DARE

I spec­u­lat­ed ear­li­er at the ter­ror I would feel if I were a par­ent of a teenaged daugh­ter who lis­tened to H.I.M. or some oth­er sui­cide-glam­or­iz­ing satan­ic glam rock. But actu­al­ly, after a few min­utes of reflec­tion I real­ized that I prob­a­bly would nev­er have any­thing to wor­ry about.

I recent­ly read She Said Yes, the sto­ry of the girl who, in the library at Columbine, was asked if she believed in God. Her moth­er told of ear­li­er years where she had lis­tened to Mar­i­lyn Man­son and writ­ten out fan­tasies of killing her­self and her fam­i­ly. Sound­ed like pret­ty typ­i­cal teenage stuff to me, but I could under­stand in some mea­sure what the fam­i­ly must have gone through. The fam­i­ly sent the girl to some fundie Chris­t­ian school and only allowed her to go to social func­tions of the church youth group from her school, where at some point she mirac­u­lous­ly had some kind of spir­i­tu­al awakening.

This reminds me of when I was in high school. I was in high school in the eight­ies, and of course those were the Rea­gan years. Rea­gan’s got­ten a lot of great press since he died, and I don’t mean to tread on the mem­o­ry of the dead, but I came of age when there was a lunatic in the White House and thou­sands of nuclear war­heads on a hair­trig­ger on both sides of the plan­et. More fright­en­ing than Sovi­et war­heads was a Pres­i­dent who lied with impunity—I was eleven years old when I start­ed ask­ing if it was my imag­i­na­tion or if the Pres­i­dent was a big fat liar. All the adults, even the bleed­ing heart lib­er­als, thought it was unthink­able and told me it was my imagination.

So any­one that was sur­prised at the whole Iran-Con­tra mess? An eleven-year-old could see that one com­ing and did in fact tell you so. Why they called that mani­ac the great com­mu­ni­ca­tor, I’ll still nev­er know.

So yes, my gen­er­a­tion read 1984 in 1984. And we saw a plan­et gone so far beyond insane that the only future we saw for our­selves was nuclear win­ter. I’m not sure how old I was, but some­where between six and eight years old when my moth­er told me to appre­ci­ate the blue sky because it might be the last one I ever see.

Did we freak out? Hell yes we freaked out. We dove into drugs and fan­ta­sy and tried to kill our­selves, some­times quick­ly and some­times slow­ly. The world we inher­it­ed was a night­mare of ter­ror and when we spoke up we were told that there’s noth­ing wrong and it was all in our heads.

None of our par­ents knew what to do with us, but a lot of them tried what Cassie Bernal­l’s par­ents tried. If you have a prob­lem child, send them away.

I lost count of the kids I knew in high school who went away to invol­un­tary vaca­tions in inpa­tient men­tal health wards and facil­i­ties. Why were they locked up away from any­one they knew? Because their par­ents did­n’t know how to deal with a child becom­ing an adult in a world where every moment was twen­ty min­utes from armaged­don. Par­ents would either have to admit that they brought chil­dren into this tick­ing time bomb or else find doc­tors will­ing to admin­is­ter tho­razine and tie a six­teen year old up in a straight­jack­et and put the prob­lem away.

Like I said, I lost count of how many of my class­mates went away to the nut­house before I grad­u­at­ed from high school. And I think it’s pret­ty screwed up that I under­stand the phrase “cog­ni­tive dis­so­nance” because it was a relief to know that there was a name for what I expe­ri­enced through high school. Rea­gan was emblem­at­ic, but he was just the tip of the ice­berg. We also had D.A.R.E. cops lying straight through their teeth at us, try­ing to scare us with the “facts” about drugs. Every­where we turned we were fed lies as if we were too stu­pid to sus­pect. Then lat­er we’d get some real infor­ma­tion backed by sci­en­tif­ic research and peer-review­able study meth­ods and the lucky ones of us fig­ured out sim­ply not to ever trust a police­man or a politi­cian. The rest of us were con­fused and scared.

I’m just writ­ing this out to remind myself, if I ever become a par­ent, not to tell lies and not to push a prob­lem away into an asy­lum. I’m sure it’s eas­i­er said than done, but I have to remem­ber this very impor­tant fact:

I am one of the lucky ones.

