Jimmy Carter
Some people revile him, claiming that he was a horrible President. and see only negatives during his tenure in the White House for four years. If you give them a chance, they will blame him for economic stagnation, for weakness and indecisiveness with the hostage situation, and for generally bringing the country down.
There certainly were problems that existed during his years as President, no doubt. But there were triumphs, as well, such as the Camp David Accord, the first significant effort towards peace in the Middle East that was met with success. There was also the Panama Canal Treaty, which gave Panama back control over the canal. Those are the ones that people know about.
But there was also his correct prognosis of the two major dilemmas facing the United States, which he accurately diagnosed. The energy crisis, with his proposed solution being to invest heavily in alternative energy technology with aspirations towards being energy independent. People at the time mocked him, laughed at him. But time has proved his dire forecast spot on, and his solutions back then proved to be ahead of their time. How well off would the country be if we had listened to him and aspired to reach truly higher heights, instead of dismissing him and electing the man who ushered in a new emphasis on corporate supremacy, which has since heralded the economic imbalances and general decline of so much in the country.
Also, Carter gave his so-called "Malaise" speech, where he spoke about another enormous problem that was growing, and threatening the country: the decadence of strong morals. He warned that the prevalence of consumerism, of unchecked greed and the rivalries that these bred, could tear the country apart.
In this, too, he was correct. He legitimately wanted the people of the country to reach deeper, to act better. To that end, he tried to live up to his own ideals.
When Carter was running for President, he promised the most honest and transparent administration possible. Following the Watergate scandals and the secretive tapes of both the Nixon and Johnson White House, as well as the JFK Assassination more than a decade earlier, but which was increasingly under scrutiny with the rejection by many of the official verdict of the Warren Commission report, people hungered for some honesty and decency. Carter appeared to be their man.
Jimmy Carter looked like he was going to cruise to the Presidency, as he owned a sizable lead in the polls during the 1976 election. But then, he gave the now infamous interview with Playboy, which was pretty risky at the time, and wound up getting burned simply for admitting to have lusted after women in his heart. That seems pretty tame next to prominent politicians - including President Bill Clinton - who actually went ahead and acted out on their sexual desires, but it almost lost Carter the election. Only when Gerald matched Carter's screw up with his own, claiming that the Soviet Union did not pose a serious security threat to the United States, did Carter secure the White House.
Again, his years were challenging, and admittedly, he was far from a perfect President. Circumstances were difficult, as America continued a decline that had begun long before Carter ever even announced his candidacy in the 1976 Presidential race. In fact, I believe that Carter receives an unfair amount of blame for things that went wrong during those four years, and he receives too little credit for things that he did right, and for trying to lead the country in a legitimately better direction. His faith in the people was, frankly, misplaced. If there was one glaring mistake that he made, it was in that assumption that people would actually be willing to be inconvenienced and have to sacrifice - even a little bit - for the betterment of the country, and particularly it's future.
I would maintain that if the country had the belief in itself that it claimed, rather than simply hiding behind a false facade of patriotism worn on the sleeve, then they would have given Carter's proposals a serious look, and even a chance. And if we had followed Carter's proposals, where would we be now?
A better place, I think. Yes, definitely a better place. More energy independent, and more aware of the pitfalls of excessive greed gone unchecked.
Instead, we turned our backs on him, and wondered how the energy crises and corporate crises of recent years, both born from the same insatiable greed that Carter had warned us about, could have turned so badly against the American people (and indeed, the people of the world), so quickly.
Frankly, it would be more appropriate to ask how it could not have done so. Also, why have we yet to acknowledge that Carter had a point about that greed, as well as the dangers of not at least trying to gain some measure of energy independence through increased investment in alternative energy solutions.
Ah, what a country we might have been!
Ronald Reagan
Instead, the country went for Reagan in 1980. One of the most polished politicians ever, a professional actor who played the part of a heroic and strong leader to perfection, the "Great Communicator' was the man that Americans turned their trust to. So much was this the case, that Reagan has become the model for conservatives everywhere, and no one - liberal or conservative - has truly enjoyed the level of popularity that Reagan enjoyed during his eight long years in office. Yes, Clinton technically left office with higher approval ratings than Reagan did, but his Presidency was more limited by what he could not achieve, while the perception with Reagan was that everything that was going right with the country was a direct result of his policies.
