A very precise focus on the key issue. The cruelty of how the law is enforced undercuts the legitimacy of enforcing the law.
Whether one mostly agrees or mostly disagrees with Trump's policies, a style and language that evidence personal grievances resonates throughout the culture. This is likely to feed a backlash that is driven by different personal grievances, also acting with cruel excesses.
Unfortunately, those who opposed the enforcement of the law have compromised their credibility when they criticize the excesses of how the law is enforced. It's time for those leaders who support enforcing immigration laws to speak up for fairness and proportionality.
The Western's man of violence is a good example of the ability to be strong without being cruel. I'm not a huge Western fan, but I love Drive which is a sort of neo-Western. The driver doesn't go around hurting people for fun. He's not violence averse, but only pushes when pushed. It's one thing to want to go down the isolationist route, deciding you don't want to fund do-gooder projects around the world. But being reserved is far superior to lashing out in all directions. It's also far more likely to get you the respect that people claim they want.
Great presentation on the concept of cruelty. Certainly, we have recent examples of harsh, humiliating or otherwise needlessly cruel treatment inflicted on our own US citizens. Anyone who carefully followed the arrest and prosecution of many of the J6 defendants as they were shuffled by thuggish prison guards aided by negligent public advocates and presented before biased judges know that their treatment crossed the “line of justice” you refer to in your piece.
We must be very careful to treat the accused justly without bias. I was shocked at the lack of public outcry then. I’m not shocked now, that suddenly these same people are accusing the current power holders of the same kind of cruelty. In my opinion, they reek of bias and belong nowhere in the realm of deciding justice.
Justice should always be decided by an unbiased examination of facts applied to existing law. The biggest problem for lay people is that we depend on the “news media” to sort out the facts. We have and continue to be lied to by a biased media as well. These people have caused so much turmoil and contention among otherwise good-hearted Americans. We need only look back 5 years to see how willingly the messengers will spread the lies, rather than investigate the truth. I’ve had enough. Many immigration stories are presented emotionally by the press and rarely include all of the facts. This is intentional by the liars to rush our judgement and get on board with their bias. I’ll wait for all the facts thank you.
We have Immigration processes and laws for treating those who, for good or for bad, wish to enter our country. You would never know that by listening to a dishonest press carping on about how heartless America is to “all” of these poor immigrants. I know many people who respected the existing process and used it legally and now enjoy the benefit of their patience. It works and like it or not, the process is intended to be just. Of course it could be improved but, so many members of Congress have neglected to do the difficult job of writing better Immigration laws. They pretend they don’t know it is their responsibility. They turned their heads while the Biden Administration opened the border and flooded the process. Now they jerk their heads toward the Trump Administration and snarl as it tries to fix the mess.
I strive daily to be just and certainly not cruel in my actions. I used to trust most journalists, admired the plight of judges who had to make tough decisions and considered first the innocent intention of most immigrants. I was naive and no longer initially leap to a side. I think it’s more fair to wait for the facts from all sources.
When, pray tell, was America 'never' cruel, eh? Shall we ask the indigenous folks who lived here before Europeans came to supplant them? Shall we inquire into the history of slavery? I am with you regarding cruelty being disgusting, but you cannot whitewash past cruelties in order to maintain a mythos of 'strong' 'guardians' and pretend the cruelty you mention is something new. It is not. Full stop.
I take issue with this. I know this is a common narrative, but as a history guy I think it needs pushing back on. There's a reason I said in the essay that America has hurt people it shouldn't and that wicked people have used it for wicked ends. That's obviously true. America has also behaved like an empire using power to advance its interests, because that is what it was and its what empires do to maintain themselves and survive. However, America was rarely cruel for the sake of instilling fear or punishing enemies--remarkably so given its power. I stand by that because its true.
The one exception to this (and its a big one) is slavery. Slavery is the original sin of America and it's the reason these narratives exist. Tocqueville was right about its effect on America's history and national narrative. However, even there America didn't invent slavery, but inherited it from Europe. From the start, everyone knew we had to get rid of it because it was unjust and contradicted the country's Founding principles and was thus destabilizing. The Founders on the whole really wanted to abolish it, but politically couldn't. The problem is half the economy depended on it, and people are really good at not understanding something their livelihoods depend on them not understanding. Rooting up slavery meant breaking the economy of the some of the richest parts of the country, which is what happened when we finally did it. It was the morally correct thing and necessary, but the reason people resisted wasn't just because they wanted to be cruel or racist. They knew ending slavery meant throwing the entire region into an economic backwater for a century, which is more or less exactly what happened. The South which had been very rich before the Civil War was an impoverished backwater until the 1960s and is still catching up today.