My par­ents were far from per­fect, but I think they played it straight with me and they nev­er pan­icked and packed me off to Elmhurst or the Yale Psy­chi­atric Insti­tute (more com­mon­ly called YPI or “Yip­pie”) when it was the cool thing for par­ents to do. What­ev­er they told me about drugs were their own opin­ions and hon­est­ly gleaned information.

I am one of the lucky ones.

So what could I do if I had a child who came home with a CD with a “parental advi­so­ry” label on it? And lyrics like “Oh baby, join me in death”? It’s too easy to be glib about this stuff, but if I had a kid who was lis­ten­ing to Satan­ic rock, well, hell, I could lend her my copy of The Satan­ic Bible and intro­duce her to the few friends I still have who are prac­tic­ing Satanists. If that did­n’t take all the fun out of it, I don’t know what would. I pray that I could get through it with­out resort­ing to falsehood.

Lets face it. From Rea­gan to Bush to Clin­ton to Bush, it’s not like we’ve had a decrease in bald-faced lies from our lead­ers. D.A.R.E. is in full swing. You can replace nuclear win­ter with the threat of ter­ror­ism, I sup­pose. And hand­ing out mood and mind-alter­ing drugs to chil­dren is now absolute­ly de rigeur. It seems absolute­ly crit­i­cal that I remem­ber this if I ever have kids of my own.

14 Replies to “DARE”

  1. It’s a mir­a­cle that human­i­ty
    It’s a mir­a­cle that human­i­ty out­last­ed the 20th Century.

    I sus­pect it will take a mir­a­cle for us to last through the 21st. I also sus­pect that chil­dren (or young adults) will play a large role in bring­ing our sur­vival about. 

    I used to think that my gen­er­a­tion was ide­al­is­tic and intel­li­gent enough to put it all togeth­er and get it all right. With the ben­e­fit of time, I now see that most of us have become just as jad­ed as we thought the world to be when we were young, or else pre­oc­cu­pied with the respon­si­bil­i­ty of pro­vid­ing for the next generation. 

    So we make way for the next gen­er­a­tion to get it right, and they grow up hope­ful­ly naive enough of the weight of time to make it so, if we do a good enough job of it. And that’s how mankind sur­vives. At least until the big mete­or comes, or the big virus, or the big dirty bomb.

  2.     ” If that did­n’t take
        ” If that did­n’t take all the fun out of it, I don’t know what would.

    That’s bril­liant. Either you make Satan look hope­less­ly square and dorky, or as a worst case sce­nario, your kid now thinks you’re cool enough to talk to.

  3. Yeah, plus actu­al orga­nized
    Yeah, plus actu­al orga­nized Satanism is pret­ty non-dan­ger­ous; bad fash­ion com­bined with a phi­los­o­phy most­ly pil­fered from Niet­zche and the Social Dar­win­ists. Noth­ing harsh­er than a kid would get read­ing, say, Ayn Rand. Plus they’re very specif­i­cal­ly against killing ani­mals. So there might be a lit­tle dam­age con­trol at play, in the best case scenario.

  4. Part I, due to Live­Jour­nal
    Part I, due to Live­Jour­nal size limitation

    This is a pret­ty scary arti­cle. If you believe that writ­ing out fan­tasies of killing one­self and one’s fam­i­ly sounds like pret­ty typ­i­cal teenage stuff, one of us has a seri­ous­ly warped view of teenagers, and I hope it is you. Most of the teens I know are pret­ty nice, nor­mal kids.

    I also know of NO kids that have been sent away to invol­un­tary vaca­tions in inpa­tient men­tal health wards. In my entire life, nobody either Susan or I have known has done that. I am sure that it hap­pens, but if it hap­pened to so many of your friends that you lost count, you must have been hang­ing out with the wrong crowd. I know that Walt sent you to a cou­ple of extreme­ly lib­er­al pri­vate schools. I thought it was best at the time because of the abysmal record of the New Haven pub­lic schools, but now I won­der if you might have been bet­ter off in the pub­lic school sys­tem with more nor­mal kids.

