Happy equinox. Right on schedule, the temperature dipped in Vermont last night. One of the sugar maples in my back yard is turning bright orange, either as a sign of the season or a reaction to stress from global warming. Is the tree half green or half orange?
Autumn in Vermont is a season of contrast – reds, oranges and yellows competing with each other and the greens of the leaves not turned and the deep greens of the conifers. The contrast evokes feelings of change in our own lives; maybe that’s why leaf-peeping tours are so popular with senior citizens, grappling with the tendency years have to pass before we’re ready.
The word “contrast” jumped off the screen the other day. An article in Salon noted that in his weekly radio address for 29 March 2003, a few weeks after U.S. forces invaded Iraq, George W. Bush said, “The contrast could not be greater between the honorable conduct of our liberating force and the criminal acts of the enemy.”
What upsets me most about that statement – especially given what we now know has happened in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere and what Mr. Bush and his aides would like Congress to allow to continue to happen – is that I think Mr. Bush actually believed the words he said and if confronted with them today, would still think they’re true.
I don’t know how Mr. Bush gets those notions, but I see them in many people. “We are honorable, they are criminal” is the formula, the only things needing definition are “we” and “they.”
According to this belief, the United States is honorable; any country with which it has a conflict is criminal – regardless of how the conflict started. If “we” are defined as Republicans, then Democrats are “criminal” and distorting the truth or stealing elections is “honorable,” because it results in Republican control of government. If “they” are other Republican candidates, such as Mr. Bush versus John McCain in 2000, then Mr. McCain – or his wife – will be accused of criminality.
It’s this kind of belief, one that determines morality by identity instead of behavior, that is the principle enemy we all face today. If one reads the accounts of Mr. Bush’s face off with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations this week, it’s clear that each man is trapped by a limited view that paints himself as “honorable” and the other “criminal.”
Karen Armstrong, in A History of God, traces the intellectual development of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Our early perceptions of god were as a tribal deity – warlike, partial to our tribe, expressing the same preferences and prejudices as our group – a kind of celestial “we are honorable, they are criminal” mentality.
That early conception of god is understandable, given that all three religions were born in strife, conflict and persecution. Ms. Armstrong relates how far the three faiths have advanced in their understanding of the holy and how the predominant view of god reverts to the biased tribal deity in times of stress, change and social upheaval.
With easy hindsight, we can see the worst actors of the 20th century – Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao – took power in large part because of uncertainty and change at their moments in history. They became manifestations of that biased, warlike tribal deity for their nations. It’s also clear we’re in another time of change and uncertainty – an autumn in the seasons of history. We’re looking back to recent decades of what now seems a summer of ease and plenty. What lies ahead seems as if it might be a winter of conflict and privation. It makes sense people want leaders who cut away shades of gray and divide the world into “honorable” and “criminal.”
The key is not to give in to fear. Franklin Roosevelt was the one leader of the mid-20th century who urged understanding, not barricades and used power to defend, not conquer. He began his tenure in the worst of times and started with a call to first defeat our own fear.
A time of decision is again upon us, not only for the weeks until the next election, but for the years of the near and foreseeable future. Our greatest enemies will be our own fear and narrowness of mind. It will not be easy to overcome these obstacles, but it will be worth it.
Equinox in the Balance
Happy equinox. Right on schedule, the temperature dipped in Vermont last night. One of the sugar maples in my back yard is turning bright orange, either as a sign of the season or a reaction to stress from global warming. Is the tree half green or half orange?
Autumn in Vermont is a season of contrast – reds, oranges and yellows competing with each other and the greens of the leaves not turned and the deep greens of the conifers. The contrast evokes feelings of change in our own lives; maybe that’s why leaf-peeping tours are so popular with senior citizens, grappling with the tendency years have to pass before we’re ready.
The word “contrast” jumped off the screen the other day. An article in Salon noted that in his weekly radio address for 29 March 2003, a few weeks after U.S. forces invaded Iraq, George W. Bush said, “The contrast could not be greater between the honorable conduct of our liberating force and the criminal acts of the enemy.”
What upsets me most about that statement – especially given what we now know has happened in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and elsewhere and what Mr. Bush and his aides would like Congress to allow to continue to happen – is that I think Mr. Bush actually believed the words he said and if confronted with them today, would still think they’re true.
I don’t know how Mr. Bush gets those notions, but I see them in many people. “We are honorable, they are criminal” is the formula, the only things needing definition are “we” and “they.”
According to this belief, the United States is honorable; any country with which it has a conflict is criminal – regardless of how the conflict started. If “we” are defined as Republicans, then Democrats are “criminal” and distorting the truth or stealing elections is “honorable,” because it results in Republican control of government. If “they” are other Republican candidates, such as Mr. Bush versus John McCain in 2000, then Mr. McCain – or his wife – will be accused of criminality.
It’s this kind of belief, one that determines morality by identity instead of behavior, that is the principle enemy we all face today. If one reads the accounts of Mr. Bush’s face off with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations this week, it’s clear that each man is trapped by a limited view that paints himself as “honorable” and the other “criminal.”
Karen Armstrong, in A History of God, traces the intellectual development of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Our early perceptions of god were as a tribal deity – warlike, partial to our tribe, expressing the same preferences and prejudices as our group – a kind of celestial “we are honorable, they are criminal” mentality.
That early conception of god is understandable, given that all three religions were born in strife, conflict and persecution. Ms. Armstrong relates how far the three faiths have advanced in their understanding of the holy and how the predominant view of god reverts to the biased tribal deity in times of stress, change and social upheaval.
With easy hindsight, we can see the worst actors of the 20th century – Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao – took power in large part because of uncertainty and change at their moments in history. They became manifestations of that biased, warlike tribal deity for their nations. It’s also clear we’re in another time of change and uncertainty – an autumn in the seasons of history. We’re looking back to recent decades of what now seems a summer of ease and plenty. What lies ahead seems as if it might be a winter of conflict and privation. It makes sense people want leaders who cut away shades of gray and divide the world into “honorable” and “criminal.”
The key is not to give in to fear. Franklin Roosevelt was the one leader of the mid-20th century who urged understanding, not barricades and used power to defend, not conquer. He began his tenure in the worst of times and started with a call to first defeat our own fear.
A time of decision is again upon us, not only for the weeks until the next election, but for the years of the near and foreseeable future. Our greatest enemies will be our own fear and narrowness of mind. It will not be easy to overcome these obstacles, but it will be worth it.
© Mark Floegel, 2006