The United States of America. Man, I always loved those words. When I was in primary school I ate those words up! I read about Jefferson and Washington and Lincoln and Roosevelt, and the untold soldiers and statesmen who helped make the USA a beacon for hope all over the world, and I just shuddered with pride. I can remember lying in bed consumed with gratitude that I was lucky enough to be born American - no joke.
I wasn't the only one, either. Most of us caught that pride in one way or another - and not just Americans. I was lucky enough as a military brat to travel all over the US and the world, and despite the well-reported enmity of that world I was always surprised - and happy - at what citizens of those other countries said about the US. Most expressed cautious, hopeful opinions that the good of the US (almost always granted) outweighed the bad.
But here's the thing: each of the people I've met, US citizen and international alike, had their own opinion on what made the US a great nation. For some of us it was the idea of fairness. For others it was the idea of strength. This diary is about how those different ideas have brought us to where we are today.
note: I realize that in real life people can love both strength and fairness, and often do. It takes strength to be fair, after all. Please forgive the literary conceit that informs this diary.
Normally, it doesn't matter why we love America. There's no reason a "fairness-loving" American can't live next door to a "strength-loving" American and have 4th of July barbecues together. But 9/11 changed all that.
I was out of the US between the end of 1999 and the spring of 2002. When I left in 1999 the nation was quiet. When I returned in 2002 it was frightened. I don't have to tell those of you who lived through it about the changes, but they were stark. And the biggest change I noticed was the rift between those who primarily came to love America as a fair country and those in whom strength was the hook on their hearts.
For those of us concerned with fairness, 9/11 was a wake-up call. The terrorists were villians and the acts inexcusable, and they pointed us toward some ugly truths. Being concerned with fairness, many of us took a long look at those truths, such as recognizing American involvement in the dramas that created al Qaeda's enmity. In any event, the response we wanted was one that would affirm our idea of fairness, if "fair" is the illusion that we love best about America.
For those concerned with strength, 9/11 was a slap in the face that cannot go unpunished. Hence, "you're either with us or against us." For these people, the response had to affirm "strength". "So", they seemed to be saying, "you obviously don't reflect "fairness" when you fly airplanes into our buildings, so don't expect us to be fair when we respond."
So that's a political problem, and here we are on a political website trying to work it out. My modest suggestion is that we should start to find the common ground, and if we must talk in "frames" to get the attention of the mass of casual observers, the frame should be "strength" (assuming for the sake of this argument that we're on the side of fairness. I am, anyway).
*It's strong to treat our enemies with fairness - the other side could never show such strength.
*It's strong to lead the charge for peace and democracy through legal means - only the weak resort to violence.
*It's strong to honestly face our past - only the weak hide their weaknesses from themselves.
and so on.
Finally, I have some questions about the idea of "blaming America first." Where I come from, taking responsibility for my circumstances is considered strong. When I get in trouble I try to figure out the ways I've created that trouble before I start blaming others. That just seems like the way a truly "strong" country would react to a big national emergency. If we're not going to look at ourselves first we're never going to be any safer.
But what do you think? Fair or strong? What combination of the two?