Many is the time I've been mistaken
And many times confused
Yes and I've often felt forsaken
And certainly misused
Oh but I'm all right, I'm all right
I'm just weary to my bones
Still you don't expect to be bright and bon vivant
So far away from home
So far away from home
And I don't know a soul who's not been battered
I don't have a friend who feels at ease
And I don't know a dream that's not been shattered
Or driven to its knees
Oh but it's all right, it's all right
For we've lived so well so long
Still when I think of the road we're traveling on
I wonder what's gone wrong
I can't help it, I wonder what's gone wrong
And I dreamed I was dying
I dreamed that my soul rose unexpectedly
And looking back down at me
Smiled reassuringly
And I dreamed I was flying
And high up above my eyes could clearly see
The Statue of Liberty
Sailing away to sea
And I dreamed I was flying
Gonna come on the ship they call "The Mayflower"
Gonna come on the ship that sailed the moon
And we come in the age's most uncertain hour
And sing an American Tune
Oh but it's all right
It's all right, it's all right
You can't be forever blessed
Still tomorrow's gonna be another working day
And I'm trying to get some rest
That's all I'm trying: To get some rest
--Paul Simon
Showing posts with label America. Show all posts
Showing posts with label America. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Friday, July 4, 2008
Star Spangled
Here's an Independence Day ramble, in honor of the day. First, what's up with this anti-"Fourth of July" phrasing from the wingnuts? C'mon, people, there's nothing wrong with saying "Fourth of July". We're saying we own this day. (It is interesting that we don't say "the 25th of December" for Christmas, but then, Christmas hasn't always fallen on the 25th, eh, what?)
Growing up when I did, in the shadow of Chomsky and other "useful idiots", steered by the press, movies and television, my teachers, books and music, my sense of patriotism and love of country is precisely the reverse of many in the preceding generation.
I grew up mistrusting it and having no sense of what made the USA great, only that we had killed the Indians and enslaved the blacks. We weren't "all that". European countries were so much better. (Well, I went Europe as a kid and loved it, but it sure seemed primitive, so I wasn't so sure about that.) Patriotism was the same as jingoism. Even at eight, I resisted saying the Pledge of Allegiance and regarded as suspect those who waved the flag or were in the military. I laughed at the thought of voting Republican and regarded Reagan as scarier than the Soviet Union.
Then, I started studying history independently. I never cared for history in school, it seeming to be a long litany of people treating each other badly. Reading Durant is probably what got me thinking, that and reading the L.A. Times. The Times, with its relentless lying--and I think that's a fair assessment of when bias takes priority over data and allows omissions and "errors" all in the same direction--is probably what made me question The Narrative.
In essence, The Narrative is what informed me, and I was actually more critical than most. I knew, for example, that the rate of draft dodging in Vietnam was comparable to that of WWII. Even so, my parents were not particularly political, and the various shenanigans of national agencies were becoming public at the time, so it was easy to look at that and believe The Narrative, with its "mistrust Authority" theme, even if the underlying theme of "don't mistrust our Authority" should've been obvious.
But the more I studied--and continue to study--world history, the more I see what some refer to as American Exceptionalism. It's not that we don't have our sins, really, it's that our sins are typical.
Meanwhile, the U.S.A. created a vision of freedom like no other. And in its shining moments the realization of that vision is available to everyone who is willing to work for it. (In some moments, perhaps not so shining, it's available to those who are willing to do something outrageous for the press as well, or those with ambulance-chasers on speed dial.) And our greatness doesn't stop at our own borders: The infectious ideas of freedom push back, however sporadically, tyranny all over the world.
I've noted many times that the Founding Fathers would be considered as radical today as they were in the 18th century. And sometimes that depresses me. People are so willing to give up their freedoms to a new royalty, to give up on that most basic of premises:
As it shouldn't need to be said, "all men are created equal" did not mean that all men were the same, but only that all were equal under the law. That there was no divine right of one man to rule over another. The law should treat all equally.
What a concept. Like "the right of the people to keep to bear arms shall not be infringed", it's some plain English that that don't people believe any more.