So nobody is whitewashing the past, but the narrative that America is fundamentally evil is also historical nonsense. The reason we repeat it doesn't even have to do with civil rights but the Vietnam War. The New Left, who didn't want to go to Vietnam to "defend democracy," developed and spread an ideology that overtook the left that America was unjust, immoral, and evil, and shouldn't be morally respected. They did this to push back on the jingoism pushing to send them to fight a war they didn't want to fight.
America is morally better than most, if not all, great empires in history. This is just a fact. It's one we should also acknowledge and embrace, because believing it is important to getting everyone to be better tomorrow and the day after. Telling people America is a moral hellhole doesn't make people better. It tells them they don't have to. What makes people behave better when its not in their interest to do so is telling them they have a duty to carry on the heavy burden of their nation, culture, and ancestors. Telling people America is bad makes people worse. Telling them its good makes people act better.
Frank, I agree with the point you’re making. On balance, the US has been by far a greater force for good in the world than cruelty. We have also acted with more restraint on the use of power and with more charity towards former enemies than any other great power I am aware of. For example, how we spent so much money and effort to rebuild Germany and Japan after World War II, turned enemies into allies, and let them govern themselves (in contrast to the Soviet Union’s cruel post-WWII domination over Eastern Europe).
But I also agree with Shagbark that we should not seem to be downplaying American cruelties of the past. It’s not clear to me how much the two of you actually disagree. I don’t see Shagbark saying America is, or has been, fundamentally evil. His follow up comment says he is just making the point that America has a history of cruelty, notably regarding slavery and Native Americans. I think his point is valid and important - not for the purpose of denigrating America, but to help prevent such cruelty from happening again. That is the point of your essay. Americans, like all humans, are capable of great good and evil. Unfortunately, cruelty and hypocritically acting contrary to Americans’ professed values was not limited to slavery. The “five civilized tribes” (so-called, because they did everything they were asked to do to assimilate into American culture and Christianity) were repaid for their attempt at assimilation by being forcefully, marched on the trail of tears to the Oklahoma Indian territory, many dying along the way. This included the Cherokee, who had been military allies of the early United States, fighting with the US against the Creek in 1813-14. Also, I don’t think it is fair to characterize the cruelty of slavery as being limited to an economic issue that clouded people’s better judgment. If that were the case, black Americans would not have had to suffer 100 hundred years of segregation and oppression after the Civil War that included lynching, murder, and even the bombing of a church that killed young children, supported and excused by some elected officials, police, and juries.
Anyway, my point is not to criticize you or America. It is to note that the things Americans do are not inherently good simply because they are being done by Americans. But the founding principles of our country, as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, are good. When we stick to those principles, and show fairness and forgiveness rather than cruelty and retribution, our country is a great force for good in the world.
I'm with you that Slavery is evil and what happened to the natives was cruel, but what exactly is unique about what America did? Slavery has existed in many forms since well for a really long time and people have been conquering and displacing others for thousands of years and the natives weren't exactly embodying the "Noble Savage" myth. They slaughtered and conquered each other as well.
Did I say America was unique? Nope. As to the rest of your statement, does it have anything at all to say about my statement. Also nope. The question is: Was the US never cruel? That is what is being addressed here. Keep your Red Herring to yourself, sir.
Strong writing, sound argumentation and the humanism without which there's not much point in living. Great stuff Frank.
A good state has to have certain standards it just won't allow itself to slip below no matter what. I agree with Trump on his push for peace in Ukraine, but on Palestine and immigration, there's just so much hate, cruelty and barbarism.
'I don’t believe in the Rousseauian blank slate, that people are inherently good and corrupted by society', yeah, fully agree. I have always found Hegel's interpretation of the state of nature by far the most compelling. He said it was a fiction (even before we knew historically and scientifically that no human ever lived outside of society) for the reason that a human was a social creature by definition. A human living on its own would not in fact be a human.