In fact, Reagan initiated the turn of political direction that has proved to be a disaster for the country. He was a union buster, and the excess materialism and greed of the "Me decade" of the 1980's was a precursor of things to come. Things were beginning to go downhill, but only beginning to. It was easier than to blame the people in Michigan for losing their jobs at General Motors, even though the company was recording record profits, while they relocated those jobs in Mexico. Taxes for the wealthiest Americans and corporations went down, in the process now famously known as "deregulation". It worked like a charm. Reagan lectured on the evils of "big government", even though he invested incredibly heavily in certain parts of that government, particularly defense. He prepared America for war, although a major war did not come on his watch, somewhat surprisingly. Deregulation also meant to disarming environmental regulators, which amounted to the deterioration of the environment. Salaries began to stagnate, but officially, the economy was booming! Plus, he talked tough to the Soviets, and ultimately, the Soviets fell shortly after Reagan left office. Many credited Reagan for "winning" the Cold War - an assertion that I would dispute, personally. The Soviet Union undid itself with tons of mistakes, not least of which was the invasion of Afghanistan, well before Reagan was President, which became a war that came to be known as the "Vietnam" for the USSR.
Reagan is viewed as a veritable conservative icon today, while Carter is largely forgotten as President today. In fact, worse than forgotten - his years in office are still used as an example of bad American leadership by neocon political commentators and other prominent conservatives. But, of course, their specialty is the blame game, always while claiming others are playing this game when they correctly diagnose the problem with neocon thinking.
Two Legacies Interpreted Wrong
Carter deserves better. His tarnished image after a difficult Presidency rebounded considerably in what is considered by many to be the most successful and impressive post-Presidency in history. His involvement with the Carter Center's efforts to eradicate curable diseases in the Third World, in attempting to bring the benefits of the best that modern society has to offer, particularly running water, has been nothing short of inspirational. The Carter Center has worked in war torn regions, always trying to promote peace, and actively trying to assess elections around the world to ensure that they are free and fair. Jimmy Carter, as the leader and symbol of that organization that bears his name, has been rewarded the Nobel Peace Prize, for this and his works during his years at the White House. This is not a man who was content to bask in the sunshine of his own accomplishments, playing regular rounds of golf, and enjoying a life in the lap of luxury that most former leaders are afforded. Here is a man who helps to build houses for the poor on his time off, because he truly cares about people, and wants to make as much of a positive difference in the lives of others as he can. He is the epitome of goodness, and although I am not exactly the most religious man you will ever meet (spiritual, but not religious, as they say), Jimmy Carter seems to me one of the best examples of the spirit of what Christianity itself is supposed to be. he recognizes his own imperfections and flaws, and chooses to focus on these, instead of judging others harshly with rigid rules that often even prominent religious leaders themselves fail to follow.
True, some criticized Carter for not simply remaining silent and on the sidelines in regard to the actions and policies of Presidents since. In fact, Carter has had harsh criticism for each President since he himself left office, whether Democrat or Republican. And frankly, I don't know, and will likely never understand, this fixation with former Presidents having to remain absolutely quiet and on the sidelines after they leave the White House. Why? After all, if you love your country, it stands to reason that you would have strong opinions about the direction that it is going in, and that you would voice those opinions of things that matter most. How could you not? So, yes, he receives some blame for this, but I don't believe that he should. Besides, he is hardly the only one who has done so, although he is probably the former President that has been the most vocal in his criticism of Presidents since is own term at the White House.
Again, I hate to repeat myself, but Jimmy Carter is nothing short of an inspiration. He is a true hero, and man who has proven that he places others before himself. He truly represents the very best that America has to offer, and at least his reputation, previously tarnished according to many Americans during his tenure at the White House, has recovered considerably in the years and even decades since.
Yet, to me, even that is not enough.
President Carter should also be recognized for those things that he dared to attempt, even at great political risk, during his all too brief time in office. he put political pragmatism aside, even though it likely would have allowed him a better chance at keeping the White House. He did so because he only had that once chance, and he wanted to do what he believed was truly best for the country. To that end, he tirelessly worked to promote true liberty and greater freedom for all, and went to considerable length to try and get the scourge of racism behind the nation. He always tried to promote peace, being that rare world leader of a truly powerful nation who actually viewed war the way we are supposed to view war: as an absolute last resort. No war games or "Wag the Dog" under his tenure. No false bravado. Carter truly wanted the most transparent and readily accessible administration in history. But because he stated this outright, he was held up to impossible standards by highly cynical and unforgiving Americans. This was a nation that was not prepared to seek the higher ideals of a man like Jimmy Carter, to try and make the country a better place.
Perhaps that is why they took to Reagan with such gratitude, for here was a man who gave Americans what they wanted to see and hear. Andrew Bacevich suggested that what Reagan ushered in was the illusion of invincibility, even untouchability, in regard to America's military might, starting with the Reagan administration. It was obviously a false hope, and rather naive of Americans to subscribe to it so easily. But since people wanted to believe these things, and they wanted to believe themselves as heroes, it was so. As my former history teacher in eighth grade (still during the Reagan years) explained to the class once, we Americans were "the good guys...in the white hat". Reagan spoke that simple black and white language, referring to the Soviet Union as an "evil empire". And indeed, Americans were actively encouraged to "dream heroic dreams", as Reagan outright suggested in his Inaugural address. Perhaps that is why the eighties became the "me decade", and saw what was then unprecedented greed and self-indulgence. Give people a chance to believe what they want to believe, and never having to face a different reality, and what you will likely get is a mess. That was largely what happened.
