Even putting aside my pleasure and relief that the moment had finally come, I
was of course inspired by President Obama's words, his call for a new spirit of
purpose and idealism, evoking a sense of history and mission, duty and vision.
Indeed, I hope they moved all Americans and people around the world - even
those whose respect is as-yet guarded and suspicious. Let us all hope that
even grudging doubters will be swayed toward firmer feelings of appreciation,
over the coming years, not only by the skill and character of the Obama team,
but also by events. By the validation that is bestowed by great success.
<i>And yet,</i> I don't feel compelled to write much about those themes and
sentiments, all of which will be noted by others. Instead, what I'll do - out
of habit - is bring notice to a few side-glimmers and <i>exceptional points</i>
that won't (I reckon) be mentioned by most pundits, or even historians.
For example, it struck me that President Obama repeatedly called upon us to
rise up as adults and <i>not only</i> listen to the angels of our better
natures - not only heed our high ideals - but also to rediscover the arts
of<i> negotiation and pragmatic problem-solving</i> that undergird those lofty
principles, and without which they so easily dissolve into platitudes or
self-righteous rationalizations. (As, indeed, the word "freedom" was cheapened
in recent years, into a mere totem for "my side.")
Other nations have known duty, honor, patriotism, self-sacrifice... and even
freedom But it is the mix of those fine things with other ingredients -- with
patience and craftsmanship, with both eager competition and willing
cooperation, with reciprocal respect and healthy self-doubt -- that made the
loftier ideals truly world-transforming. And that notion of anchoring idealism
in pragmatic action is the message that I felt through my bones - deeper than
through my ears - during Barack Obama's inaugural address.
Do you want examples?
<i>"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing
of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will
extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."</i>
How simple an image, and fundamental an offer. And then came a sentence that
both rebuked the recent past and expressed far greater confidence in us than we
have seen expressed (alas) by recent leaders:
<i>"As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety
and our ideals."</i>
Of course you'll recognize a central theme of my book <i>The Transparent
Society: Will Technology Make Us Choose Between Privacy and Freedom?</i> And
especially since the dire events of 9/11, as I kept hoping Americans would
reject the dismal and insipid "devil's dichotomy" we were constantly offered,
having to choose between two things we simply cannot live without.
Those two passages were certainly noted by others. Moreover, without question,
President Obama had to say them, whether or not he meant quite the emphasis
that I perceived. But <i>two other paragraphs</i> contained - tucked within -
what I feel are vital hints to Barack Obama's character and agenda. Because
they are things he <i>did not have to say.</i> Very few of the two million
people attending in Washington, or close to a billion watching around the
world, will note them. But I suggest that you do.
<i>"We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's
wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the
sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we
will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of
a new age."</i>
Yes, yes. Education, sustainability, the new technologies that may not only
help save the nation and planet, but also start the next economic boom, in much
the same way that our government's internet research sparked the last one...
all of that was profoundly welcome, and expected. <i>But to put science first,
</i>ahead of all the others, and thus signaling it's "rightful place" struck me
deeply. This is one lawyer who knows that good decisions cannot be based
incantations, but ultimately depend on actual, <i>honest-to-God facts.</i>
We have had enough of leaders who arrogantly believed that all you need to
govern is one thing, a powerfully certain, subjective force of will.
But then, it can be argued that Obama also had to mention science, after the
travesties of recent years. Perhaps that, too, was no surprise, and I may be
reading too much into it. So let me reach deeper for my final clue.
<i>"Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be
new. But those values upon which our success depends - hard work and honesty,
courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism - these
things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of
progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these
truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility - a
recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves,
our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather
seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the
spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult
task."</i>
Did you see it? The word he did not have to mention? The <i>deep and
profoundly American value</i> that so many people forget to mention, even
though it stands behind our greatest achievements and underpins our loftiest
ambitions? Yes, all the others that he listed are profound and vital. But
this is the oft-forgotten trait that makes us at-once both wondrously childlike
and yet also mature, in the best sense of the word.
Mature enough to ask that precious question (the foundation of true science)<i>
"what if I am wrong?" </i> The one question that we have learned - the hard way
- leads to wisdom, justice, humility, and incremental progress.
Look again. It is the one word that you never heard used to describe the
dismal bunch who have departed and who will not be missed. Even though it once
applied - and may yet again - to broadminded conservatism, as much as it did to
liberals.
The new president did not have to mention it. But he did. And it shows that
he wants not only to preside and rule. He wants to learn.
====
Side notes:
Those who have been following my political commentaries know that I have long
favored efforts to wean our more decent conservative neighbors away from their
reflex-driven alliance with the kleptos and know-nothings who have hijacked
their movement. Conservatism, in its better form, deserves a place at the
negotiating table, but it can only return to credibility if its saner members
gather the courage and patriotism to do what democrats and liberals did in 1947
-- by cutting themselves off from monsters, dogmatists, troglodytes and a bona
fide criminal gang.
http://www.davidbrin.com/1947.htm
http://www.davidbrin.com/ostrich2a.html
And an older essay (still relevant) at: http://www.davidbrin.com/neocons.html
Those interested in following up on this concept can find more grist for
thought in "Building a Rhetorical Bridge To (and For) Reasonable
Conservatives," by my colleague in the SIGMA think tank of scientific science
fiction authors, Dr. Charles E. Gannon. Most insightful.
http://www.libertas.bham.ac.uk/analysis/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20Column%201%20Reasonable%20Conservatives[1].doc%20-%20GANNON1.pdf
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
