unrelated stuv
Jul. 6th, 2004 10:31 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ciroccojOK, silly things first. I may have ruptured something giggling at these:
Highlights of Troy and
Troy in Fifteen Minutes.
***
Chris pointed out when we were downtown for Canada Day that these days it's far more common to overhear people talking in Spanish. Which is true. When I was a kid, I turned around every time I heard Spanish in the street, since it was so unusual. These days, I don't even register it most of the time.
And yesterday I got another example of how the Hispanic presence has grown in Ottawa. My phone rang and I picked it up.
Me: Hello?
Voice: Puedo hablar con Sylvia?
Me: Eh... no, creo que esta equivocado. (incidentally, I don't know the correct term for 'wrong number' in Spanish.)
Voice: Ah, disculpe. Muchas gracias, adios.
Me: Adios.
First Spanish wrong number I've ever had. Bizarre.
***
And on a more sober note, this is the article I mentioned the other day.
The real anti-American
U.S. President's preoccupation with accumulating power defies the ingenious constitution he is sworn to protect
As someone who has written more than a few unkind words about the Bush administration, I know better than most that such criticism always prompts angry accusations of anti-Americanism. It's annoying not only because it's silly - more than half of Americans are anti-American by the logic of some of George W. Bush's Canadian fans – but because I have always considered myself to be passionately pro-American.
The single best expression of my own political philosophy is the Constitution of the United States. If I were to make a list of the thinkers and leaders I most respect, as many as half of the top 10 spots would go to men the Americans know as Founding Fathers. When I die, I want the gravestone to read "don't tread on me" – historically meaningful and practical, too.
Jefferson, Franklin, Jay, Hamilton, Madison, Washington: these were extraordinary men. And don't forget Tom Paine, who isn't technically a Founder but is no less deserving. They were one and all humane, energetic, passionate, intellectually curious and open to the world - the finest fruit of the Enlightenment.
The greatest among them, Thomas Jefferson, was a lawyer, landowner, scientist, polemicist, philosopher, governor, diplomat and poetic author of the Declaration of Independence long before he became president – and after he left office, the founder of a university. "How alive with creative imagination they were," writes historian Bernard Bailyn in To Begin the World Anew. "How bold they were in transcending the world they were born into."
Their view of human nature was realistic, but never cynical. In the Federalist papers, Hamilton wrote that "the supposition of universal venality in human nature is little less an error in political reasoning that the supposition of universal rectitude." People are both generous and selfish, noble and base, honest and corruptible.
The Founders' new system of government was constructed on that idea: The good in human nature meant power could be entrusted to men but the flaws meant that power must always be restrained. To this end, the constitution dispersed power among different institutions – the president, Congress, the Supreme Court, the states – that would check and balance each other. "The American Revolution in its essence had been a struggle against unconstrained centralized power," writes Mr. Bailyn, and the American constitution was intended to prevent any such power from forming again.
The Founders' humility about human nature underpinned much of what they did. In foreign policy, they had, as the Declaration of Independence stated, a "decent respect to the opinions of mankind." They foresaw American taking leadership, but it would lead by example, not force of arms. As John Quincy Adams put it in later years, America "goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy." To do so, Adams warned, would change the American maxim "from liberty to force. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."
Of course the world has changed in two centuries and ideas must change with it. Isolationism, for example, is no longer tenable or wise. But human nature does not change and because the Founders' work was grounded on a powerful understanding of that nature, the Founders' essential vision remains as vibrant as ever. This is precisely why the U.S. constitution, which is the practical expression of that vision, has functioned brilliantly for more than two centuries.
The current occupant of the White House may be spectacularly unlike the polymaths who founded the U.S., but he, too, does have a clear vision of human nature. It is a vision the Founding Fathers would not recognise. It is a vision in which the line between good and evil does not run through every human heart – a phrase penned by Solzhenitsyn that neatly sums up the Founder's view – but instead runs between people. There are good people and there are bad people – or, in Mr. Bush's terms "good hearts" and "evil ones."
Mr. Bush's reaction to the Abu Ghraib scandal was a typical expression of this vision. "This is not America," he insisted, it does not reflect "America's heart." America and Americans are inherently virtuous. Evidence to the contrary is irrelevant, impossible. "Americans do not do this to other people," said Condoleeza Rice about a scandal in which Americans did this to other people.
