on our border for decades, then why not guns? That’s the hot topic as anti-gun and pro-gun lobbies debate whether lax gun laws are to blame for the escalating violence.

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend and Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, write:

This crisis is not happening because our border is loose. It is happening because our gun laws allow guns to be sold by unlicensed sellers without background checks required by the Brady Bill, military-style assault weapons to be freely sold and corrupt gun dealers to thrive.

Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association fires back:

Everything Mexico’s murderous thugs are doing is already illegal. At issue is not the absence of law, but the absence of political will to enforce the laws that both nations already possess.

As tragically confused as the border I grew up in, they are both right and they are both wrong. Kennedy Townsend is correct that the border’s porous nature is not to blame. But she’s wrong to decry easy gun sales as the cause of the violence. Just because you can buy a gun doesn’t make you want to kill people.

Wayne La Pierre is right that if these evildoers couldn’t get the guns in a store or gun show in Texas, they’d get them somewhere else. He’s also on target in saying that the problem is not an absence of law. But he’s terribly naïve in opining that the solution is finding the political will to enforce existing binational laws.

What they both don’t get is that at its murky depths this heinous crisis ripping our nations apart at the seams is not about broken laws; it’s about broken cultures. It’s about something way deeper than both the law and the Rio Grande that divides our systems of justice. It’s about what drives young Americans to throw away their futures and seek out drugs despite their self-destructive power. It’s about what compels young Mexicans to jettison their values and join the drug trade. It’s not about absence of law, but it is about absence of better things to do with their lives. It’s not about lack of political will, but it is about lack of meaning, purpose and legitimate opportunity in these people’s lives.

I grew up on that border that now draws so much attention with buzz over building walls, gory beheadings, and violence spilling over into sleepy American neighborhoods. I almost drowned in its desperation right on the shores of the Rio. And I’m haunted every day as I see Mexico dying from a new manifestation of the same disease that has been killing it since the day it won independence from Spain and then started having pieces of itself chopped off and consumed by its ambitious neighbor to the north. Mexico is trapped in a culturally engrained system of impenetrable social stratification and personal economic paralysis. It is nearly impossible for a person to rise up from poverty or family anonymity to wealth and fame through legitimate means. So those with desire and any shred of imagination are left with two viable options: leave the country (hence the immigration problem) or join the drug cartels. It’s the only way to grow out of the circumstances into which people are born. Imagine that. And here in America, our youth – trapped as well – seek the only escapes they can find and afford: video games, mobile technology, the internet, music, sex and, of course…drugs. We’re all mired in shallow ground. Who’s going to throw us all a communal rope so we can climb back onto the banks?

In the end, arguing about laws, border security and military crackdowns is not going to end the Drug War or the problems that cause it. That’s like arguing over what size or color of Band-Aid to put on a broken heart. What we need to talk about, work on, and figure out – both as autonomous nations and as symbiotic neighbors – is how to mend our inner selves as “a people.” It’s harder and not nearly as sexy as showing pictures of federales battling machine gun-toting killers in a Robert Rodriguez/Quentin Tarantino-esque hyper-reality that has become the evening news. But it is only through the inglorious, surgical labor of cultural introspection, rehabilitation, and evolution on both sides of the border that the bleeding wound we both share – the carved deep wound I crossed every day as a child – will ever heal.