MLK I have a dream speech

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."
Martin Luther King - August 28, 1968 Hear highlights at I have a dream speech or read the full text.

.Historical - Lincoln's Second Inaugural Addres

Some things are worth repeating and this is one of them.
It is also a useful reference for anyone who wants to do one of the following:
a) Refute the claim that the civil war was not about slavery.
b) Refute the claim that the American government has never had a place for religion in it.
c) Read good literature and/or history.

Lincoln'sSecond Inaugural Address

American Retreat?

Fareed has another piece in which he disagrees with those who describe American foreign policy as being in retreat.

I think that on this question almost all of us, including those who make a living writing about such things, are in over our heads.

I think that the old order with its large America is gone.
Depending on your perspective that large America was either:
a) trying to stabilize and protect the world and/or
b) bullying the world into supporting American interests.

Either way it is gone.

A new less expansive (and less expensive) American foreign policy will follow.
I hope it will be something like first among equals for awhile with being in the group of "firsts among equals" later.  We cannot dominate the world like we did in the middle of the last century but how it plays out or should  play out is way too much for most of us.

That is why, although I have some quarrels with Obama, I am reluctant to oppose his path toward that new world order.  Fareed seems right to me.

Race 7 A discussion on Race

The following appeared in the Paducah Sun in March of 2014.

President Obama and others have called for a conversation on race in America.  Here is a thought.

If you are an American, the place to begin a discussion about race is to clearly acknowledge how bad the American version of racism was and why.  The short answer is slavery and the fact that it was based almost entirely on race.  It took almost a century and a civil war for the new nation to eliminate slavery itself.  Then another century of apartheid before we even began the job of removing that very strong American racism.  To succeed in that endeavor would also take very strong measures. 

How strong would the measures have to be?  Well, our rights and privileges as Americans are among the things that we hold most dear. We guard them jealously.  However, by the sixties we were so committed to eliminating racism that we gave up some of those rights by separating the battle against racism from the criminal justice system when we created the EEOC. Consequently, although an accusation of racism within an institution is at least as serious as many crimes, the accused does not have many of those basic rights that are part of the criminal procedures specified in the constitution. This is so that a victim of racism can be heard even against an entire institution.  A formal complaint which brings the entire process into motion can be made by a single individual. That is one edge of that sword. There is no preliminary review by an expert (a parallel of an indictment by a grand jury) to determine if the evidence meets even a modicum of credibility.  The process is conducted in secret by someone who chooses whom to call to testify and whom to leave out.  The invitation to testify may go to far more adversaries than friends of the accused.  Negative evidence may be presented against the accused by someone who had a disagreement with him at any time in the past. The accused will receive a copy of and be allowed to respond to the original complaint.  However, there is no right to confront witnesses (or even the accuser), there is no right to cross examine witnesses (or even the accuser), and there is no right to call witnesses in his defense.  The structure also forbids any retaliation against someone who makes a claim. Because our racism has been so powerful, I think the inclusion of each of these provisions is at least arguably justified.  Why do I list them here?  Because they are part of the evidence of how committed our country became fifty years ago to ridding ourselves of the scourge of racism. A measure of the success of this program is the fact that being labeled a racist is now one of the worst things that can happen to a person in this society.

I believe that in the overwhelming majority of racism cases, the accuser has some basis for his belief.  In what follows I am not talking about that person, even if his claim was rejected because there was not quite sufficient evidence for his belief.  I am talking about the person who, with no evidence at all, exploits the structure that was built to protect him from racism and turns that structure into a political weapon.

The process is there for a lofty purpose, but it can be abused.  The other edge of that sword is that a formal complaint - charging racism - which brings the entire process into motion can be made on the whim of a single individual.  A malicious person can use the structure to attack someone he considers to be an enemy. A paranoid person could use the structure to go after someone he thought looked at him wrong one day. But the possibility of abuse doesn’t require an assumption of malice or paranoia on the part of the accuser.  Perhaps X and Y had a disagreement and Y is mad at X and Y can’t tell the difference between someone who disagrees with him and someone who is a racist.  Y can take a few hours and throw together a complaint that can cause his target substantial amounts of agony, lost work time and expense.  Suppose the Equal Opportunity Officer determines that, in each and every one of accuser’s claims, there is no basis for a charge of racism?  What happens then?  Nothing.  No matter how frivolous the claims, no matter how mean the motives, one can file the complaint and do it in full confidence that when the process is over, no one will call him to account. The structure does not include consequences for filing false charges.  The filer has a license to smear. 