    I have a prob­lem with the term “cognitive dissonance.” As I under­stand it, that is a fan­cy term for hav­ing two con­tra­dic­to­ry facts that you haven’t yet rec­on­ciled. We used to call that a dichoto­my or a para­dox. Ayn Rand says in Atlas Shrugged, “When con­front­ed with a para­dox, check your premises.” She knew, as did the rest of us, that a para­dox is sim­ply a lim­i­ta­tion of knowl­edge. Per­haps your schools weren’t get­ting that across. Kids have always ques­tioned author­i­ty. Didn’t they in your gen­er­a­tion? If so, they would have found answers to their con­tra­dic­tions and cured their “cognitive dissonance.”

    Par­ents didn’t know how to bring up their kids in a world where every moment was twen­ty min­utes from Armaged­don? The par­ents grew up in the same world! That had been the sit­u­a­tion since the ear­ly 1950’s at least. The “lunatic” you refer to is the man who end­ed that! Yes, I know there are still far too many nuclear war­heads in the world, but Ronald Rea­gan end­ed the con­stant con­fronta­tion of the cold war. The world is a far safer place because of him. (Admit­ted­ly, still not a safe place, but far safer.) And he was called the Great Com­mu­ni­ca­tor because he could (duh) com­mu­ni­cate. With the excep­tion of the main­stream media, every­body liked him. He could dis­agree with the Democ­rats on pol­i­tics, but he did it civil­ly, and most of his con­tem­po­raries on both sides of the aisle actu­al­ly liked him. Oh, yes. He wrote (or rewrote) most of his speech­es. And they were good.

    As far as Rea­gan lying with impuni­ty, what are you refer­ring to? Obvi­ous­ly it was some­thing in 1980 from your com­ment about being eleven years old. 

    In his sec­ond term reporters accused him of lying when he denied knowl­edge of the Iran-Con­tra affair, but with all their inquiries and inves­ti­ga­tions no one even close to Rea­gan was actu­al­ly impli­cat­ed. The end result was deter­mined to be sole­ly a rogue oper­a­tion of the NSC. The Tow­er Com­mis­sion cas­ti­gat­ed Rea­gan for his lack of con­trol over the NSC, but found no link to him. (BTW, I am skep­ti­cal that you were pon­tif­i­cat­ing on I‑Ca at age 11. That oper­a­tion was ini­ti­at­ed in 1985 and first came to pub­lic light in Novem­ber of 1986. You would have been almost 17 when it first came out.)

    Dad

  5. Part II
    Also, “nuclear

    Part II

    Also, “nuclear win­ter” was a term coined by Carl Sagan in 1983. I doubt your moth­er was ter­ri­fy­ing you about that in 1975 when you were six. Inci­den­tal­ly, she was a Gold­wa­ter Repub­li­can until she mar­ried Walt and start­ed work­ing at Yale when you were around ten. We did NOT spend our lives ter­ri­fied of nuclear war. Of course, we were not then liv­ing in a pri­ma­ry tar­get area, either. But between her con­ser­v­a­tive pol­i­tics and her rea­son­able­ness as a moth­er, I doubt she ever tried to ter­ri­fy you about any­thing, let alone about nuclear win­ter. And I can’t see how the world you were liv­ing in was a “nightmare of ter­ror” as you described it. It cer­tain­ly wasn’t to most peo­ple. Most peo­ple thought of the eight­ies as the best years. Rea­gan had turned the econ­o­my around and cre­at­ed a boom for the US that last­ed until the final year of the Clin­ton admin­is­tra­tion, when we entered the lat­est reces­sion that we are final­ly get­ting out of. Maybe the ter­ror you speak of had roots in the fact you lived in a vio­lent, crime-filled slum city instead of in nation­al politics.

