Years ago, a college professor said something I’ll never forget about writing. He said (and I may be paraphrasing) “Writing is convincing somebody who doesn’t love his mother that you love yours.”
I understood what he meant, not because I don’t love my mother (in fact, I do) but because I know what it’s like to feel pressured to say something that’s not really true — and then to feel suspicious that everyone else who says that very thing is only saying it because they feel pressured to say it, and not because they really believe it.
For example, if you were a gay man in the 1950’s, and if you were asked if you were gay, you would probably lie and say, “no, you (expletive), of course not, I like girls!” And if you overheard another man answer in the same way, you would wonder: Is that man really straight? Or is he like me, a gay man, forced to lie?
Similarly, a man who didn’t love his mother would nevertheless insist that he did if asked. That man is a closeted mother-hater, hoping to pass as a mother-lover. And when he overhears another man say the same thing, “Of course I love my mother, you (expletive)!” he wonders: Does that man really love his mother? Or is he like me, unwilling to admit the truth?
To convince a man who hates his mother that you love yours, you must do more than simply insist upon it. You must find a way to present authentic evidence to support your claim — you must somehow find a way to convey the reality of your own feelings.
Writing is also convincing an American who hates his country that you love yours. In this country, the social pressure to be “patrotic” is so intense that many Americans claim to love this country without any true feeling. They call themselves “patriotic” in the same way many Americans say they “believe” in God — they don’t actually believe in God or love their country, but they pretend to feel and believe these things because that’s what’s expected of them.
Liberals are intellectually honest by nature. They resist pressure to lie about their own feelings and beliefs — and they resent being pressured to lie.
The point of all this is to say: I love my country. (Really. I’m not just saying that.)
I love it that America is a stable democracy. I love it that America stands as evidence that a form of government where power and responsibility are broadly shared can provide harmony and prosperity for its citizens.
I love it that America was founded on the idea that “all men are created equal” and that these men (read: men and women) possess inherent rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
I love it that America’s history has been one of expanding enfranchisement to include the poor, blacks, women, etc. – and today homosexuals can rightly point to the trajectory of American history as evidence in support of their claims to equal citizenship.
I love it that “the American Dream” is an egalitarian dream, a dream that says everyone who is willing to contribute to society (by, for example, working) should have the opportunity to live a fulfilling life.
I love it that America is committed to protecting its people – through law enforcement, public education, food and drug oversight, zoning laws, welfare and programs like social security – so our economic growth doesn’t victimize our poor and middle-class while enriching the wealthy.
I love it that America does not embrace a culture of endless expansionism, but rather accepts the notion that its borders will remain fixed — leaving the other nations of the world, and their people, free to pursue their own self-determination.
I love it that American culture is so diverse and exciting.
I believe that America has the potential to play a leading role in lifting the world’s people out of poverty and violence.
I am an American. As an individual, I can speak at great length about my own flaws and failings, my own imperfections, but when I look in the mirror, I am proud of what I see. Similarly, I can say plenty about America’s racial history, it’s Civil War, it’s poverty and crime, it’s culture of excess, it’s irresponsible environmental policies, etc. — but I love this country with all my heart. I do not believe that America is “better” than other countries — just as I, in true American fashion, do not believe that I am “better” than the other people in my life – but when I look at America, I am very proud of what I see.
What I want is liberty, prosperity and security for all Americans. I want the American people to be free from violence, free rom famine and disease, free from slavery — free, in other words, to follow their own spirit! This is what I want and this is what makes me a patriot.
I have a hunch that Colin Powell feels the same way.
I used to think that everybody in America knew who Colin Powell is and what he stands for. But the reaction of the right-wingers to Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama this past Sunday made me think that some of us may have forgotten. So let’s review:
Powell was a professional soldier in the U.S. Army for 35 years. He was wounded during the Vietnam War. While in the Army, he served a White House fellowship under President Richard Nixon, and served as a senior military assistant to Ronald Reagan’s Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. He was Ronald Reagan’s National Security Advisor for two years in the late 1980’s before he was named Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff — the military’s highest rank — in 1989.