Just like the Founders, Mr. Bush has followed the logic of his vision to conclusions about power: If power is in the hands of a good man, there's no need to disperse and restrain it. Good men won't abuse power, after all. In fact, power should be coalesced in the hands of the good man so he may more effectively do what is right.
Inevitably, the accumulation of power has been the dominant theme of the Bush presidency. Power has been sucked up from the states, over from Congress and out of the rest of the world. It pools in the desk drawers of one man, unchecked and unbalanced.
No need to worry, though, because the man at the desk is a good man. Trust me, is surely the motto of this president.
Mr. Bush's arrogance is exemplified by his claim that as commander-in-chief he can arrest any person, American or foreigner, anywhere on the planet and imprison them without charge for as long as he deems necessary in the "war on terrorism" – and that no court or institution in the world can say anything about it.
It is a conceit more fit for a Roman emperor than an American president and this week the Supreme Court demolished it by ruling that detainees do have the right to test the lawfulness of their detention in a court. Seldom has there been a better demonstration of the genius of the Founding Fathers' checks and balances, and the danger in dispensing with them.
Arrogance also underlies the administration's handling of torture. The leaked memos show, at a minimum, that the Bush administration was very interested in defining torture down to boost the available techniques of interrogation. And why wouldn't they be? Other regimes may use such powers for evil but the president's good men can be trusted to do what's right.
Mr. Bush has little curiosity about the world beyond his borders. Why should he? He has nothing to learn. He has little regard for the "opinions of mankind" - foreigners have nothing to teach him. He has shown contempt for international law – it's just another hindrance on his virtuous exercise of power.
Mr. Bush is a man possessed of so little humility, not to say humanity, that when a woman condemned to die appealed to the then-governor of Texas for clemency, he mocked her in front of a reporter by pursing his lips and whimpering in a falsetto voice, "I don't want to die." He gave her no clemency. She is dead.
Tomorrow is the Fourth of July, a day on which Americans celebrate the memory and legacy of the Founding Fathers. I honour the same memory and legacy. And that is why I can say I am not anti-American – but George W. Bush is.
Highlights of Troy and
Troy in Fifteen Minutes.
Chris pointed out when we were downtown for Canada Day that these days it's far more common to overhear people talking in Spanish. Which is true. When I was a kid, I turned around every time I heard Spanish in the street, since it was so unusual. These days, I don't even register it most of the time.
And yesterday I got another example of how the Hispanic presence has grown in Ottawa. My phone rang and I picked it up.
Me: Hello?
Voice: Puedo hablar con Sylvia?
Me: Eh... no, creo que esta equivocado. (incidentally, I don't know the correct term for 'wrong number' in Spanish.)
Voice: Ah, disculpe. Muchas gracias, adios.
Me: Adios.
First Spanish wrong number I've ever had. Bizarre.
And on a more sober note, this is the article I mentioned the other day.
The real anti-American
U.S. President's preoccupation with accumulating power defies the ingenious constitution he is sworn to protect
As someone who has written more than a few unkind words about the Bush administration, I know better than most that such criticism always prompts angry accusations of anti-Americanism. It's annoying not only because it's silly - more than half of Americans are anti-American by the logic of some of George W. Bush's Canadian fans – but because I have always considered myself to be passionately pro-American.
The single best expression of my own political philosophy is the Constitution of the United States. If I were to make a list of the thinkers and leaders I most respect, as many as half of the top 10 spots would go to men the Americans know as Founding Fathers. When I die, I want the gravestone to read "don't tread on me" – historically meaningful and practical, too.
Jefferson, Franklin, Jay, Hamilton, Madison, Washington: these were extraordinary men. And don't forget Tom Paine, who isn't technically a Founder but is no less deserving. They were one and all humane, energetic, passionate, intellectually curious and open to the world - the finest fruit of the Enlightenment.
The greatest among them, Thomas Jefferson, was a lawyer, landowner, scientist, polemicist, philosopher, governor, diplomat and poetic author of the Declaration of Independence long before he became president – and after he left office, the founder of a university. "How alive with creative imagination they were," writes historian Bernard Bailyn in To Begin the World Anew. "How bold they were in transcending the world they were born into."