If they ever did. Just like I won't dwell on my country's sins on this date, I won't fault the Founders for failing to change a world population that believed in royalty for the past 5,000 years to suddenly respecting the inherent equality of citizens.
Self-evident. Self-evident! What an audacious phrase to put there.
I like to think that that most people probably do accept the right to life. (Oops. For born people, anyway.)
Liberty? Oh, no. We don't really believe in that. As Jefferson lamented, the State acquires power and loathes to give it up. But in our day, if not in his, it does so by creating hostility and suspicion of our fellow citizens. "Trust us," it says, "because you can't trust them."
And despite its miserable failures, many corruptions, and clearly stated counter-intentions, they succeed in convincing us (as a whole). There's an interesting thread over at Althouse about how children don't play outside any more and how this is the fault (at least in no small part) to the exaggerated tales of kidnapping and violence that permeate the media. How many of those people would admit that their views of the second amendment (and the other nine amendments!) were similarly colored?
No, liberty is too dangerous a thing for the common man to have.
And that most tread upon of the three--the one that really should have been "property", and God help that poor, deceased right--the pursuit of happiness. I remember the good ol' days when it was right wing Christians who were taking away your right to, uh, miscegenate (ok, I don't remember that, but it happened) and liberals were the good guys, protecting your right to, you know, do whatever with whomever.
Now of course, they're the clucking hens of "pursuit of happiness so long as it doesn't leave any trace whatsoever on the planet". Cars, lightbulbs, food, reproduction--not sex, they're still pro-sex, as long as you don't actually use it for its biological purposes of perpetuating the human race--where you live, how you travel, how much you fart, it's all subject to governmental scrutiny.
And free speech? I grew up on tales of the ACLU (a bunch of liberal Jews, as Cedarford would have to note) protecting Nazis' right to have a parade. Now they spend all their time on "freedom from" instead of "freedom to".
But here's the great thing about this country and this day: We have those rights to lose, and we can fight to keep them. And all it's going to take is eternal vigilance and proper education.
God bless America. Let freedom ring.
Growing up when I did, in the shadow of Chomsky and other "useful idiots", steered by the press, movies and television, my teachers, books and music, my sense of patriotism and love of country is precisely the reverse of many in the preceding generation.
I grew up mistrusting it and having no sense of what made the USA great, only that we had killed the Indians and enslaved the blacks. We weren't "all that". European countries were so much better. (Well, I went Europe as a kid and loved it, but it sure seemed primitive, so I wasn't so sure about that.) Patriotism was the same as jingoism. Even at eight, I resisted saying the Pledge of Allegiance and regarded as suspect those who waved the flag or were in the military. I laughed at the thought of voting Republican and regarded Reagan as scarier than the Soviet Union.
Then, I started studying history independently. I never cared for history in school, it seeming to be a long litany of people treating each other badly. Reading Durant is probably what got me thinking, that and reading the L.A. Times. The Times, with its relentless lying--and I think that's a fair assessment of when bias takes priority over data and allows omissions and "errors" all in the same direction--is probably what made me question The Narrative.
In essence, The Narrative is what informed me, and I was actually more critical than most. I knew, for example, that the rate of draft dodging in Vietnam was comparable to that of WWII. Even so, my parents were not particularly political, and the various shenanigans of national agencies were becoming public at the time, so it was easy to look at that and believe The Narrative, with its "mistrust Authority" theme, even if the underlying theme of "don't mistrust our Authority" should've been obvious.
But the more I studied--and continue to study--world history, the more I see what some refer to as American Exceptionalism. It's not that we don't have our sins, really, it's that our sins are typical.
- Genocide of the Native American? Sounds (and is) horrible. It was a forgone conclusion long before we were a nation. From what I can tell, it's a foregone conclusion whenever an agricultural society meets up with a nomadic society.
- Slavery? Every single civilization in the history of the world has a history of slavery. In fact, Keith Chandler theorizes in Beyond Civilization that it's a requirement for civilization.
- Imperialism? By God, we are the most faint-hearted imperialists in the history of the world's superpowers.
- Militaristic? That's a laugh. We're merchants. We have to be roused to attack. Granted, we can be rused to attack (the Spanish-American War and WWI come to mind, and perhaps Vietnam as well). As Iraq shows, we're the kindest invaders in history as well, with an unprecedented concern for those we're invading.
