On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, J.D. Giorgis wrote:
> Apparently a lot of you disagree, yet somehow noone
> ever seems to come up with a substantive and coherent
> argument as to why America is *not* "great."
The problem with the word "great" is that when used in the
moral/political way, it's an idiot category. That is, it doesn't mean
anything except for being a rhetorical device for arguing an
otherwise unrelated point, such as whether Americans are incurably rude
or whether a missile defense shield is a good idea or whether the
legislature is or isn't doing what it ought to be doing right here and
right now.
If one argues "great" just means big and powerful, then it's no problem.
"Greatness" is then a quality shared by the US, China, ancient Rome,
the old British Empire, and so on.
If one argues that America has done great things--sending people to the
moon, establishing functioning non-monarchical democratic republic, made
it possible for gibbering morons to become superstar actors--then I think
few will disagree.
On the other hand, to argue that America has been a net force of good in
the world requires some very difficult accounting, the weighing of
countless lives and possibilities and possible alternatives...in short,
it's pretty much impossible *unless* what you really want is for somebody
to admit that America really is pretty great after all.
To argue that America is "great," and to mean something other than to
argue one of the trivial meanings of "great" descibed above, is nothing
less than to argue that America should be allowed a special exemption when
it comes to evaluating its motives and behavior. It is to argue that,
based on past deeds and current activities, America deserves to enjoy more
credit and status and influence in the world than other nations *no matter
what* America actually wants to do with all that power.
When we say a person or thing is great, we mean that it defies the normal
categories of judgement. Beethoven is great because he transcended the
standards of music which then existed and because his music still has an
elemental spiritual power. Van Gogh is great for similar reasons. When
someone argues that Napolean was great, they are arguing that he was more
than just an ambitious butcher like Hitler, but that he accomplished
something which justified all the blood he shed.
To argue that America is great, then, is to argue that America rises above
the categories of good and evil by which "ordinary" nations and men ought
to be judged. It means that when America sits down with a nation to argue
about trade or the environment, that America should be held to a different
standard from everybody else.
And that is why nobody will concede that America is "great" in the sense
that you appear (as far as I can tell) to want to argue, John. Because it
means that in affairs of state, an American's needs must then be accounted
more priority and dignity than a German's needs, or an Argentinian's
needs, or an Ethiopian's needs, and that's just hogwash.
Another way to look at it is to realize that true greatness is bestowed
retroactively on people and things, by people who are in a historical
position to evaluate the allegedly great people and/or things. To declare
oneself great in the present tense, as a person or as a nation, is to
declare oneself exempt from current and future judgement in a grandiose
and aggressively self-justifying way. And there's no good reason for
anybody to grant a person or nation that irrational privilege.
Marvin Long
Austin, Texas