    I am only vague­ly famil­iar with DARE, so I can’t speak with cer­tain­ty, but my impres­sions from their web site seem pret­ty straight for­ward. Of course, DARE was found­ed on the Left Coast in 1983, so it would have been brand new here when you were in school and they might have improved since then. Of course, more clin­i­cal stud­ies have been done in the last 20 years, but the end result is the same: Recre­ation­al drug use isn’t good for kids. Same with alco­hol and tobac­co. Duh. You said DARE lied to you. Did they try to con­vince you that drugs were GOOD for you? There is a dif­fer­ence between lying to some­one and hav­ing a dif­fer­ence of opin­ion. There are a few sci­en­tists who believe that drugs aren’t bad for you, but they are a tiny minor­i­ty. Even they don’t think that recre­ation­al drug use is good for chil­dren, which also appears to be DARE’s posi­tion. (It seems fun­ny to hear you argue in favor of mind-alter­ing drugs and then crit­i­cize the wide­spread use of Rital­in, et al. My posi­tion is that life is chal­leng­ing enough stone-cold sober, let alone FU’ed on any drugs.)

    I am glad to see that you don’t think kids should be lied to. I think real lies are accept­able only in extreme­ly lim­it­ed cir­cum­stances, and hope that I nev­er reach that extreme. (I don’t con­sid­er say­ing, “You look love­ly tonight.” a real lie when you are try­ing to get laid.) A major advan­tage of truth-telling is that you nev­er have to remem­ber which sto­ry you told to whom. But kids shouldn’t be lied to. I don’t think it is always nec­es­sary to answer all their ques­tions, but if you do you should be straight with ‘em. Of course, there are cer­tain hered­i­tary tales about San­ta and the Tooth Fairy, por ejem­p­lo, that I con­sid­er enter­tain­ment and not lies, per se.

    Dad

  6. I’m run­ning off to lunch, so
    I’m run­ning off to lunch, so only a quick clar­i­fi­ca­tion now: I am not in favor of mind-alter­ing drugs. I’m in favor of not hav­ing schools and police­men lie to kids about mind-alter­ing drugs. I was for­tu­nate enough to have an expen­sive edu­ca­tion (thank you for that) so that the anti-drug pro­pa­gan­da was sec­ondary. I think the truth about drugs should be suf­fi­cient­ly scary enough with­out resort­ing to falsehood.

    The lies were about the spe­cif­ic effects of drugs. All it takes is a kid see­ing one per­son smoke a joint and not go on a homi­ci­dal spree before they throw out every­thing else that a police­man says to them. In fact, when I was on a jury, we were instruct­ed that it was per­mis­si­ble to dis­re­gard a wit­ness­es entire tes­ti­mo­ny if we found that they had lied on one point. So that log­ic isn’t iso­lat­ed to children.

    But most of the lit­er­a­ture giv­en to chil­dren about drugs reads like “reefer mad­ness” and are filled with cir­cu­lar log­ic. Drugs are ille­gal because they are dan­ger­ous. They are dan­ger­ous because if you’re caught with them, you’ll go to jail. Huh? Wait­a­min­nit.… so they should be ille­gal because they are ille­gal. Riiiiight.

    And no, at my schools, we did­n’t have DARE itself, but I’ve got­ten to see some of the demon­stra­tions and some of their lit­er­a­ture. At my school we had teach­ers that spent some time with us going over the clas­si­fi­ca­tions of drugs and the par­tic­u­lar dan­gers and show­ing us stud­ies and data backed by sci­en­tif­ic inquiry. We also had a cou­ple of recov­er­ing addicts come in to talk to us about their experiences.

    Of course, I went on to use and abuse drugs. So maybe facts and truth are an inef­fec­tive deterrent.

    In any case, I’m total­ly addict­ed to food. Can’t go more than a cou­ple of days with­out it, and usu­al­ly I have to have it mul­ti­ple times per day. I’ll respond to more of your respons­es lat­er, after lunch (and prob­a­bly after my workday).

    Thanks,

    Steve

  7. DARE does­n’t seem that wacko
    DARE does­n’t seem that wacko today. I can’t speak for how they were 20 years ago, but I have nev­er heard any­one claim that smok­ing one joint would turn you instant­ly into a homi­ci­dal mani­ac. But mar­i­jua­na IS the sec­ond lead­ing cause of DUI fatal­i­ties, after alco­hol of course, and I see noth­ing wrong in say­ing that. Smok­ing mar­i­jua­na is cer­tain­ly worse for you than smok­ing tobac­co, and EVERYONE approves of anti-tobac­co pro­grams. I just don’t get it.

