Yet what good is any rule without a couple of probative exceptions? Maybe, once in a long while, somebody out there beyond Cape Cod says something worth attending to. Maybe.
For reasons of ethical cleanliness and good thought and, above all, narcissism avoidance, however, one must always be cautious about citation of the Lesser Breeds Without. One is not to go about ballyhooing this or that exotic observation, picking up some striking passage like, for example,
| George W. Bush’s contempt for the rules and institutions of international politics, his revival of preventive war, with all its unforeseeable consequences, his abrogation of the rule of law in his own country, and his ignorance of every issue related to environmental conservation have become, for me and for the vast majority of Germans, synonymous with a high-handed, ugly America |
merely because one happens to wish one had written it oneself. Exactly what purpose the rest of the world serves by existing is far from clear, but the theory that it is meant as a mirror to look at and admire one’s own silly face in can be ruled out, having been refuted by Copernicus. Or was it Dr. Kuhn of MIT?
Anyhow, a little examination of a gift horse's teeth never comes amiss (does it?) and may even reveal definite evidence that the Universe is not actually revolving around Oneself. In the case at hand, it does so. Herr Christoph Peters followed up imediately with a sentence which it would be grossly indecent to wish that Oneself had written:
| "This state of affairs has provoked not only rage and horror, but also great sadness, for the United States has always been the symbol of freedom, democracy and law." |
Gentlemen do not care to be flattered, and philosophers do not approve of inaccuracy. Accordingly, that slice of baloney starts out with two strikes against it.
There may be a third strike as well, depending on whether one chooses to disentangle blackmail from flattery. It is a fairly common ploy, and maybe with Old Euros especially, to butter up our poor old Uncle Sam with all that "freedom, democracy and law" jazz in hopes of (not merely receiving a tip, but actually of) dictating policy. Judge for yourself -- or go ask Rupert Murdoch -- whether or not Herr Peters is suavely threatening even as he lays on the b------t with a dumptruck: "If you folks don’t do something about the militant extremist GOP and do it pronto, why, I and the vast majority of Germans may be obliged to procure ourselves some other FD&L Symbol to venerate in future." [1] I detect that note in Herr Peter's little op-ed sonata, but perhaps I am mistaken, confused by recollection of previous works in the same genre?
Power being what it is, and Hyperpower bein’ even more so!, it would be silly and ungracious for Uncle Sam to object to flattery and even blackmail attempts from the Lesser Breeds Without. Sillier still, though, for Wunnerful US to take such oblique tributes to our Pentagon at face value. Without seeming impatient or ungrateful, Wunnerful US ought always to try to figure out what the LBW are up to, what they really and substantially want when they take to buttering up and laying on. I find Christoph Peters simpático and am willing enough, maybe too willing, to suppose that he wants more or less what he says he wants, a USA that looks and behaves less like Greater Texas, though perhaps not exactly reproducing More's Utopia and Plato's Republic straightaway either.
Alarm bells go off at once when I notice that what Herr Peters calls for is (mostly) what I want myself. A "judicious indifference to the Opinions of Mankind" is admirable, but a "judicious indifference to the Opinions of Oneself," so to rephrase the rephrasing, is mandatory as well for those who take M. Pascal seriously about travaillons donc à bien penser: voilà le principe de la morale. Judiciousness and high-quality thinking might be served in this case by being three times, or five times, less indifferent to the opinions of Frau Merkel (that one rejects) than to the opinions of Herr Peters, which are, in part, almost indistinguishable from what one had already thought for oneself without his assistance. [2]
___
[1] I notice that Dr. R. Limbaugh or Mlle. A. Coulter might have written those words, only meaning them to be enunciated sarcastically with the implication that Wunnerful US is -- obviously! -- the only, or the only acceptable, "symbol of freedom, democracy and law" product presently available on The Market. On that view, either Herr Peters is bluffing, or he is a mere left-wing infant and imbecile who doesn't know any better.
Neither estimate of him is credible chez moi, but I do suspect that he may not be 100.0% sincere and frank about his symbol worship. Any alien admitted to the columns of the New York Times Company is likely to be a big enough boy intellectually to dispense with idols and icons, adoring Freedom and Democracy and Law unembodied in concrete imagery.
At a lower level, isn't it likely that when Herr Peters discusses us Yanks in ordinary political conversations, his F-D-L trinity turn up mostly per contra? I find it difficult to imagine even his dubyaphile Chancellor, Frau Merkel, going on about Wunnerful US in that civics-textbook strain at any length. But God knows best.
[2] Two members of Peters’ own F-D-L trinity encourage a Pascalian measure of self-distrust:
(1) Democracy means that the People (not Oneself) is to rule.
(2) The Rulalaw slogan can mean pretty well everything and its opposite, yet in some sense if "Law rules," then necessarily Oneself does not rule.
Put like that, however, Democracy and Rulalaw look to be incompatible. Furthermore, Freedom could hardly be introduced as an anti-Oneself principle by anybody but a satirist. One might emulate the move that most eleutheromaniacs are eventually reduced to and solemnly announce "The only TRUE Freedom is OTHER PEOPLE'S freedom!" -- a formula that clearly relegates Oneself to its proper humble place.
That soundbite even sounds sort of edifying, dunnit? But of course it cannot possibly pass the bien penser test.
No comments:
Post a Comment