It is hard to be a politically engaged progressive American and not be very concerned about the final back and forth of the HCR debate.
Kill the Bill.
Reconciliation.
Sell-out.
Start over.
You’re wrong.
No, you’re wrong.
We are doomed if we do this.
We are doomed if we don’t.
And on and on it goes.
Who is correct and who is wrong depends on how you define situation.
And as I’ve read and heard the back and forth, I have found myself thinking about the final scenes of the classic David Lean film The Bridge on the River Kwai. Here it is:
I think this is a fine metaphor for where we are in this debate and a bit of a Rorschach test.
To the jump...
The Bridge on the River Kwai is a great movie. It functions on many levels but at the core is a story about a man who learns too late that through his narrow pursuit of one worthy goal he has ended helping his enemy and betraying all that he believed in.
Here is a quick synopsis.
The film is a fictionalize World War II story about how the Japanese used forced labor to build a railroad line in Thailand. Among the forced laborers for this project were prisoners of war. The film opens as a handful of work camp POW survivors greet a fresh group of British POW. The Brits are led by Colonel Nicholson (played by Alec Guinness). One of the surviving work camp POWs is an American, Commander Shears (played by William Holden). The contrast between these two characters is a tension that runs through the film as issues of loyalty, tactics and morality are explored. At the moral center of the film is a British doctor Major Clipton (played by James Donald).
In the film the POWs are being forced by the Japanese to build a bridge over the River Kwai. Colonel Nicholson insists that the Japanese respect the Geneva Conventions and allow him and his officers to maintain a command structure over the captured British troop. Colonel Saito (played by Sessue Hayakawa), the Japanese camp commander orders the officers to work along side of the men and a stand off between Nicholson and the Saito ensues. Nicholson eventually wins the standoff and is able to reestablish the chain of command within the captured POWs.
While this is going on, the American POW and two others try to escape. Only Shears survives and eventually he is recuperating at an Allied hospital. It is here that he gets a visit from Major Warden (played by Jack Hawkins), a British special forces officer. Warden has learned that Shears was an enlisted man who had impersonated an officer in an unrealized effort to get better treatment in the prison camp. To avoid exposure, Shears agrees to join Warden and a team of commandos on a return trip to Thailand with a goal of blowing up the bridge on the river Kwai.
Meanwhile, back in the prison camp, Colonel Nicholson has decided that his men need discipline and a project. He decides to help the Colonel Saito build a proper bridge. When Shears, Warden and the commandos make it to the river they discover a well built bridge about to go into operation. While the Japanese and the British POWs celebrate the completion of the bridge the commandos wire it with explosives and then lay in wait to set them off when the first Japanese train carrying war supplies is crossing the bridge.
Overnight, the tide goes out and the waters of the river Kwai recede. Some of the wires leading to the detonator are now visible. In the moments before the first train arrives, it is Colonel Nicholson who notices the wires and takes a group of Japanese soldiers with him to investigate. A firefight ensues and the British commando who was to detonate the explosives is killed. Shears is on the other side of the river and jumps in to swim across and set off the explosives. Major Warden, who has been injured, is on a hill firing mortars down on those fighting in the river.
It is here where the clip picks up:
Colonel Nicholson makes it to the dead commando. A shock of realization begins to cross his face. A figure swims towards him, fighting off attackers and being repeatedly shot. As Shears makes it to the beach, Nicholson and Shears have a moment of mutual recognition before Shears collapses from his wounds. It is at this point that the full realization of what he has done hits Colonel Nicholson. He turns, says "what have I done", and heads for the plunger to set off the explosives just as Warden sends down a mortar round to ensure that Shears and the fallen commando will not be taken alive by the Japanese. Fatally wounded, Nicholson takes a few steps and falls upon the plunger. The explosive go off just as the train begins to cross the bridge. Warden and his remaining team leave as he justifies making sure that Shears and the fallen commando were killed.
As the bridge collapses into ruin the British doctor, Major Clipton, arrives on the scene. As he scans the fallen bridge and the bodies of Nicholson, Shears and others he repeats the word "madness" over and over. The film ends with a pair of vultures circling the destruction.
For the last few days, I’ve thought of the final scenes of this film as a metaphor for the HCR debate. Within the progressive community we are having a debate about who is losing sight of the big picture in favor of a process goal that actually aligns them with our enemies. The back and forth is intense and I could see several ways to use this climatic clip as a metaphor to illustrate the conflict at hand.
For example, it would be easy to view the bridge as the Senate HCR bill. It would be easy to see this as a project built with a lot of good intentions, but ultimately a project completely at odds with core Democratic and progressive values. In this metaphor, Colonel Nicholson represents President Obama, or Harry Reid, or any one of the 60 Democratic Senators who will realize—even at the last minute—that this Senate Bill must be stopped. In this cut of metaphor, the commandos are progressive activists and HCR activists and Shears is not William Holden, instead he is Howard Dean. The vultures at the end are the insurance companies.
