|
WASHINGTON DIARIST.
Heroes
by Leon Wieseltier
| Post
date 10.04.01 | Issue date 10.15.01 |
|
|
Who does Ari Fleischer think he is? "There
are reminders to all Americans that they need
to watch what they say, watch what they do,
and this is not a time for remarks like that;
there never is." With those scolding words,
the president's press secretary became responsible
for the administration's first disgrace in Operation
Enduring Freedom. A briefing on the founding
documents of the United States would instruct
the civics teacher at the blue curtain that
this is not a time for remarks like that; there
never is. Fleischer's little lesson was galling
for a variety of reasons. It was a startling
misrepresentation of the American spirit in
philosophy and politics. It exemplified a coarse
patriotism in an hour of fine patriotism. And
it was a great gift to the two-bit Randolph
Bournes of the American left, who are always
congratulating themselves not only on the correctness
of their opinions but also on the courage of
their opinions. One of the enduring comedies
of American life is the notion that criticism
of the American government is a species of heroism.
Consider the martyrdom of Bill Maher. Fleischer's
un-American homily was provoked by a remark
by Maher in which he compared the American military
unfavorably to the levelers of the World Trade
Center. "We have been the cowards lobbing cruise
missiles from 2,000 miles away," he fearlessly
asserted. "That's cowardly." Never mind that
the significant fact about Al Qaeda's pilots
is not that they were prepared to take their
own lives for what they believed, but that they
were prepared to take other people's lives for
what they believed. Never mind, too, that it
is the duty of every self-respecting society
to make itself stronger than those who would
destroy it. To argue with Maher's understanding
of morality and strategy would be to mistake
patter for thought. For a long time now Maher
has been the smirking personification of the
American confusion of show business with dissent.
He is the critic of whom every establishment
dreams: the one who is in it for the laughs.
He is network television's idea of a dangerous
man; which is to say, an essentially undangerous
man. (Oh, for Lenny Bruce's imitation of Bill
Maher!) As a consequence of Maher's crack, "Politically
Incorrect" lost a few sponsors, and a few affiliates
of ABC pulled or pushed back the show. And we
call this a free country! But then two delightfully
American things happened. First, the hero of
political heterodoxy took it back: "In no way
was I intending to say, nor have I ever thought,
that the men and women who defend our nation
in uniform are anything but courageous and valiant,
and I offer my apologies to anyone who took
it wrong." But the men and women in uniform
who defend our nation are precisely the people
who lob cruise missiles from two thousand miles
away, and Maher said precisely that those people
are anything but courageous and valiant. The
mendacity of his apology was fully the match
of government at its worst. And John Peter Zenger
continued: "My criticism was meant for politicians
who, fearing public reaction, have not allowed
our military to do the job they are obviously
ready, willing, and able to do." Do you follow?
He was not dissenting from the left. He was
dissenting from the right. He was just a jingoist
who misspoke. And then the second thing happened:
martyrdom turned out to be a good career move.
On the nights after Maher's apparently inexpedient
comment, "Politically Incorrect" picked up approximately
a million more viewers. Fearing public opinion,
indeed. Maher owes Fleischer a drink. The system
worked.
Elsewhere in America, however, conscience
refused to be silenced. The American Civil Liberties
Union ran an advertisement that showed the parchment
of the Constitution shorn of all its hallowed
words except the preamble. (You know, the one
that includes "provide for the common defense"
among the purposes of the nation.) In The
New York Times, Blaine Harden proclaimed
that "[i]n lock step with times like these,
loose lips have been slapped shut," and provided
an example of loose lips with this grotesque
description of the weeks since September 11
this way: "As it has during every major military
conflict since World War I, a nationalist undertow
that is culturally conformist, ethnically exclusive
and belligerently militaristic began to silence
dissent, spread fear among immigrants and lock
up people without explanation." Obviously the
tragedy has blunted the man's senses. In the
next morning's paper, Richard Reeves issued
a warning that "patriotism calls out the censor"
and chillingly adduced Tocqueville. In a fit
of Fleischerism, a columnist in Texas City,
Texas, was fired for criticizing the president
and a columnist in Grants Pass, Oregon, was
dismissed for attacking the president for having
"skedaddled" to a "Nebraska hole" on September
11. These are the only real thwartings of the
ethos of free speech that have so far been recorded.
No, it is not the right of dissent that needs
to be defended against Operation Enduring Freedom.
It is the romance of dissent. This is how one
contrarianism-artist explained the predicament
of the lonely partisan of truth on September
13:
With cellphones still bleeping piteously
from under the rubble, it probably seems indecent
to most people to ask if the United States
has ever done anything to attract such awful
hatred. Indeed, the very thought, for the
present, is taboo. Some senators and congressmen
have spoken of the loathing felt by certain
unnamed and sinister elements for the freedom
and prosperity of America, as if it were only
natural that such a happy and successful country
should inspire envy and jealousy. But that
is the limit of permissible thought.
Who wants to think permissibly? So let us
transgress the limit, and throw caution to the
winds, and act like genuine intellectuals, and
endanger our livelihoods, and risk the loss
of friends and lovers, and think impermissible
thoughts. To wit: Osama bin Laden is a shy,
enigmatic, and cruelly misunderstood individual.
There is nothing more urgent in the world than
the satisfaction of the Palestinians, and the
attacks on New York and Washington would not
have happened if Israeli tanks had not spent
a few hours in Jenin last month. Capitalism
and democracy are the cunning devices of imperialism.
The United States has brought mainly misery
upon the nations of the earth. Saddam Hussein
is an innocent victim of America's surrender
to Zionism. Terrorism is a form of political
criticism. The use of force against terrorists
is not different from the use of force by terrorists.
A greater measure of vigilance in America is
really a greater measure of racism in America.
It will be plain, I hope, that those propositions
are not heroic. They are idiotic. The "permissibility"
of a thought has nothing to do with its truth
or its falsity. It has to do only with the vanity
of the individual who thinks it. But no matter.
America is permissive (which is why America
has been attacked). And we are one people. These
heroes will have to be defended by those heroes,
I mean the actual ones.
is Literary Editor of TNR.
|