I think that Bacevich was right: Americans came to believe in America's military invincibility during the Reagan years. But it is more than this, it seems. I suspect that Americans began to extend this sense of invincibility beyond just the American military, and began to apply this feeling towards pretty much everything to do with their country. America, according to Americans, became the center of the world, if not the universe. What happened elsewhere hardly mattered, unless it threatened our interests. Other countries could and should benefit and learn from out example, but they certainly offered nothing of value for Americans to benefit or learn from. On a level more magnified than ever before, the United States truly became what historian Christopher Lasch referred to as "The Culture of Narcissism". With the end of the Cold War, nothing would challenge that perception, really, until September 11th, and it's aftermath.
Reagan ushered in a popular and populist belief in "American exceptionalism", and the beginning of the gap the growing chasm, if you will, in understanding between Americans and the rest of the world began. The United States began to move in a direction opposite that of the rest of the world, until it's natural pull began to get other nations to try things the American way (although not normally to the same degree that it occurred in America), a trend that, unfortunately, only encouraged Americans to view themselves as truly exceptional. With the ill-advised war in Iraq, and the obviously long and not fully successful war in Afghanistan that were fought at the same time, we are now only beginning to see the folly of such over-the-top assumptions.
People still want to view Reagan as an American hero. Some began to talk about putting his image up on Mount Rushmore, or on American currency (I heard someone once saying that Reagan should replace FDR on the dime). The reverence, almost bordering on worship at times of this man, is as exaggerated as the invincibility that Americans came to believe in during his years at the White House.
By contrast, Carter was vilified. he was dismissed an a weak and ineffective leader, because he did not immediately launch an all-out attack against Iran in response to the hostage situation. If you listen to his detractors (and they are many), he compromised America's positioning in the world.
I disagree. What he did - or what he tried to do - was get Americans to recognize that they are not an island in the world. They are a part of the rest of the world and, yes, like everyone else, they have to prepare for the future to sustain the nation.
Carter tried to get Americans to accept the limitations of the present, in order to face it and create a better future. Reagan, by contrast, tried to get Americans to believe what they wanted to believe, and he told them what they wanted to hear, so that he and his administration could pursue their ulterior motives. Carter wanted to get Americans to embrace a more limited and honest role in the world, to promote the best ideals that Americans have traditionally professed. Reagan, in the name of America, gave lip service to the United States as a "shining city on a hill", while in reality, supporting dictatorships and oppression around the world as part of the corporate friendly culture that he helped to set up. Carter asked Americans to embrace the truth, to accept their limitations and to work on them, and to aspire to the highest principles and ideals, and they turned their back o him. Reagan asked Americans to "dream heroic dreams", and really, to forget reality for a little while, and his popularity soared. Many of his policies, and his overall approach, have continued to the present day, and the results of getting used to not paying attention to reality speaks for itself. Had we listened to Jimmy Carter and taken his warnings of the dilemmas that faced America more seriously, the country likely would be the leader in alternative technologies, and probably would have gone a long way towards succeeding in achieving energy independence. It is questionable whether we would have gotten into the oil wars in the Middle East. Our national name would not have been dragged through the mud. But we chose Reagan, and we have what we've got now: a mess. A mess that can be dissected and traced back to one November day in 1980, when the country made a choice in what perhaps was the most important election in the latter half of the twentieth century for the United States. We chose self-deception over truth, and greed over solid values. More than that, we are still choosing it, by revering the man who made it all possible, while reviling the man who tirelessly worked to make America, and the world, a truly better place.
The sooner we acknowledge this, the sooner we can get the country off it's knees, and get it back to work, standing straight and proud. But Carter warned us that this would be a long process, and would require sacrifices. Chances are, the sacrifices that we would need to make now are greater, even far greater, than those that Carter asked of us decades ago. And the question of whether or not we are willing to actually go through with it, or even to seriously consider it, is far from answered.
Just don't blame Jimmy Carter because our collective fear of our own imperfections was too great to take the chance that the man asked. We failed him at the very moment that we chickened out ans voted for the guy who reassured us of how brave we were and told us those pretty little lies to reassure us, while he brought out the worst in the nation, and in us, collectively. Carter warned us of the world to come if we ignored his warnings. Carter asked for nothing short of the very best within us, so that we may act in the best interests of the country. If anything, we failed him, not the other way around. Reagan offered us an easy out, as he urged us to wear our patriotism on our sleeve, but did not ask much in the way of service or sacrifice towards making the country a better place with a brighter future. Carter offered us the chance to improve ourselves and our country and, frankly, we blew it. We should not blast him because of our own failure to heed his message. We should lay blame where it belongs: at our own feet. We let him down, not the other way around.
No comments:
Post a Comment