Surely there is a modification of this system that would maintain the basic protections needed for minorities and give the EEOC Officer the authority to deal with inappropriate attacks.  Perhaps his options should include a ‘summary dismissal’ analogous to a judge’s dismissal of a frivolous lawsuit.  That option could be of great value to the country itself because it is not just the target that suffers.  Frivolous complaints weaken the public’s confidence in the EEOC and its procedures and undermine our nation’s vital struggle to put racism behind us.      

Wayne C. Bell, Murray State Univ. Professor Emeritus of Mathematics, 1976-2008 

enslaved persons

A few years ago I took a trip around the US and went to several historical sites in the east.  I noticed that in many (I think all) of these locations the word “slave” was not used.  In its place was the expression “enslaved person”. 

My initial reaction was, “Well there is another example of politically correct nonsense.”

But the expression hung around in the back of my mind and finally I felt the need to analyze it.  What do the two terms say about the individuals who wear them?  How is the word whose root word is slave, used?  In the first case “slave” was a noun.  The individual was a s-l-a-v-e.  In the second case “enslaved” was an adjective.  It described the individual’s condition, not his essence.  The individual was a p-e-r-s-o-n (who had been enslaved).

Now, I know what you’re thinkin’.  To the slave it is a distinction without a difference.  Maybe. But even in the hardest of times perhaps the most important thing of all is how you think of yourself.  Frederick Douglass may not have made the verbal distinction, but I believe that he did make the psychological one.

Be that as it may, a modern American who wants to understand his country and how the reality of its history correlates with the exceptionalism of its vision ought to consider the distinction above to be about a very significant difference. 

PS  The term enslaved person also implies the existence of an enslaver.

a race based society

If you think that there is no one who wants to have a society in which race is the defining characteristic on a permanent basis consider the following:

"To say that we should get over race is like saying democracy should get over having elections."
Caleb Branch on Face the Nation August 25, 2013.

MLK I have a dream speech

August 28
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal."
Martin Luther King - August 28, 1968 Hear highlights at I have a dream speech or read the full text.

Bush and Obama in Africa

 On his meeting with Obama:
KARL:  What did you talk about when the cameras weren't rolling?
BUSH: What a big pain the press is.
(CROSSTALK)
KARL: You probably agreed entirely on that.
(LAUGHTER)
BUSH: We just chatted about his trip. He's at the end of the trip. I remember how tired I used to get. I said, you got to be kind of worn out, he said, I had a great trip, looking forward to getting back home. And I asked him about his girls, were they having a good time? He said, you bet, because I remember bringing our daughters on some of these trips and how meaningful it was to be with them. And we didn't sit around hashing out policy.
KARL: Did you talk to him? Not much at all?
BUSH: No, not really. He's busy. And I'm retired.

On his own work in Africa:
BUSH: We (Obama and I) both represent a great country. People admire America. And Africans are thrilled with the idea that American taxpayers funded programs that save lives.
KARL (voice-over): One of those programs, the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, PEPFAR, which President Bush signed into law 10 years ago is now celebrating a remarkable milestone. One million African babies born HIV-free, thanks to programs preventing mother-to-child transmission. Another 7 million with HIV are getting the drugs they need to survive.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
OBAMA: I think this is one of his crowning commitments. Because of the commitment of the Bush administration and the American people, millions of people's lives have been saved.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KARL: President Obama said this is one of your crowning achievements. Do you agree with that?
BUSH: That's nice of him. I view it as an achievement of American generosity. And it has been an extraordinarily successful program. And I was honored to be a part of it.
One reason we're in Africa is because we have found out and discovered that women are dying of cervical cancer. They have been saved from HIV through antiretroviral drugs, yet they're dying of cervical cancer. We think it's needless, and we're trying to do something about it.
...
KARL: Why Africa? I mean was there a moment where this clicked for you? You visited earlier.
BUSH: There was a moment because I was the president of the most powerful, rich nation and a pandemic was destroying an entire generation. And I thought it would be morally shameful not to act.
KARL: How important is Africa to your husband's legacy?
LAURA BUSH: I think it's very important. I think it's really important for people to know that the generosity of the American taxpayer has saved lives here. And that now seven million people are on anti-retroviral drugs and are living full, productive lives. They can contribute to their economy. They are not leaving orphans like what happened earlier in the big pandemic. I think it's, I think Americans should feel great about it.

On Obama's lack of concern for Africa:
KARL: President Obama has been criticized by those who say he hasn't done as much for Africa as you did. That he's neglected Africa. Is that a bad rap?
BUSH: President Obama cares deeply about ... people on the continent of Africa. All I can tell you is that the State Department under his leadership and under Secretary Clinton has been incredibly helpful in our efforts to deal with cervical cancer. It doesn't surprise me that presidents get criticized.
...