Meanwhile, the U.S.A. created a vision of freedom like no other. And in its shining moments the realization of that vision is available to everyone who is willing to work for it. (In some moments, perhaps not so shining, it's available to those who are willing to do something outrageous for the press as well, or those with ambulance-chasers on speed dial.) And our greatness doesn't stop at our own borders: The infectious ideas of freedom push back, however sporadically, tyranny all over the world.
I've noted many times that the Founding Fathers would be considered as radical today as they were in the 18th century. And sometimes that depresses me. People are so willing to give up their freedoms to a new royalty, to give up on that most basic of premises:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
As it shouldn't need to be said, "all men are created equal" did not mean that all men were the same, but only that all were equal under the law. That there was no divine right of one man to rule over another. The law should treat all equally.
What a concept. Like "the right of the people to keep to bear arms shall not be infringed", it's some plain English that that don't people believe any more.
If they ever did. Just like I won't dwell on my country's sins on this date, I won't fault the Founders for failing to change a world population that believed in royalty for the past 5,000 years to suddenly respecting the inherent equality of citizens.
Self-evident. Self-evident! What an audacious phrase to put there.
I like to think that that most people probably do accept the right to life. (Oops. For born people, anyway.)
Liberty? Oh, no. We don't really believe in that. As Jefferson lamented, the State acquires power and loathes to give it up. But in our day, if not in his, it does so by creating hostility and suspicion of our fellow citizens. "Trust us," it says, "because you can't trust them."
And despite its miserable failures, many corruptions, and clearly stated counter-intentions, they succeed in convincing us (as a whole). There's an interesting thread over at Althouse about how children don't play outside any more and how this is the fault (at least in no small part) to the exaggerated tales of kidnapping and violence that permeate the media. How many of those people would admit that their views of the second amendment (and the other nine amendments!) were similarly colored?
No, liberty is too dangerous a thing for the common man to have.
And that most tread upon of the three--the one that really should have been "property", and God help that poor, deceased right--the pursuit of happiness. I remember the good ol' days when it was right wing Christians who were taking away your right to, uh, miscegenate (ok, I don't remember that, but it happened) and liberals were the good guys, protecting your right to, you know, do whatever with whomever.
Now of course, they're the clucking hens of "pursuit of happiness so long as it doesn't leave any trace whatsoever on the planet". Cars, lightbulbs, food, reproduction--not sex, they're still pro-sex, as long as you don't actually use it for its biological purposes of perpetuating the human race--where you live, how you travel, how much you fart, it's all subject to governmental scrutiny.
And free speech? I grew up on tales of the ACLU (a bunch of liberal Jews, as Cedarford would have to note) protecting Nazis' right to have a parade. Now they spend all their time on "freedom from" instead of "freedom to".
But here's the great thing about this country and this day: We have those rights to lose, and we can fight to keep them. And all it's going to take is eternal vigilance and proper education.
God bless America. Let freedom ring.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
America: Heck Yeah! (Updated and bumped!)
I have often maintained that America needs immigrants because, well, that's where Americans come from: some place else.
Living in L.A. my whole life, I have no doubt that the vast majority of Hispanics who come here embody the American spirit--the willingness and drive to improve their lives for their future generations--in many ways better than we do. Most of us born here are too busy enjoying the lives our ancestors made for us to really have the same hunger, certainly not with the desperation someone from an impoverished or war-torn country does. And when they get here, it's not uncommon for them to express an admiration and defensiveness of the country we don't, or are reluctant to.
But the cinema is well-informed with anti-American propaganda, so much so that the occasional potshot (the obese, obnoxious tourists in In Bruges) hardly goes noticed.
But a pro-America attitude, or even friendly expression, does get noticed, at least by me, and it makes me feel good when it does happen.
But as I'm writing this I can only think of a few recent examples.
The World's Fastest Indian -- The Anthony Hopkins movie about the kiwi who comes to America to race has him encountering all kinds of generous Americans who help him get to his destination.