    Dad

  8. Rea­gan end­ed the cold war -
    Rea­gan end­ed the cold war — yes! It is gen­er­al­ly accept­ed that his SDI (Star wars) plan forced the Sovi­ets to spend them­selves to the brink of bank­rupt­cy to keep up. Gor­bachev then backed down and agreed to mis­sile reduc­tions at peace sum­mits in 1985 through 1987, tore down the Wall, and with­drew from Afghanistan. The fact that SDI was an enor­mous bluff was uncov­ered lat­er, but it worked. (SDI had a 3.8 bil­lion dol­lar bud­get and a tril­lion dol­lar cost esti­mate, IF some­body invent­ed the new type of lasers and super­com­put­ers need­ed.) With­out the need for a uni­fied defense against the US, there was no longer much rea­son for the expense of the USSR, so the mem­ber nations went their own ways, thus ter­mi­nat­ing the Cold War for good.

    At the very least, you have to admit it hap­pened on his watch.

    Dad

  9. Steve has touched on
    Steve has touched on some­thing regard­ing DARE. As a par­ent of chil­dren required to go through the pro­gram, I def­i­nite­ly observed an Orwellian, Hitler youth ele­ment to the program. 

    The kids were encour­aged to report their par­ents to the police, not only about drug use, but abuse in gen­er­al. The offi­cers always want­ed to try and pull infor­ma­tion out of the kids regard­ing their expe­ri­ence at home. I remem­ber on one occa­sion hav­ing to clar­i­fy to the admin­is­tra­tion that when my daugh­ter was talk­ing about her father, who had a drug prob­lem and put her in jeop­ardy on one occa­sion, that she was not refer­ring to me, but to her pater­nal father who was no longer allowed to have any con­tact with her. Before that point, I am sure that both the school and the police were on the verge of inves­ti­gat­ing our house­hold, based only on the nar­ra­tive coxed out of my then 11 year old.

    I con­sid­ered it a reck­less inva­sion of our pri­va­cy that my daugh­ter was being inter­ro­gat­ed in school by the police, under the guise of “edu­cat­ing the chil­dren about the dan­gers of drug abuse.”

  10. That cer­tain­ly is scary. But
    That cer­tain­ly is scary. But is that DARE? I know that a lot of DARE offi­cers are also being trained as School Resource Offi­cers, which I sus­pect was the capac­i­ty they were work­ing in your inci­dent. DARE seems to con­cen­trate on drug abuse.

    And, hey! If you actu­al­ly WERE abus­ing your kid, I’d hope to hell some­one would come get you. I hope some­body gets her bio father. If he would joepar­dize his own daugh­ter, he’d prob­a­bly jeop­ar­dize some­body else’s.

    Just an old-fash­ioned con­ser­v­a­tive cur­mud­geon, I guess.

    Dad

  11. “Gen­er­al­ly accept­ed”, yes,
    “Gen­er­al­ly accept­ed”, yes, in about the same way that it is “gen­er­al­ly accept­ed” by many Amer­i­cans that Sad­dam had some­thing to do with 9/11.

    Gor­bachev came to pow­er with two agen­da items in hand from the start: one was to improve the inter­nal open­ness of sovi­et soci­ety (glas­nost and per­e­stroi­ka) for large­ly eco­nom­ic rea­sons, the oth­er was to improve for­eign rela­tions with non-super­pow­er coun­tries by get­ting away from the use of mil­i­tary force and threats against them. (That lat­ter one is almost nev­er men­tioned in Amer­i­ca.) These two ideas togeth­er led direct­ly to the end of the Sovi­et sys­tem: first by encour­ag­ing some dis­sent, and then by refrain­ing from crush­ing that dis­sent with lethal force as the Kruschev types had done. Any­body who fol­lowed the steps in East­ern Europe that led to the breakup could see that defense and Star Wars had noth­ing to do with it.