On Gay Marriage:
KARL: I saw a journalist in Zambia asked you about gay marriage and whether it is compatible with Christian values. And you had an interesting response.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: I shouldn't be taking a speck out of somebody else's eye when I have a log in my own.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BUSH: I meant that I'm not going to answer the question then and I'm not going to answer it now in terms of the political question about whether or not, I just don't want to weigh back in the debate. I'm out of politics.
But I meant it's very important for people not to be overly critical of someone else until you've examined your own heart.
 

Bacevich, Niebuhr, and Dylan

Andrew Bacevich is a Professor of History and International Relations at Boston University and a retired Colonel in the U S Army.  He has written a little book entitled The Limits of Power, The End of American Exceptionalism, Henry Holt, 2008.  In it he argues very convincingly that the reason that we continue making foreign policy blunders is precisely because we do not recognize that we are subject to those limits.  I recommend it strongly.  It is not just another diatribe about George W. Bush.  It is much more.  See it on Amazon.

Bacevich led me to the renowned theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, 1892-1971.   In 1952 Niebuhr wrote a little book entitled The Irony of American History,  University of Chicago Press. Bacevich wrote an introduction to this edition.  It is a more philosophical approach to a broader variation of the same question.  I had some difficulty at the beginning of the book,  but it was worth it.  Among other things, the book anticipates some of the philosophical problems that would arise during the then recently begun cold war.  See it on Amazon.

Since there are an ample number of reviews on Amazon I will not write one and avoid the risk of coming up against the limits of my own power. 

 I don't know if there is a "Cliff Notes" (abreviated) version of these books.  However, it would not be too far wrong to say that the following song (hear it here) serves that purpose:

With God on Our Side

Bob Dylan

Oh my name it ain't nothin'
My age it means less
The country I come from
Is called the Midwest
I's taught and brought up there
The laws to abide
And the land that I live in
Has God on its side.

Oh the history books tell it
They tell it so well
The cavalries charged
The Indians fell
The cavalries charged
The Indians died
Oh the country was young
With God on its side.

The Spanish-American
War had its day
And the Civil War too
Was soon laid away
And the names of the heroes
I's made to memorize
With guns in their hands
And God on their side.

The First World War, boys
It came and it went
The reason for fightin'
I never did get
But I learned to accept it
Accept it with pride
For you don't count the dead
When God's on your side.

The Second World War
Came to an end
We forgave the Germans
And then we were friends
Though they murdered six million
In the ovens they fried
The Germans now too
Have God on their side.

I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war comes
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.

But now we got weapons
Of the chemical dust
If fire them we're forced to
Then fire them we must
One push of the button
And a shot the world wide
And you never ask questions
When God's on your side.

Through many dark hour
I've been thinkin' about this
That Jesus Christ
Was betrayed by a kiss
But I can't think for you
You'll have to decide
Whether Judas Iscariot
Had God on his side.

So now as I'm leavin'
I'm weary as Hell
The confusion I'm feelin'
Ain't no tongue can tell
The words fill my head
And fall to the floor
That if God's on our side
He'll stop the next war.

Obama Exceptionalism

During his first term, Obama seemed resolutely opposed to supporting the concept of "American exceptionalism."   Did anyone else find it strange that, he then said in his second inaugural address:

What makes us exceptional – what makes us American – is our allegiance to an idea, articulated in a declaration made more than two centuries ago:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” 

It seems almost as if he believes it but, before his last election, he did not want to sound jingoistic.

American prisoners

.
From Fareed Zakaria GPS and Pat Robertson.

America has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners.

California spends less than $9,000 per year per student and more than $50,000 per year per prisoner.

Is this who we have become?

Our politicians are so obsessed with their conflicting economic certainties that they will not deal with our real and pressing problems.

Is it not time to say ALL OUT?
.

Historical - Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address

.
Some things are worth repeating and this is one of them.
It is also a useful reference for anyone who wants to do one of the following:
a) Refute the claim that the civil war was not about slavery.
b) Refute the claim that the American government has never had a place for religion in it.
c) Read good literature and/or history.

Lincoln'sSecond Inaugural Address
.

American Exceptionalism 2

In a 10-31-2010 post I made my case for American Exceptionalism.
Now I would like to say what I believe are some of the consequences of that belief. What you might call the rights and privileges and responsibilities of that status.
Well, let’s start with the part about being a “shining city on a hill” and a light unto the world. I doubt that we were a very bright light when Winthrop was talking about the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 16xx. But if my understanding of history is correct we were such a light (an example of freedom) to some of the world in the late 18th century and to much of the world in the 19th century and well into the 20th century. But now there are lots of places that promote freedom and opportunity. You might or might not think of that as a success of ours, but in any case our special role in that regard is over. There were no rights and privileges that went with the role of “shining city on a hill” other than perhaps an unfortunate inclination to self adulation. But, since we claimed the role, there was a responsibility to live up to its image.