Tracy Ullman: Live and Exposed -- I like Tracy's act more sometimes than others, but her performance chops get better and better over time, which is really apparent in this show. When she ended it with a salute to America, I found myself surprised and surprisingly warmed.
Schultze Gets the Blues -- I love this deliberate (slow moving) picture of a retired German salt miner who becomes obsessed with zydeco and journeys to America to experience it first-hand. But what makes it especially wonderful is the warm welcome Schultze gets when he journeys through the bayous.
The Visitor -- I haven't seen it, but I'm hoping that a movie that is so transparently about the harshness of the immigration and naturalization services has to acknowledge the fact that America must be well worth coming to. I'll review it in a few days.
Sad that I can't think of any more off-hand, especially with all the foreign movies I've seen. But maybe I'm missing some?
Victoria offers these suggestions:
Hector says:
Y'know, Fritz Lang didn't make a lot of happy-happy joy-joy movies.
Trooper offers up this from Scarface:
True confession time: Though I am a long-time De Palma fan, I have never seen Scarface. And I'm kinda off him since that abomination that was Redacted, so I may never see it!
Living in L.A. my whole life, I have no doubt that the vast majority of Hispanics who come here embody the American spirit--the willingness and drive to improve their lives for their future generations--in many ways better than we do. Most of us born here are too busy enjoying the lives our ancestors made for us to really have the same hunger, certainly not with the desperation someone from an impoverished or war-torn country does. And when they get here, it's not uncommon for them to express an admiration and defensiveness of the country we don't, or are reluctant to.
But the cinema is well-informed with anti-American propaganda, so much so that the occasional potshot (the obese, obnoxious tourists in In Bruges) hardly goes noticed.
But a pro-America attitude, or even friendly expression, does get noticed, at least by me, and it makes me feel good when it does happen.
But as I'm writing this I can only think of a few recent examples.
The World's Fastest Indian -- The Anthony Hopkins movie about the kiwi who comes to America to race has him encountering all kinds of generous Americans who help him get to his destination.
Tracy Ullman: Live and Exposed -- I like Tracy's act more sometimes than others, but her performance chops get better and better over time, which is really apparent in this show. When she ended it with a salute to America, I found myself surprised and surprisingly warmed.
Schultze Gets the Blues -- I love this deliberate (slow moving) picture of a retired German salt miner who becomes obsessed with zydeco and journeys to America to experience it first-hand. But what makes it especially wonderful is the warm welcome Schultze gets when he journeys through the bayous.
The Visitor -- I haven't seen it, but I'm hoping that a movie that is so transparently about the harshness of the immigration and naturalization services has to acknowledge the fact that America must be well worth coming to. I'll review it in a few days.
Sad that I can't think of any more off-hand, especially with all the foreign movies I've seen. But maybe I'm missing some?
Victoria offers these suggestions:
Three films on this topic come two mind:Along with the Eddie Murphy classic Coming to America, which she rightly pegs as Eddie Murphy's last great movie.
I Remember Mama
Similar theme, Sweet Land
About Indians, The Namesake
Hector says:
Maybe I need to watch Stroszek again. That was cheerful, wasn't it? An accordion, a dancing chicken… A whole lot of Wisconsin… it's been a while.
Y'know, Fritz Lang didn't make a lot of happy-happy joy-joy movies.
Trooper offers up this from Scarface:
Immigration Officer #2: So where's your old man now?
Tony Montana: He dead. He die. Sometime. Somewhere.
Immigration Officer #2: Mother?
Tony Montana: She dead too.
Immigration Officer #1: What kind of work you do in Cuba, Tony?
Tony Montana: Ah, you know, things. I was, uh - This, that. Construction business. I work a lot with my hands. I was in the army.
Immigration Officer #1: Any family in the States, Tony? Any cousins, brother-in-law, anybody?
Tony Montana: Nobody. Everybody's dead.
Immigration Officer #1: You ever been to jail, Tony?
Tony Montana: Me? Jail? No way. No.
Immigration Officer #1: Been in a mental hospital?
Tony Montana: Oh, yeah. On the boat coming over.
True confession time: Though I am a long-time De Palma fan, I have never seen Scarface. And I'm kinda off him since that abomination that was Redacted, so I may never see it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
