Taking a Stand

From Zanecorpwiki

Taking a stand is a narrative that was used to great effect by the Bush administration to justify the invasion of Iraq. In their dealings with Iran, the Bushies said time and time again that they would not talk with Iran till Iran met certain demands. In both cases, the narrative was that America must and will take an uncompromising stand against aggression.ref group=notesTrusting the truth more than I trust powerful men to manipulate the populace, I find the facts underlying these narratives troubling. In the case of Iraq, the charge was manufactured or at best the result of gross incompetence. Saddam was in fact complying with demands and there was in fact no aggression against which to stand. And while Iran does indeed have a nuclear program, the US has tolerated and even aided other nations--such as relatively unstable Pakistan--to build nuclear weapons. So while Iran may be aggression, the idea that we resolutely stand against aggression as a non-negotiable matter of principal is demonstrably false./ref

For many, the archetype of this machismo-driven, muscular version of the narrative is to be found in the popular recounting of the Cuban Missile Crisis in which Kennedy stares down the Russians, convincing them of his unwavering resolve to defend liberty and freedom even in the face of likely death:refOn the Media July 3, 2009, contains audio recordings of Kennedy's participation in the popular myth version as well as recordings of the actual events. They actually end up drawing their own parallels with Bush, though it's a very different focus./ref

blockquote We will not prematurely or unnecessarily risk the course of worldwide nuclear war in which even the fruits of victory would be ashes in our mouth. But neither will we shrink from that risk at any time it must be faced. /blockquote

For 20 years, this was our image of Kennedy. He was the best of us, willing to lay his life on the line and inspiring in us a resolve to do the same. His unshakable faith in what was right restored our own. It's an image we need, and an image worth having.

This version, however, was cooked up by Kennedy himself and sold to the American public through seven of his aides who leaked and stood by the myth. No doubt, Kennedy's own political career loomed large in his own mind as he crafted the narrative of himself as steely hero.ref group=notesOne can take the fact that Kennedy secretly recorded the meetings as evidence that he did feel a responsibility to the truth. Or maybe he just liked to hear himself talk./ref But it need not be all back-room plotting, though. Maybe the country did need a hero. Maybe the nation was naive to accept the factual Realpolitik series of events.

But whatever the reasons, what we got was not the truth. Setting aside the question of whether it was a necessary lie, there's no doubt as to the impact the myth has had on our national political narrative. Bush was cast and strove mightily to be the masculine, wise and steady leader. Despite his policy differences, Obama is playing much the same character himself.

As a Romantic who sees great appeal in the principal and narrative of taking a stand, I am troubled by all this. Taking a stand is something that needs to happen from time to time, but not too often. If one never takes a stand, there is a loss of moral fiber. However taking a stand is too stressful to make a habit of. Taking a stand is difficult, and this difficulty makes it precious.

So when Bush chose to take a stand by invading Iraq, we were not only pulled into a questionable war of aggression, but we lost the chance to take a stand against North Korea or in the African genocides. I wish Kennedy had had the wisdom and selflessness to let the real story be known. It was what he himself described as a fair trade--and not steely resolve--which saved the world from a nuclear war. And thank heavens it did.

To be fair, Kennedy's assassination made everything the man did into more than Kennedy himself may have intended. Indeed, one can imagine that the pact to keep the true story of the Crisis secret was spurred by the assassination itself. If not for his death, we may have excised the false narrative early enough to check it's growth.

But the effect has been that politicians now must always stand on principal and resolve, forever publicly taking stands which are often incompatible with reality. All this unnecessarily polarizes the populace and isolates our country. We're like a guy at a party who has some genuinely interesting stuff to say, but ends up alienating everyone by talking loudly and at length about his views with no opportunity for dialog.

Notes

references group=notes /

References

references /