Monday, July 14, 2008

Dissent Not Necessarily Patriotic

Author/columnist Ralph Peters (at the NY Post, via RCP) takes on the bumper-stickerization of America, particularly the "dissent is the highest form of patriotism" gang. The quote is often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, who never said any such thing.

"Parrot-talk on policy infects both ends of the political spectrum. Extremists like things neat and simple. But, these days, tape-loop talk has reached epidemic proportions on the left. Rational debate? Ain't going to find it at that MoveOn fund-raiser. Worst of all, the most enduringly popular slogans tend to be either dishonest, misattributed - or just plain dumb.

We've all heard humorless America-haters promote themselves by announcing, As Thomas Jefferson said, "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." The first problem with that self-righteous bull is that Jefferson never said it. On the contrary, he warned of the dangers of political dissension carried to extremes.

The earliest traceable provenance of the slogan goes back to an obscure 1960s lefty who just made it up (long before activist-historian Howard Zinn commandeered it)."

In short, dissent can be patriotic, but spirited public debate should be based on facts, and not on some mushy 'feelings' and as Peters puts it, dissent should emphatically NOT be a fashion statement.


Could not agree more.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

"We've all heard humorless America-haters promote themselves by announcing, As Thomas Jefferson said, "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism."

Kalthalior, isn't it funny that Mr. Peters would set out to attack the "bumper-stickerization of the American mind" with a bumper sticker phrase: America-haters. If I harbor a thought critical of my country, am I an America-hater™? Worse yet, he presents this as if it were something new. I'm 43 years old, and as far as I can recall, I've been seeing cars plastered with slogans from all sides my entire life. (It does seem to be an American phenomenon, as I've never seen anything like it in my travels abroad.)

Peters also acts like the vacuousness of "The Audacity of Hope" is somehow new. How about "Its Morning Again in America" or "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow"? What the hell is any of that supposed to mean??

The real purpose of Peter's article is to tie Barack Obama to people we don't like:

"My fellow Americans, let me ask you: Were Abby Hoffman, Jerry Rubin and Sen. Barack Obama's Weatherman Underground pals (who bombed their own country) really more patriotic than those who served in Vietnam? Was trashing the campus records office truly the "highest form of patriotism?"

I'm sure Sen. Obama chums around with former members of the Weather Underground all the time. And if he does, no doubt they have taken control of his mind. Please.

I could hardly come up with a better example of bumper-sticker thinking - Abby Hoffman, Jerry Rubin and Sen. Barack Obama's Weatherman Underground pals now stand for the millions of Americans who came to view our involvement in Viet Nam as immoral.

Here in Madison, Karl Armstrong and three others bombed the Army Math Resaearch Center in 1970, killing an innocent resaearcher and deafening another. I saw the horrible destruction with my own eyes. Was that a patriotic form of dissent? Absolutely, resoundingly not.

Were the guardsman at Kent State patriots?

One of my neighbors has a sticker on his front door: "America - Love it or Leave it."

In other words, "shut up, and do what you're told - or move to Bosnia"

I don't know. That doesn't seem any more patriotic than Ralph Peter's shallow writing. It just seems dumb.

No shortage of that, though(not that that's anything new).

Respectfully yours,

Doug