bush needs a history lesson; iraq is not the american revolution

[dajoki]

The Nation http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=17116


Posted 08/26/2005 @ 3:34pm
Bush vs. History

The Iraqis are having a hard time pulling together a constitution quickly enough to meet President Bush's public-relations timeline.
As I am not an Iraqi, I have no interest in meddling in the affairs of that troubled land. Of course, I would prefer that the Iraqis establish a system of self-governance that, like ours in the United States, seeks to erect a wall of separation between church and state, preserve the rights of small states and political minorities, protect against military and police abuses, and guarantee freedom of speech, freedom of the press and all the other basics of a functioning democracy.

If I was really writing a wish list, I might also recommend that the Iraqis do a better job than we do of limiting the power of corporate monopolies, keep special-interest money out of their politics, treating healthcare and education as basic rights and establishing reliable electoral systems.

But as an American, I should not be worrying about perfecting the Iraqi constitution before I go about the work of getting things right here at home. This seems like basic logic to me. But that logic escapes our President.
<<snip>>

But it would be reassuring if the President at least had a passing acquaintance with American history.

As efforts to reach agreement on an Iraqi constitution have stumbled again and again, Bush has sought to comfort in a bizarre analogy.
"We had a little trouble with our own conventions writing a constitution," the President told reporters in Idaho the other day, continuing a pattern of comparing the US and Iraqi experiences of writing a constitution that began several months ago when Bush explained, " must remember the history of our own country. The American Revolution was followed by years of chaos.... Our first effort at a governing charter, the Articles of Confederation, failed miserably--it took several years before we finally adopted our Constitution and inaugurated our first President.... No nation in history has made the transition from tyranny to a free society without setbacks and false starts. What separates those nations that succeed from those that falter is their progress in establishing free institutions. So to help young democracies succeed, we must help them build free institutions to fill the vacuum created by change."

To hear members of the Bush Administration and their amen corner in the media tell it, suicide bombs must have been going off like clockwork in Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia and Charleston back in the 1780s. But, of course, that was never the case.

While there were rowdy demonstrations and loud dissents during the years following the end of the British occupation of the Empire's former colonies along the Eastern Seaboard of North America, the period was characterized by relative calm as factions within the new nation debated the extent to which states should cooperate with one another.

Try as Bush and his followers may, they will find no historicalrecord of Ayatollah Alexander Hamilton's militia hunting down followers of radical secularist Thomas Jefferson, nor of rival Christian gangs blowing up one another's houses of worship. Nor will they find a record of renegade Green Mountain Boys gunning down foreign troops who were supposedly present to "help young democracies succeed."

[dogday]

1. Our men are dying so the Iraqi women can

lose all their rights! God Bless America :sarcasm:

[McCamy Taylor]

2. And so a secular middle east country can become a muslim one.

I am sure that the Saudi family is very happy with the Bush family.

[dajoki]

4. good article on that " mortgaged to the house of saud"

The Nation http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050815/scheer0810


Mortgaged to the House of Saud
Robert Scheer
The only evidence you need that President Bush is losing the "war on terror" is this: On Sunday, the foreign minister of Saudi Arabia said that relations with the United States "couldn't be better."

Tell that to the parents of those who have died in two wars defending this corrupt spawning ground of violent extremism. Never mind the ugly facts: We are deeply entwined with Saudi Arabia even though it shares none of our values and supports our enemie

[w13rd0]

3. If Iraq is the historical equivalent...

...of the American Revolution, that makes the United States the historical equivalent of France. You go right ahead with that halfwit idea, Bush...

[dajoki]

5. from same article; french left quickly

In fact, there were no foreign troops prodding the process along. The French, who played a critical role in helping the American revolutionaries throw off British colonial oppression, exited quickly. The Marquis de Lafayette, as good a friend as the American rebels had, did not return to the new republic until 1824.

To be sure, Lafayette had ideas about how the Continentals ought to organize the American experiment. But he was smart enough to recognize that constitutions are organic documents that cannot be written under timelines imposed by foreign powers, just as he recognized that democracies cannot form or flourish under occupation.

[PurityOfEssence]

6. There never was an American Revolution

There was a War of Independence. The ruling local elites didn't want to pay their taxes or be beholden to foreign control, so they broke away. NOTHING about the socio-economic structure changed, and many businessmen and southern planters were happy to not have to service their notes while it was going on. Slavery didn't end. People without property didn't gain any rights.

There have been a few shakeups since then: Jackson's election, the Civil War, the New Deal, but there's never been a revolution. Go to some of the original colonies and you'll find that the families that controlled them then are still holding the reins. Are you listening, Lincoln Chaffee?

We are a country founded upon the glorification of the individual and the right to subjugate others; we are about money. The idiots who claim that we are a country that sprang from the need for religious freedom miss the many facts of our beginnings and development. Jamestown predates the Massachusetts Bay Pilgrims by 13 years, and the Virginians were a secular mercantile venture; hell, there were slaves in Virginia before the Pilgrims landed. We have always been about money and the primacy of personal rights to do as we please.

[dajoki]

10. you are correct...

but "war for independence" or "american revolution" are only semantics. http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/revolution

[Jade Fox]

7. Speaking of the American Revolution....

those who support Bush would have gladly killed American rebels for
George--King George, that is. Those rebels were treasonous and
unpatriotic!

[cliss]

8. Thanks for the excellent reminder, dajoki.

I think the author hit the nail on the head here:

"I should not be worrying about perfecting the Iraqi constitution before I go about the work of getting things right here at home".

That's why so many people really don't care about what happens in Iraq. Now, Americans do care that their loved ones are dying, and that we're technically bankrupt right now over this scheme.

But they really DON'T care about their constitution. Not when they have increasing layoffs, gas prices soaring, 45 million without health insurance, and so on.

How many people sit at a cocktail party and discuss the fine points of the Iraq constitution?

And THAT's why Bush doesn't get anywhere with his pleading speeches. He begs for patience, cries for tolerance. People are fed up.

[dajoki]

9. you also hit the nail on the head n/t