This is incomplete.
.

Jefferson and Lincoln and King

.
Some see in Thomas Jefferson only a hypocrite who owned slaves.

I see Jefferson as a man, admittedly flawed, who lived in a world not of his making which he could not change.

But I will also say that he did not simply "accept that which I cannot change" as in the cleric's serenity prayer. He contributed to the eventual solution in the only place where it could happen: the future. He placed in the hands of, then unknown, leaders a powerful weapon that could be wielded when the time came that it was possible to "change the things they could".

Lincoln: "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."
Gettysburg, November 1863

King: “I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal.’”
Washington, August 28, 1968
.

Islamic dress code

.
On a trip to Texas we stopped in a Waffle House in Arkansas and saw what I assumed to be a Muslim family of father, mother and 3 children. The mother and teen daughter were carefully scarfed so that only their faces and hands were visible. Not even their hair showed.

Well sort of.
The scarves were very colorful almost form fitted so that one could see that underneath was a lot of flowing hair. The slacks that they were wearing were also form fitted and very colorful .

While they appeared to meet the requirements of "covering" I expect many of the mullahs in the more backward parts of the Islamic world would have been shocked at the sight.

Like all of the other threads that make up the fabric of America, Islam will change what we become.

But America will change Islam too.
.

pictures

.
Some nice color pictures from America circa 1940 at this Denver Post blog.

Cruel America

.
Cruel America by Jonathan Schell
This article "appeared" in the October 17, 2011 edition of The Nation.

Mr. Schell talked about Gov. Perry, the death penalty, Republicans and other cruel people, Iraq, Bush and Cheney, and torture.

He criticized Obama too - for not holding Bush and company accountable for their crimes.

Funny though, he apparently hasn't heard about Obama's assassination of American Citizen Awlaki.
.

Ferguson's six killer apps

.
In 1453 Christian Constantinople fell to the Islamic Turks, which ended the Byzantine Empire again.

I once read (I don't remember where) that if an alien had come to visit the earth shorly after that event and had been asked which of the existing cultures in the world would rise to domination, he would probably have not chosen beseiged Europe.

Niall Ferguson (The Ascent of Money)has offered up a "simple explanation" for the rise of the West in his book Civilisation: The West and the Rest. His answer in summary is that they had six "killer applications": competition, science, democracy, medicine, consumerism and the work ethic.

They are open source apps which is why the "rest" are catching up.
This "rise of the rest" was as certain as the rising of the morning sun.

Fareed Zakaria points out in the Post American World that this is not necessarily a "decline" of America. But it does require that we revise our way of thinking. We should aspire to be the first among equals.

PS Medicine is part of science and competition, consumerism, and the work ethic are parts of capitalism. So maybe he's really got 3 killer apps: democracy, science, and capitalism. That probably wouldn't sell as well in certain circles.
.

Historical - Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address

.
Setting: March 4, 1865
The previous Nov Lincoln defeated General McClellan, the peace candidate.
It is more than 2 months since Sherman completed his march to the sea and a few weeks before Lee's surrender at Appomattox. It is clear to all that the war is won.
Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address
Saturday, March 4, 1865
Fellow-Countrymen:
At this second appearing to take the oath of the Presidential office there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement somewhat in detail of a course to be pursued seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention and engrosses the energies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself, and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.
On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, urgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war — seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.
One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war the magnitude or the duration which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with or even before the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

Libya

.
Revised a few hours later to tone it down a bit.

On CNN Anderson Cooper just said about 9:05 central (last night) the the "US had a lot to answer for" about Libya.

If you like gall, then you will love the media.

I expect that Anderson would, like any good liberal, reject out of hand any suggestion of American Exceptionalism. But, apparently, he really does believe in it, because why else would he look to us for the existence of Quaddafi? He didn't mention that China has anything to answer for.

He's putting people on TV saying we should do more. But if we did more and got involved in it then the self same Anderson Cooper would then put people on TV saying that interference was American Imperialism run amok and we were just there for the oil. Then he would bring on the others screaming - No blood for oil.

There is an Org of African states, the Org. of Arab states, an org of Islamic states, NATO, and the UN. Why is it our problem?

I support John F. Kennedy's statement from long ago: "Africa for the Africans."

It is now 9:30 and Cooper goes on and on. It was not an isolated remark.

It is time to say: "The era of American Exceptionalism is over. Let'em kill each other."

3-1-11 OK So I got a little carried away. I should have made it into a question with: Is it time to say ... . But I couldn't figure out how to punctuate that. See Libya 3 on 3-2-11.

.