Their view of human nature was realistic, but never cynical. In the Federalist papers, Hamilton wrote that "the supposition of universal venality in human nature is little less an error in political reasoning that the supposition of universal rectitude." People are both generous and selfish, noble and base, honest and corruptible.
The Founders' new system of government was constructed on that idea: The good in human nature meant power could be entrusted to men but the flaws meant that power must always be restrained. To this end, the constitution dispersed power among different institutions – the president, Congress, the Supreme Court, the states – that would check and balance each other. "The American Revolution in its essence had been a struggle against unconstrained centralized power," writes Mr. Bailyn, and the American constitution was intended to prevent any such power from forming again.
The Founders' humility about human nature underpinned much of what they did. In foreign policy, they had, as the Declaration of Independence stated, a "decent respect to the opinions of mankind." They foresaw American taking leadership, but it would lead by example, not force of arms. As John Quincy Adams put it in later years, America "goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy." To do so, Adams warned, would change the American maxim "from liberty to force. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit."
Of course the world has changed in two centuries and ideas must change with it. Isolationism, for example, is no longer tenable or wise. But human nature does not change and because the Founders' work was grounded on a powerful understanding of that nature, the Founders' essential vision remains as vibrant as ever. This is precisely why the U.S. constitution, which is the practical expression of that vision, has functioned brilliantly for more than two centuries.
The current occupant of the White House may be spectacularly unlike the polymaths who founded the U.S., but he, too, does have a clear vision of human nature. It is a vision the Founding Fathers would not recognise. It is a vision in which the line between good and evil does not run through every human heart – a phrase penned by Solzhenitsyn that neatly sums up the Founder's view – but instead runs between people. There are good people and there are bad people – or, in Mr. Bush's terms "good hearts" and "evil ones."
Mr. Bush's reaction to the Abu Ghraib scandal was a typical expression of this vision. "This is not America," he insisted, it does not reflect "America's heart." America and Americans are inherently virtuous. Evidence to the contrary is irrelevant, impossible. "Americans do not do this to other people," said Condoleeza Rice about a scandal in which Americans did this to other people.
Just like the Founders, Mr. Bush has followed the logic of his vision to conclusions about power: If power is in the hands of a good man, there's no need to disperse and restrain it. Good men won't abuse power, after all. In fact, power should be coalesced in the hands of the good man so he may more effectively do what is right.
Inevitably, the accumulation of power has been the dominant theme of the Bush presidency. Power has been sucked up from the states, over from Congress and out of the rest of the world. It pools in the desk drawers of one man, unchecked and unbalanced.
No need to worry, though, because the man at the desk is a good man. Trust me, is surely the motto of this president.
Mr. Bush's arrogance is exemplified by his claim that as commander-in-chief he can arrest any person, American or foreigner, anywhere on the planet and imprison them without charge for as long as he deems necessary in the "war on terrorism" – and that no court or institution in the world can say anything about it.
It is a conceit more fit for a Roman emperor than an American president and this week the Supreme Court demolished it by ruling that detainees do have the right to test the lawfulness of their detention in a court. Seldom has there been a better demonstration of the genius of the Founding Fathers' checks and balances, and the danger in dispensing with them.
Arrogance also underlies the administration's handling of torture. The leaked memos show, at a minimum, that the Bush administration was very interested in defining torture down to boost the available techniques of interrogation. And why wouldn't they be? Other regimes may use such powers for evil but the president's good men can be trusted to do what's right.
Mr. Bush has little curiosity about the world beyond his borders. Why should he? He has nothing to learn. He has little regard for the "opinions of mankind" - foreigners have nothing to teach him. He has shown contempt for international law – it's just another hindrance on his virtuous exercise of power.
Mr. Bush is a man possessed of so little humility, not to say humanity, that when a woman condemned to die appealed to the then-governor of Texas for clemency, he mocked her in front of a reporter by pursing his lips and whimpering in a falsetto voice, "I don't want to die." He gave her no clemency. She is dead.
Tomorrow is the Fourth of July, a day on which Americans celebrate the memory and legacy of the Founding Fathers. I honour the same memory and legacy. And that is why I can say I am not anti-American – but George W. Bush is.
