|
Karen, thank you for your very thoughtful piece
to the list, but I would question whether what is now going on in America is, as
you put it, a "transformation" or simply the emergence, more full blown than
usual, of something that has been there for a very long time.
There is no question but that Americans have
produced and steadfastly held some of the world's highest ideals built on the
thoughts of people like Thomas Paine, Jefferson, Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson and
Martin Luther King. Yet how well America has followed its ideals
is hugely questionable. Since its beginnings as a nation, it has not
hesitated to trample the ideals of others if that suited its
purposes. Though founded on principles of "the rights of man", it
denied human rights to its Aboriginal people, then to millions of people brought
over from Africa as slaves. It is still denying such rights to prisoners
held in Cuba and to others whom it is holding on suspicion of links to
terrorism. And, one can't overlook the fact that, despite the value
it espouses to place on human life, it was the first major power ever to use
weapons of mass destruction on civilian populations by dropping nuclear bombs on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
What this suggests is a schizoid society, part
tolerant, peaceful and open; part repressive, dangerous and closed. The
former is embedded in its contributions to governance, to philosophy, to
literature, and in its academia; the latter in its militarism, in its
corporatism, and its prison system, which still in many states still includes
the death penalty. Except perhaps during the Civil War, the two sides of
this duality have never been in open combat and yet, from any reading of
American history, one senses that they have always been engaged, pushing and
shoving at each other for dominance.
The repressive and closed side is currently
in ascendancy, clothing itself in its own peculiar idealism of saving the
world from terror and transforming the dark parts of the world into peaceful
democracies, thereby saving them from themselves. George W. Bush, the
product of privilege, power and corporatism is not its leader, but its
figurehead. What he represents is deeply embedded in the American
psyche. But then so is what Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, Kennedy and
perhaps even Clinton, represented, and what Jimmy Carter has come to represent
now.
Like you, I don't think Americans will rise up
against their President. That is not the American way. What is more
likely is that people will become sick of militarism, of seeing bedraggled men,
women and children trying to get out of the way of tanks and bullets in Iraq
(and perhaps Iran thereafter). Like "Survivor", it's all now being played
out on reality TV, and people must eventually sicken of the stench of it.
Though it is the American way, hand on heart, to express solidarity with the
President whatever he does, the schizoid pushing and shoving will continue
behind the scenes, aided and abetted by body bags. Like '41, '43 may be a
one term President. Though it may be attributable to a genetic flaw, it
does seem rather strange that '43, like his father, shows a remarkable stupidity
about the economy. The costs of war and the tax cuts for the rich could
prove to be a disastrous curb on American power.
Ed Weick
----- Original Message
-----
Sent: Sunday,
March 23, 2003 9:59 AM
Subject:
[Futurework] Re: A child with no legs (was Tigris Zone)
Keith, I have seen no evidence or know of
any protocol that a condemned death row prisoner would ever be in the actual
presence of a governor asking for clemency, so that a woman prisoner falling
on her knees begging for her life must be allegorical not literal.
I believe the case to which you are
referring that Bush mocked afterwards was Karla Faye (Tucker?), a woman who
became a ‘jailhouse Christian’ and reportedly tried to influence other women
prisoners in a positive way, whose cause was taken up by religious leaders
because she had asked for forgiveness of her sins, and this was naturally an
issue they found compelling. She
was executed nevertheless. The
law trumps forgiveness and redemption in Texas any day of the week, even
Sundays. Is the law accountable
in Texas is the question.
I am in no way defending Gov. Bush’s
immaturity and lack of gray matter, meaning that the man sees things very much
in black and white: if the Texas judicial system said this convict was guilty
and deserved to die under the laws of the state, Gov. Bush had no compulsion
to investigate further or question, nor even appear to take a position of
careful deliberation. To do so
would acknowledge complaints about the system itself and admit institutional
and personal weakness. His
personality is to show strength, decisiveness and dedication and let the chips
fall as they may. As history and
both secular and religious literature teach us, these qualities are easily
diverted from good purposes to bad when there is little or no independent
tendency to question or be curious.
