January 23, 2005 8:19 AM

Onward Christian Soldiers

Way Too Much God: Was the president’s speech a case of “mission inebriation”?

You have to wonder if George W. Bush is becoming a victim of his own rhetoric when even Peggy Noonan, Ronald Reagan’s former speechwriter, is willing to take him to task for revealing himself to be a moralizing, narrow, intolerant zealot of Biblical proportions.

I do not have a problem with Bush’s obvious, strongly-held Christian faith. This is hardly the first time that the occupant of the White House has been a committed Christian. It may well be the first time that policy has been formulated and implemented based on a narrow-minded moralistic Christian agenda- not to mention the strongly-held belief that we have the right to force it on the rest of the world.

Faith is and can be a powerful and wonderful thing when it is used for good. Conversely, it can also be a frightening thing when employed by someone lacking in tolerance and intellectual agility.

The administration’s approach to history is at odds with what has been described by a communications adviser to the president as the “reality-based community.” A dumb phrase, but not a dumb thought: He meant that the administration sees history as dynamic and changeable, not static and impervious to redirection or improvement. That is the Bush administration way, and it happens to be realistic: History is dynamic and changeable. On the other hand, some things are constant, such as human imperfection, injustice, misery and bad government.

This world is not heaven.

The president’s speech seemed rather heavenish. It was a God-drenched speech. This president, who has been accused of giving too much attention to religious imagery and religious thought, has not let the criticism enter him. God was invoked relentlessly. “The Author of Liberty.” “God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind … the longing of the soul.”

It seemed a document produced by a White House on a mission. The United States, the speech said, has put the world on notice: Good governments that are just to their people are our friends, and those that are not are, essentially, not. We know the way: democracy. The president told every nondemocratic government in the world to shape up. “Success in our relations [with other governments] will require the decent treatment of their own people.”

Interesting, isn’t it, that such a profound double standard can be placed on the rest of the world? Never mind that it’s also stunningly arrogant in it’s assessment. To define another country using the standard of our own is not only the height of arrogance, it is also disturbingly despotic. While the desire to help ensure that nations respect basic human rights, where is it written that governments must function as our own does? Where does it state that democracy on the American model is the only acceptable version? (And when it comes to respecting basic human rights, how can Bush explain Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib?)

“We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands.” “Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self government… . Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation’s security, and the calling of our time.” “It is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in the world.”

Ending tyranny in the world? Well that’s an ambition, and if you’re going to have an ambition it might as well be a big one. But this declaration, which is not wrong by any means, seemed to me to land somewhere between dreamy and disturbing. Tyranny is a very bad thing and quite wicked, but one doesn’t expect we’re going to eradicate it any time soon. Again, this is not heaven, it’s earth.

Implied in this vision is the conviction that we have the implied right- nay, the obligation to invade, conquer, and convert those countries deemed to be a threat and do not meet the Bush litmus test. Welcome to the Crusades…those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it, eh? Does this mean that we can count on more military adventures like Iraq? Whither Iran, North Korea, or Syria?

Of course, when you can fall back on the memory of 9.11 and our propaganda-fueled collective desire for revenge, you can sell most anything. Fear, hatred, and anger are powerful emotions that can be manipulared by someone skillful, crafty, and motivated enough. You might wonder how someone can do this and be able to look at themself in the mirror. If you honestly feel that you’re doing the Lord’s work, as Bush no doubt does, you probably quite easily and comfortably sleep the sleep of the just. It’s the rest of us that are left to suffer.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on January 23, 2005 8:19 AM.

This seems wrong on so many levels.... was the previous entry in this blog.

It's here...wish you were beautiful.... is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 5.12