Wikipedia says this about Powell’s years as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs:
During this time, he oversaw 28 crises, including the invasion of Panama in 1989 to remove General Manuel Noriega from power and Operation Desert Storm in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. During these events, Powell earned his nickname, “the reluctant warrior.” He rarely advocated military intervention as the first solution to an international crisis, and instead usually prescribed diplomacy and containment.
Powell also served the George W. Bush administration for four years as Secretary of State. He has been criticized harshly — and correctly — for supporting Bush’s horrible decision to invade Iraq in 2003. We must hold Powell accountable for the role he played in initiating a war that has cost thousands of American lives — not to mention many thousands of Iraqi lives — and left America weaker and more vulnerable to its enemies.
But it’s hard to look at Powell’s career and believe he is “unpatriotic” — at least by my definition of the word.
But according to the right-wingers in America, Powell is not a patriot. Why? Because Powell endorsed Barack Obama for President.
Here is what Powell had to say in an interview with Tom Brokaw on NBC’s Meet the Press. It’s a powerful endorsement from a true American patriot:
I know both of these individuals very well now. I’ve known John for 25 years, as your setup said. And I’ve gotten to know Mr. Obama quite well over the past two years.
Both of them are distinguished Americans who are patriotic, who are dedicated to the welfare of our country. Either one of them, I think, would be a good president.
I have said to Mr. McCain that I admire all he has done. I have some concerns about the direction that the party has taken in recent years. It has moved more to the right than I would like to see it, but that’s a choice the party makes.
And I’ve said to Mr. Obama, “You have to pass a test of, do you have enough experience, and do you bring the judgment to the table that would give us confidence that you would be a good president?”
And I’ve watched him over the past two years, frankly, and I’ve had this conversation with him. I have especially watched, over the last six or seven weeks, as both of them have really taken a final exam with respect to this economic crisis that we are in, and coming out of the conventions.
And I must say that I’ve gotten a good measure of both. In the case of Mr. McCain, I found that he was a little unsure as to deal with the economic problems that we were having, and almost every day, there was a different approach to the problem.
And that concerned me. I got the — sensing that he didn’t have a complete grasp of the economic problems that we had.
And I was also concerned at the selection of Governor Palin. She’s a very distinguished woman, and she’s to be admired. But at the same time, now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president.
And so that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment that Senator McCain made.
On the Obama side, I have watched Mr. Obama, and I watched him during this seven-week period. And he displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems like this and picking a vice president that, I think, is ready to be president on day one, and also, in not just jumping in and changing every day, but showing intellectual vigor.
I think that he has a definitive way of doing business that would serve us well. I also believe that, on the Republican side, over the last seven weeks, the approach of the Republican Party and Mr. McCain has become narrower and narrower.
Mr. Obama, at the same time, has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He’s crossing lines –ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He’s thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values.
And I’ve also been disappointed, frankly, by some of the approaches that Senator McCain has taken recently, or his campaign ads, on issues that are not really central to the problems that the American people are worried about.
This Bill Ayers situation that’s been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign. But Mr. McCain says that he’s a washed-out terrorist.
But then, why do we keep talking about him?
And why do we have these robo-calls going on around the country, trying to suggest that, because of this very, very limited relationship that Senator Obama has had with Mr. Ayers, somehow, Mr. Obama is tainted?
What they’re trying to connect him to is some kind of terrorist feelings. And I think that’s inappropriate.
Now, I understand what politics is all about. I know how you can go after one another, and that’s good. But I think this goes too far. And I think it has made the McCain campaign look a little narrow. It’s not what the American people are looking for.
And I look at these kinds of approaches to the campaign, and they trouble me. And the party has moved even further to the right, and Governor Palin has indicated a further rightward shift.
I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that’s what we’d be looking at in a McCain administration.
I’m also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, “Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim.”
Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim; he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian.
But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America.
Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president?
Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, “He’s a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.” This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards — Purple Heart, Bronze Star — showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old.
And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross; it didn’t have the Star of David; it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life.
Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way. And John McCain is as nondiscriminatory as anyone I know. But I’m troubled about the fact that, within the party, we have these kinds of expressions.
So, when I look at all of this and I think back to my Army career, we’ve got two individuals, either one of them could be a good president. But which is the president that we need now?
Which is the individual that serves the needs of the nation for the next period of time?
And I come to the conclusion that because of his ability to inspire, because of the inclusive nature of his campaign, because he is reaching out all across America, because of who he is and his rhetorical abilities — and we have to take that into account — as well as his substance. He has both style and substance. He has met the standard of being a successful president, being an exceptional president.
I think he is a transformational figure. He is a new generation coming into the world — onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason, I’ll be voting for Senator Barack Obama.
The right-wing defines the word “patriotism” in such a way that Powell’s endorsement of Obama is considered “unpatriotic.”
Jay Severin, my favorite right-wing Republican radio talk-show host, recently confirmed this right-wing definition while discussing Powell’s endorsement. (Before you dismiss Severin as a fringe kook, keep in mind that he worked for the presidential campaigns of George H. W. Bush and Pat Buchanan, was a contributor to MSNBC, and “despite not having a nationally syndicated program, Severin was named 53rd most most important talk show host in the country” in 2008 according to wikipedia. G. Gordon Liddy was listed as 49th on this list.)
Real soldiers and real patriots do not endorse racists, Marxists and anti-Semites. … The Colin — Powell, that is — has thrown away his reputation, and his patriotism, and endorsed the Marx brother, the racist, anti-Semite Marxist Barack Obama. And it’s all about two things. It’s about the rehabilitation and rejuvination, selfishly, of the Colin — Powell, that is — career. And it’s about race. Colin Powell has chosen racial preference over the well-being and security of his country. Period. And everybody knows it. But nobody will say it, but a very few people, including we.
Understand that Jay Severin is using the word “patriotic” in exactly the same way that almost all Republicans use this word, and that includes John McCain and Sarah Palin — and although neither McCain nor Palin would have the courage to suggest that Colin Powell is unpatriotic, I’m guessing they both believe it.
That’s Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s definition of the word “patriotism,” and she was merely expressing the mainstream Republican viewpoint when she said she “absolutely” believes that Barack Obama may have “anti-American views.” And when she said
I think it’s people who don’t like America, who detest America. And on college campuses, a Ward Churchill, another college campus, a Bill Ayers, you find people who hate America. And unfortunately, some of these people have positions teaching in institutions of higher learning. But you’ll find them in all walks of life all throughout America.
she absolutely was using a definition of patriotism that would define Colin Powell as “unpatriotic” and “anti-American.” Powell was one of the people Bachmann was referring to — although she wouldn’t have the guts to admit it. When Bachmann said,
I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out, are they pro-America or anti-America? I think people would love to see an expose like that.
she absolutely wanted to expose people like Colin Powell, who is “unpatriotic,” by their definition, because he would endorse Obama for president.
And when Palin said this on the campaign trail in a Republican-leaning area:
We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation.
Palin was absolutely using Severin’s definition of the word “patriotism” — a definition that excludes Colin Powell and others (like me).
And when McCain recently said
I couldn’t agree with you more than the fact that Western Pennsylvania is the most patriotic, most god-loving, most, most patriotic part of America, and this is a great part of the country.
he too was using the Severin definition.
The great thing about Severin is that he is willing to say what Bachmann, Palin, McCain, and the rest of the Republican Party refuse to say — that they use the word “patriotic” in a very specific way, and by their definition, Colin Powell is no patriot, not by a long shot.
So how do we put the Severin definition of “patriotism” into words? We all know, on a gut level, what Severin means when he uses the word “patriotism.” But how do we explain it?
And what will happen to our beloved America if this new definition replaces the definition that you and I use? What will we call ourselves then?