Friday, March 21, 2008

The Trouble With Patriotism Is

Recently, there's been a critical review of Senator Obama's minister Jeremiah Wright and specific sermons he gave that were purportedly "Un-American". First off, labeling anything un-American is, ironically, un-American in itself. Our founding fathers constructed this nation on ideas expressed on parchment made from trees owned by the King of England. And, appropriately, the words declared nothing less than freedom of thought and expression, among other things. How dare anyone decry another for exercising their constitutional rights. And this includes every American flag waving zealot who can't stand an ounce of criticism of the United States from its citizen. Thomas Jefferson shifts in his grave.

We pride ourselves on being the leaders of the free world but denounce and seek to suppress speech that points out our flaws. The United States hasn't risen to prominence by sweeping dirt under the rug, but by confronting our flaws and finding solutions. Self criticism and reflection is what forces us to progress as a nation and people. Without it we'd still have no civil rights, no equal opportunity, and no place on top of the western hegemony. September 11th has somehow given conservatives the excuse of labeling any criticism of our past as unpatriotic and treasonous. We now reject the ideas of The Enlightenment for security from terrorism. We've subtly erased portions of the Constitution and pasted in portions from the so called Patriot Act. Isn't this what the terrorists ultimately want? We have played into their game of fear and now restrict ourselves and abandon our values because we're scared of them. And even more interesting is that we're afraid of the things we had a hand in creating.

One of the sermons reverend Wright is being criticized for was given immediately after September 11th and listed the past wrongs of the United States. Now I have no love or hate for this man, I don't even know him. All I know is that he presented two sermons which have recently garnered media exposure for being "inflammatory". But this sermon in particular has emboldened his critics and has seen them cry out that he's a terrorist sympathizer. But if you read the text of his sermon and actually know the history of the United States, there is truth in what he says and it is important to know why terrorists may hate us. I'm not saying that they are justified in their actions against us, but that there is veritable anger around the world at the United States. Sometimes we tend to forget that the US hasn't been the champion of the world that we believe it to be.

Slavery won't be included as a sin of the United States here because the practice has been around since the dawn of civilization and continues to be practiced in corners of the world. But lets take a look at the First World War. The United States justifiably entered the war on the side of the Allies to stop the Central Powers from taking Europe. However, its actions during the Paris Peace Conference was no different than that of the other imperial powers. We promised the world the ambiguous maxim of "self determination of people" and a League of Nations that would end conflict. We delivered on none of those by allowing the Middle East and Africa to be carved up by Clemenceau and Lloyd George. And we've seen the repercussions of that today in our ordeal with Iraq and the Middle East as a whole.

And we tend to forget the lessons of the Second World War. Again we were thrust into war to save the Allies from their Axis tormentors, this time including Japan. But we forget the xenophobic attitude that spread across the nation after Pearl Harbor and saw to the detention of many United States citizens of Japanese descent. And we tend to forget that the Japanese regiments in our military that fought in Europe were some of the most decorated outfits in the war effort.

America also became the first, and only, nation in history to detonate a nuclear weapon on a civilian population. I forgot, we did it twice. With a drop of two bombs we killed millions of people in the blink of an eye. These were people that were in school, playing with their kids in the park, going to the post office, doctors operating on patients, and people trying to earn a living. These were everyday people living their lives. And we took them from this world on the promise that it would save lives. We accepted that logic because we believed that dropping two nukes would save us the trouble and American lives needed to physically invade the Japanese homeland. And this may very well have been true.

But recent documents and writings by revisionist historians have uncovered that Emperor Hirohito had conceded defeat and was determined to surrender to the United States. He had a recording, on vinyl, that was to be played across the airwaves commanding the Japanese people to put down their arms. There is also documentation that the United States government knew of the emperor's intent. So there is a possibility that we sacrificed the lives of millions of Japanese not to defeat them, but solely to warn the Soviet Union that we had the power to destroy. And this wouldn't be the last time we'd risk American and other people's lives to best the USSR.

The entire policy of Containment, though crucial to the preservation of the Western hegemony, did no favors for the United States' image in the world. In the process we had U2 spy plane shot down over Russian territory, funded the Mujahadeen (later to become the Taliban), propped up pro western dictators (Pinochet and Saddam to name a few), and callously used countless other nations for our purpose. A realist would argue that this is how the new international order worked. However, we mortgaged influence and efficacy for the destruction of our rival. And now we pay the piper with terrorists seeking our destruction and our influence waning at a crucial juncture in our history.

Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel. Anyone who waves the flag of patriotism and uses it to stifle any portion of the Constitution or to shackle our inalienable right to liberty should be headed as that scoundrel. They shouldn't be censored but the people should be weary of those who seek to advance their own cause by appealing to ignorant love of country. True love of country is only achieved by recognizing what makes our nation great and what makes our nation deplorable. We must remember the lessons of history and realize that the United States of America is like any other nation. It has flaws that must be addressed and a history marred by darkness. It is not perfect, and anyone who tells you otherwise is, to put it lightly, nothing more than a preying scoundrel using a bludgeon to smear the words of our Founding Fathers.

Thursday, March 13, 2008

The Nature of Things

The stupidity of brilliant men doesn't go unnoticed for long. Nor does their narcissism. It may seem completely audacious for a person in the public eye to order coitus over the Internet for a moderately hefty rate. But to people in power, it's not a matter of enticement, it's a matter of entitlement.

Elliot Spitzer's recent scandal is of a type that frequently befalls political figures. Sure, athletes and movie stars solicit sex all the time (see Hugh Grant and Darryl Strawberry). But those guys are typical alpha males obsessed with themselves and full of testosterone, or whatever women are currently using to blame us for such follies. Americans view politicians as scumbags of the more subtle variety. We expect our Congressmen and Senators to stand for family values and simultaneously tread water in an ocean of political intrigue and deception full of sharks and undertows.

To be honest, survival on the floors of the Capitol is on par with survival in the sports world or in Hollywood. Both of those industries require top notch killer instinct and a talent for survival. They require skills at manipulation and a salesman's tongue to stay on top. When a player is "loved by teammates", that probably just means that he kisses ass to stay on the roster and preserve his direct deposit. It's all part of the game and we shouldn't expect any different from our politicians. Or should we?

Politicians are inherently different because, in America, they run on rhetoric and values more than actual policy (see Obama winning Democratic nomination). Elliot Spitzer was admired by the public because of his tough stance on corporate America and his crusade for ethics reform in New York state. The people elected him on these promises and his recent actions shattered their collective heart. However, if we take a look at the real Elliot Spitzer, we find an egomaniac that vociferously threatened his opposition personally and alienated his supporters. He was an alpha male bent on dominating the political scene.

He was no different than Hugh Grant or Darryl Strawberry. He's the governor of New York! He could have found some ambitious intern in the governor's office or state legislature and promised her a quick ascension for an hour of fun. The matter would have been kept silent because there wouldn't have been a bank trail and their collective legitimacy depended on it. But that would have meant that Spitzer was being used while using. And that's not what an alpha male does. An alpha male needs the narcissistic pleasure of using something or someone completely for the sake of that use. He was entitled to an hour with "Kristin". And he took it. Sure it cost him $80 thousand over the tenure of his business relationship with her firm, but money is nothing. Power is everything.

Unfortunately for him, Internet call girl services aren't the most secure of businesses apparently. And he was caught. So America faces a conundrum for future politicians. Should we do as they say and not do as they do? Or should we elect someone who acknowledges that they are a scumbag no better than the general populace? Honestly I'd love to have the latter, but in America where everything from health care to racism is privatized, there's no chance of electing a truly honest politician.