    Rea­gan’s rhetoric against the Sovi­ets cre­at­ed the impres­sion of putting new pres­sure on them, but Rea­gan’s pol­i­cy did noth­ing of the kind. He took not a sin­gle action that changed the dif­fi­cul­ties already faced by the Sovi­ets from past US pol­i­cy. The strate­gic weapons pro­grams he moved for­ward all began under Carter, or ear­li­er, and when it came to arms reduc­tions nego­ti­a­tion, he was one of the most flex­i­ble and con­cil­ia­to­ry of the cold war pres­i­dents. Every bur­den that the Sovi­et sys­tem was labor­ing under was of long stand­ing, aris­ing from poli­cies going back to Har­ry Tru­man. Rea­gan added noth­ing new except the bluff of Star Wars, which the entire pub­lic knew was not fore­see­ably work­able. It is true that Gor­bachev per­son­al­ly made a big deal out of Star Wars when talk­ing with Rea­gan, but the deci­sions that brought down the Sovi­et sys­tem had already been made before they ever met, and I have nev­er heard the slight­est evi­dence that Star Wars ever had any­thing to do with the domes­tic dis­sent that broke up the Sovi­et Union into sep­a­rate republics.

    The Sovi­et col­lapse became inevitable not when the US called them evil, but when they acquired a leader who was unwill­ing to kill peo­ple in the streets to pre­serve the system.

  12. Your 9 – 11 com­par­i­son does­n’t
    Your 9 – 11 com­par­i­son does­n’t make sense. I know of nobody who claims Sad­dam had any pri­or knowl­edge of 9 – 11. Many DO believe he spon­sored terrorism.

    As for SDI being the straw that broke the USS­R’s back, here’s what the Bri­tan­ni­ca says: 

    “Rea­gan’s mas­sive mil­i­tary spend­ing pro­gram, the largest in Amer­i­can peace­time his­to­ry, was undoubt­ed­ly anoth­er fac­tor, though some observers argued that the buildup—through the strain it imposed on the Sovi­et economy—was actu­al­ly respon­si­ble for a host of pos­i­tive devel­op­ments in Rea­gan’s sec­ond term, includ­ing a more accom­mo­dat­ing Sovi­et posi­tion in arms nego­ti­a­tions, a weak­en­ing of the influ­ence of hard-lin­ers in the Sovi­et lead­er­ship, mak­ing pos­si­ble the glas­nost (“openness”) and per­e­stroi­ka (“restructuring”) poli­cies of mod­er­ate Sovi­et leader Mikhail Gor­bachev after 1985, and even the dis­so­lu­tion of the Sovi­et Union itself in 1990–91.

    “A sig­nif­i­cant com­po­nent of Rea­gan’s mil­i­tary buildup was his 1983 pro­pos­al for a space-based mis­sile defense sys­tem that would use lasers and oth­er as yet unde­vel­oped killing tech­nolo­gies to destroy incom­ing Sovi­et nuclear mis­siles well before they could reach their tar­gets in the Unit­ed States. The Strate­gic Defense Ini­tia­tive (SDI), dubbed “Star Wars” after the pop­u­lar sci­ence-fic­tion movie of the late 1970s, was denounced by the Sovi­ets, includ­ing Gor­bachev, as a dan­ger­ous esca­la­tion of the arms race, a posi­tion also tak­en by many crit­ics at home. Mean­while, oth­ers argued that the project was tech­no­log­i­cal­ly impos­si­ble and poten­tial­ly a “black hole” in the coun­try’s defense bud­get. In lat­er years, how­ev­er, for­mer Sovi­et offi­cials cit­ed SDI as a fac­tor in the even­tu­al col­lapse of their coun­try, for it showed that the Sovi­et Union was polit­i­cal­ly unpre­pared and eco­nom­i­cal­ly inca­pable of com­pet­ing in a new arms race with the Unit­ed States, espe­cial­ly one led by some­one as unre­lent­ing as Reagan.”

    Dad

  13. PS The SDI was first
    PS The SDI was first pro­posed by Pres­i­dent Ronald Rea­gan in a nation­wide tele­vi­sion address on March 23, 1983. Carter had noth­ing to do with it.

    I will read­i­ly con­cede that the Sovi­ets prob­lems were long­stand­ing and that Rea­gan mere­ly gave it the final push.

    The fact that, as you claim, Rea­gan act­ed rea­son­ably even while bluff­ing mil­i­tar­i­ly indi­cates that per­haps the term “lunatic” is not appro­pri­ate. He did sign sev­er­al major dis­ar­ma­ment treaties, which did make the world a lit­tle bit safer.

    Dad

Leave a Reply