I would suspect that this would be the most popular way to interpret this clip as a metaphor for the current state of HCR debate. Simple, clear and we are the good guys. And yet, this doesn’t work for me.
I’ve thought about this clip as a HCR metaphor in many ways. And most of the time, as I contemplate the current state of the HCR debate and its impact on the Progressive movement and the Democratic Party, I find myself identifying with Major Clipton—staring at the latest bit of news, the latest blog post, the latest bit of back and forth and name calling—and saying "madness, madness, madness" to nobody in particular.
As I’ve thought about this clip as a metaphor, I’ve come to think of it as bit broader than the battle at hand.
In my view, the Japanese Army and their war effort represent the conservative movement. They are both doctrinaire, arrogant, fearful bullies. In the film and now, they have both hit a stumbling block. The Japanese need to get across the river and the GOP needs to build a bridge over the wreckage of their Bush/DeLay/Gingrich years. In this view, the bridge is the way that the GOP will revive their movement. It is something that needs to be destroyed.
This GOP/wing-nut/conservative bridge is built with the myths of Ronald Reagan. The strongest and most powerful of these myths is this one:
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem."
This, for me, is at the heart of every progressive battle. I firmly believe that this quote—this belief—is the most destructive myth to infect American politics in my lifetime. It is absolute bullshit. And yet, day after day, on progressive sites and conservative sites, in traditional media and in blogs, one can see over and over and over again endorsement of this myth by way too many folks on the right, the left and the imaginary center.
HCR, immigration, climate change legislation, GLBT rights, education, jobs, lobbying reform, campaign finance, fighting corruption and on and on and on. To solve any of these issues in a way that promotes justice and perfects our Union requires Government to be part of the solution. That so many firmly believe the lies of Saint Ronnie, including way too many self-identified progressives, is hurting our ability to make progress and to bring about real change.
In my view of this metaphor, the bridge is built by this false belief that "government is the problem". That is the larger battle. HCR is just the explosives or maybe just the detonator. It is a way to prove that Government has a role in solving our problems. In my humble opinion, that is the fight that President Obama has been fighting every day since he was sworn into office and because he has kept his eyes on the larger fight, he has had and still has my full support.
The focus on this larger battle over the role of government has been obscured by a resurgence of single issue groups within the progressive/liberal/left community. IMHO it is a big problem when we concede the agenda and our power to these single issue groups. By definition, these groups do not and will not look at the big picture. Their focus is victory in a single battle, a single fight (it is not HCR that is important, it is the public option—there is only one way. Yada, yada,yada. There is always more than one way to do something if you can think outside of a single issue framing, but I digress). Single issue groups are designed to win. If the rest of a progressive agenda has to be hurt to win a battle, then single issue groups will ALWAYS throw the rest of a progressive agenda under the bus. Always. They have a narrow focus. It is OK. It is what they do and I think it is very important to have their focus in a progressive coalition. I just think it is a bad thing when any single issue group captures the movement—then, as history has proven time and tim again, wee will lose. It is a close call for me, but I tend to think that this has happened in the HCR fight.
As intense as this HCR battle is—and it is intense—it is just a skirmish in this larger fight. When conservatives and Republicans are quoting you and your arguments to prove that Reagan was right, to prove that "government is the problem," then you need to stop and think, because at that point you are Colonel Nicholson and you are helping them build their bridge to support their effort to destroy everything you believe. In my view of this clip as a metaphor, if you argue for the defeat of the Senate Bill and using the old "we can’t trust government" and the old "government is out to get us" and the ever popular "government is incompetent" framing to score points in the HCR battle, you are putting self-perceived short term gain over the larger fight. Your motives may be pure, but the effects of your actions are harmful.
In my view of this metaphor, the bridge must be blown up and to do that we must pass HCR. With all of its flaws (and there are many) it is another way to show that government can be part of the solution. The stimulus bill passed earlier this year was another example of this fight that is proving that Reagan was a liar. Finance reform, Immigration reform, a jobs bill, climate change legislation and more are other ways that the destructive myth of Reagan can be put to rest, but they all wait in the que behind HCR. This must pass and soon. If not, Reagan’s myth wins and the bridge survives.
As a metaphor for HCR the current the final moments of film The Bridge on the River Kwai is not perfect, but I have found it useful as I sorted out my feelings about this current conflict. My own private HCR Rorschach test as it were. I pass these musings along for what they are worth (perhaps nothing).
HCR is only a battle in a much larger fight. We need to keep our eyes on the prize. And key to any progressive victory is destroying Reagan’s myth of the role of government in problem solving. Republicans believe that government is always the problem. It is a myth that also infects many progressives. If we could flip the switch, if we could prove that government can and does solve problems, then we could have some lasting progressive victories.
My few cents, for whatever they are worth.
Cheers