My gut instinct is that this is a man who
worships not the redeeming power of his faith but the conquering power of the
transformation. As illustration,
if any of you read the Newsweek cover story I posted (Bush and God), Fineman
described Bush’s bible study group as a substitution for AA group therapy, and
the class focus on the conversion of Saul of Tarses to Paul the Apostle is
very instructive, because Paul
became one of the most proactive, judgmental and influential apostles, using
his previous sinners life and his newfound transformation in ways that the
original 13 could not.
In response to your speculation that the
American public will rise up and reject this transformation of their
leadership, I have no idea, but it is certainly why many of us are having more
difficulty sleeping at night. I
agree with comments I have heard from historians and retired officials who say
out loud that it seems that this administration and its agenda, specifically
the war agenda but also the economic/social agenda, are creating a rift in
this country similar to the great divide before, during and after the Civil
War. This should make any red
blooded American citizen tremble.
The risks and consequences in this national
transformation are great, which we have discussed here before and I won’t go
into now. But I heard a few moments of a speech (Friday?) on CSpan book show
by Katherine McNamara, publisher/editor of Archipelago,
who repeated a
comment by a Canadian politician on CBC.
He answered the interviewer’s question, should Canada take a more
public stand opposing the US war against Iraq by saying that America is
changing itself right now and perhaps Canada should wait and see. Her remarks on the whole were closer to
my darkest fears, that we are sitting through a silent coup d’etat of the
greatest American creation and export, democratic ideals, and seeing a
triumphant installation of military supremacy as a political philosophy,
instead. The term American Empire
is being said more without being challenged or mocked. No, I am not referring to my
neighbors, whom may be watching CNN war coverage now but flipping back to ESPN
when the talk is too cerebral.
I’m talking about the expert class, the professionals, the historians
and the punditry.
Word coming from France via Friedman today,
that perhaps their leadership overreacted to the political crises in the UN,
that Europeans who oppose US hegemony in principle have not fully realized how
America has changed since 9/11.
For once I am doubtful of Friedman. My personal feeling on this is that
superficially there has been a great deal of change; however, if a mighty
military victory succeeds in restoring what I’ll call a collective state of
post traumatic stress syndrome and the public seems to regain its sense of
purpose and security, then a lasting transformation has not taken place (as
many grieve has happened in Israel-Palestine under much worse and longer
lasting terror; they have lost their vision of themselves). After all, for the vast majority, life
is still safe and there has been precious little sacrifice in daily life.
It is the suggestion of
vulnerability and the apprehension about of a lifetime and generations of
national uniqueness and invincibility that have been exposed. Our worldview is under reconstruction,
and that may have been inevitable given we are coming of age as a nation.
Which leads to the old question
(yes, I am going to say it) in other hands, what would the response to 9/11
be? Does Man make history or
history make men?
As long as the drums of war are beating,
and the crescendo is making it difficult to hear anything else at the moment,
there is little chance that moderation and restraint will have much influence.
Talking about the surging polls
supporting the president in the war, I heard it said that at any one time
under normal (peace) times, 25% of the American population opposes war of any
kind anywhere. This was used as a
justification to ignore, I think, the protestors in the streets. I’ve noted before that Republicans in
particular have a tendency to abuse percentages in economic and political
debate, because 25% of the population is vague and has a softer impact than a
real head count.
As far as the transformation goes, it is a
serious and legitimate concern.
This is much different that the greed of the 80s, the Me Decade, or the
division after the fact in Vietnam, as many of us personally recall. I am sickened that as of this moment
the “contract with America”, an image and reputation built, marketed and sold
globally for more than a century, is broken. My hope is that this will be a
temporary condition (and I refrain from describing it in mental health terms).
To those who decry my pessimism,
please be assured that I struggle daily to look at the glass half full not
half empty, but experience and prudence tell me it is better to be prepared
for the worst and hope for the best.
On the face of it, it seems that we have returned to a Cold War,
dividing the world into competing camps and philosophies, where mistrust and
mutually assured destruction permeate the air once again.
Who or what gets the blame for it,
regardless of the success or failure of a lopsided military crusade, is still
to be determined.
Karen
|
