CSotD: Standing in doorways, blocking up halls
Skip to comments
Jimmy Margulies notes the lack of patriotism currently at play among the self-proclaimed "patriots" who seek revenge rather than justice in the Boston bombing.
Back in the olden days, the bumpersticker cry of "America: Love It or Leave It" was leveled at protestors who objected to the war and/or the draft. This never made much sense, because the majority of protestors were demanding that the country live up to its own self-proclaimed values.
Even sillier were the catcalls of "Why don't you go to Russia?" Why on earth would someone demanding more rights want to live in a place where people had no rights at all?
And if the intention had been to tell us that things could be worse, well, we probably wouldn't have disputed that. We were just saying that they could also be better.
And, by the way, they did become better, though not all by themselves.
Passage of the 26th Amendment made Barry McGuire's lyric, (well, P.F.Sloan's lyric) "You're old enough to kill, but not for voting" obsolete, but even more reassuring was the triumph of the system in Watergate: Even the President of the United States indeed must sometimes stand naked.
It never became perfect, but, as it approached its 200th birthday, the system proved that it worked, and it even worked under stress and in turmoil and when powerful forces were arrayed against it.
Confucius said "How
can he be said truly to love, who exacts no effort from the objects of
his love? How can he be said to be truly loyal, who refrains from
admonishing the object of his loyalty?"
A wise man, Master K'ung Fu-tzu.
Love and Loyalty require a willingness to both make demands and to admonish when things don't measure up. And note that it's a two-way street: His "love" is that of a leader to his followers, his "loyalty" the reverse.
Certainly, not every protestor was pure in this respect. Extremists and fools were in the mix and, then as now, they made more colorful photos for the front page and more interesting quotes for the news. If 20,000 students marched down the street with signs, the one dressed as the Statue of Liberty and smeared with fake blood would be on Page One, and I would assume the same applies to Tea Party rallies today, where the majority of people are not, indeed, dressed as Paul Revere.
Most people at Woodstock kept their clothes on, too, and few football fans take off their shirts in sub-zero weather. And dogs bite far more men than vice-versa.
But perception matters, and a fool at center stage can appear larger than life. I remember a rally during the Cambodian incursion, in which the jocks and cheerleaders had finally decided it was time to stand up and be counted, when didn't some fool get up and start raging about "our brothers in North Vietnam and our brothers in North Korea and our brothers in Cuba," and about half the crowd is thinking, "dear lord, what have we gotten ourselves into?" and the other half is thinking, "dear lord, Gerry, just shut up."
But here's the deal: Gerry didn't have his own radio show or his own TV show or his own syndicated column.
And he sure as hell didn't have a seat in the Senate. Lord preserve us!
So who are these losers who doubt the power of the Constitution?
Who are these cowards, who think that "rights" only apply in the good times, and who fear that our system cannot withstand a real challenge?
Who are these sunshine patriots, whose love of country does not include faith in its foundations?
Why do they hate America?
And how in the name of God did they get into positions of such power?
Comments 2
Comments are closed.