It also harkens back to a song my school sang on the Bicentennial, "Freedom is a word often heard today/But if you want to keep it there's a price to pay/Each generation has to win anew/Cause it's not something handed down to you. Freedom isn't free." In fact, it is inspired by every time I hear that "freedom isn't free," taken to imply that the more wars we fight, the freer we are.
It is also inspired by a poem I saw long ago in the Washington Times generally denigrating democratic (small-d) politicians ("who would betray a fellow man") as self-seeking, squalid and sordid compared to soldiers who are models of pure, unselfish patriotism. "It's not the politicians with their compromising ploys/That have given us the freedom that our country now enjoys."
But what finally inspired me to write it today (on Veterans Day) was a tweet on Twitter:
It’s the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of pressAnd this counter-tweet, "please PLEASE stop vomiting this nonsense all over social media every May and November."
It’s the soldier, not the speaker, who has given us freedom of speech
It‘s the soldier, not the organizer, who gave us freedom to assemble
We can‘t thank them enough, but we must try.
So let's talk about how we achieved our freedom. I do think it fair to say, by fighting against un-freedom. But there are many kinds of un-freedom, some that soldiers can protect us against, and many they cannot.
The most obvious kind of un-freedom is foreign conquest. If there is one definition of freedom recognized the world over and throughout all history, it is freedom from foreign conquest. Our military does protect us from that kind of un-freedom, and for that we should be grateful.
Another kind of un-freedom is the un-freedom that is inevitable when a country lives under the shadow of constant menace. Freedom and security are often spoken of as being opposed, but without a certain minimum of security, we cannot be free. Our military protects us from any foreign menace that might force us to live in fear, or as an armed camp. So, again, let us be grateful for that.*
But the military can only protect a country from external menaces and give the country the scope to create its own domestic institutions. Whether the institutions that a country creates at home are free institutions or not is not something the military can control. Or rather, when the military controls a country's domestic institutions, then that country by definition is not free. It is a military dictatorship. Once the military gives a country the scope to create its own institutions and agrees to step aside to allow civilians to create those institutions, it is the civilians who decide whether those institutions will be free or not.
It isn't always easy. In the countries that have free domestic institutions today, there are many heroic stories of how it was won, but the military plays a supporting role at most. In other countries, it was the story of the majority rising up against a ruling elite. In the U.S., the story has been one more of dissenting minorities standing up to the tyranny of the majority. Freedom of the press was won, in many cases, as a struggle to resist wartime restrictions placed on what could be expressed. It has its heroes, its villains, and even a few martyrs. But it was not fought by soldiers on the battlefield, it could not be won on the battlefield, and it is most unlikely to be lost on the battlefield. The same can be recounted any number of times, with freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and countless others.**
Nor are our soldiers overseas fighting for our domestic freedom at home. Looking at the numerous wars we are fighting overseas, can anyone point to a single shred of evidence that we are any freer for fighting them, or that we would be any less free without them? Or that fighting any more wars overseas would make us any freer at home? Some may object that even if our wars abroad do not make us freer at home, they bring freedom to other people and therefore make our world more secure and allow liberty a better opportunity to flourish at home. And it is true that we freed Europe from the Nazis and safeguarded them from the Communists and thereby allowed freedom and friendship to flourish. It is also true that we freed Europe from the Kaiser, too, but Europe ultimately gave up its freedom between the wars and became a series of dictatorships.
Korea is an even better example. Our army saved South Korea from the Communists. If we had not saved South Korea from the Communists, it would be just like North Korea today -- one of the least free countries the world over. To this day our army (together with the South Korean army; must give credit where it is do) continues to protect South Korea from North Korea. But saving South Korea from the Communists did not, by itself, make South Korea free. It merely made it possible for South Korea to be free. For a long time, that country continued to be an unfree military dictatorship.
And in the US today, the military contributes to our freedom somewhat by safeguarding it in places far from home, but mostly by staying out of domestic politics altogether and leaving it to the democratic process. Our free government rests with politicians who concede defeat when they lose, or who win and make the sordid, squalid compromises that are necessary to get things done, instead of calling in the army to crush their opponents by brute force. It rests with the whole brigade of volunteers and professionals who campaign for politicians but stay within proper bounds. It rests with journalists who expose abuses by the powerful, and tipsters who give them leads. It rests with lawyers who stand up for the little guy and judges who give them their day in court. It rests with protesters who speak their minds and counter-protesters who speak theirs, and police who keep them apart. It rests with the countless organizations, some political, some not, that make up a free society. It rests with a public that understands the rules of democratic fair play, that accepts defeat when they lose and accepts that no win is final and absolute.
And the reason our democracy is starting to look imperiled today is not just that people are losing faith in our institutions. It is because people are losing faith most of all in democratic institutions like Congress or their state legislature, and keeping most faith in the most authoritarian institutions, like the military. Because democracy is government of the people, and if the people don't want it, it cannot endure.
So let's give our honor to our veterans for defending national sovereignty. And to the figures of the past who squeezed open old doors to give us the free institutions we have today. And to the politicians, journalists and countless others who make the system work today. And We, the People, who the whole system rests upon. Because know that in the end, whether our freedom survives depends above all on us, and whether we maintain the habits and discipline that freedom and democracy require.
_______________________________________
*Of course, there may be other factors at work here, too. Like the wide oceans that lie between us and either Europe r Asia, and our being so much more powerful than either Canada or Mexico that neither could possibly threaten us. And, yes, our military might is at least partly responsible for this fortunate situation. But so is the attractiveness of this country that brought over enough people that made our population so vastly larger than our neighbors'. So is their energy that much us so much wealthier than our neighbors. So is the wisdom of our political leadership that managed to pursue friendly relations with our neighbors instead of making them enemies.
**The obvious exception is slavery, which was defeated on the battlefield. But if there is one thing that the failure of the Reconstruction should make clear, it is that freedom cannot be imposed at gunpoint on an unwilling population. The Army could end slavery; it could not create freedom.
No comments:
Post a Comment