We now know that the first human social institution was the band. This was our first state of nature. It was very democratic too and never seems to have had hereditary rule, unlike many tribes.
A very precise focus on the key issue. The cruelty of how the law is enforced undercuts the legitimacy of enforcing the law.
Whether one mostly agrees or mostly disagrees with Trump's policies, a style and language that evidence personal grievances resonates throughout the culture. This is likely to feed a backlash that is driven by different personal grievances, also acting with cruel excesses.
Unfortunately, those who opposed the enforcement of the law have compromised their credibility when they criticize the excesses of how the law is enforced. It's time for those leaders who support enforcing immigration laws to speak up for fairness and proportionality.
The Western's man of violence is a good example of the ability to be strong without being cruel. I'm not a huge Western fan, but I love Drive which is a sort of neo-Western. The driver doesn't go around hurting people for fun. He's not violence averse, but only pushes when pushed. It's one thing to want to go down the isolationist route, deciding you don't want to fund do-gooder projects around the world. But being reserved is far superior to lashing out in all directions. It's also far more likely to get you the respect that people claim they want.
Great presentation on the concept of cruelty. Certainly, we have recent examples of harsh, humiliating or otherwise needlessly cruel treatment inflicted on our own US citizens. Anyone who carefully followed the arrest and prosecution of many of the J6 defendants as they were shuffled by thuggish prison guards aided by negligent public advocates and presented before biased judges know that their treatment crossed the “line of justice” you refer to in your piece.
We must be very careful to treat the accused justly without bias. I was shocked at the lack of public outcry then. I’m not shocked now, that suddenly these same people are accusing the current power holders of the same kind of cruelty. In my opinion, they reek of bias and belong nowhere in the realm of deciding justice.
Justice should always be decided by an unbiased examination of facts applied to existing law. The biggest problem for lay people is that we depend on the “news media” to sort out the facts. We have and continue to be lied to by a biased media as well. These people have caused so much turmoil and contention among otherwise good-hearted Americans. We need only look back 5 years to see how willingly the messengers will spread the lies, rather than investigate the truth. I’ve had enough. Many immigration stories are presented emotionally by the press and rarely include all of the facts. This is intentional by the liars to rush our judgement and get on board with their bias. I’ll wait for all the facts thank you.
We have Immigration processes and laws for treating those who, for good or for bad, wish to enter our country. You would never know that by listening to a dishonest press carping on about how heartless America is to “all” of these poor immigrants. I know many people who respected the existing process and used it legally and now enjoy the benefit of their patience. It works and like it or not, the process is intended to be just. Of course it could be improved but, so many members of Congress have neglected to do the difficult job of writing better Immigration laws. They pretend they don’t know it is their responsibility. They turned their heads while the Biden Administration opened the border and flooded the process. Now they jerk their heads toward the Trump Administration and snarl as it tries to fix the mess.
I strive daily to be just and certainly not cruel in my actions. I used to trust most journalists, admired the plight of judges who had to make tough decisions and considered first the innocent intention of most immigrants. I was naive and no longer initially leap to a side. I think it’s more fair to wait for the facts from all sources.
We have been a nation that practices torture for more than twenty years. Adding gulags is just the next step.
When, pray tell, was America 'never' cruel, eh? Shall we ask the indigenous folks who lived here before Europeans came to supplant them? Shall we inquire into the history of slavery? I am with you regarding cruelty being disgusting, but you cannot whitewash past cruelties in order to maintain a mythos of 'strong' 'guardians' and pretend the cruelty you mention is something new. It is not. Full stop.
I take issue with this. I know this is a common narrative, but as a history guy I think it needs pushing back on. There's a reason I said in the essay that America has hurt people it shouldn't and that wicked people have used it for wicked ends. That's obviously true. America has also behaved like an empire using power to advance its interests, because that is what it was and its what empires do to maintain themselves and survive. However, America was rarely cruel for the sake of instilling fear or punishing enemies--remarkably so given its power. I stand by that because its true.
The one exception to this (and its a big one) is slavery. Slavery is the original sin of America and it's the reason these narratives exist. Tocqueville was right about its effect on America's history and national narrative. However, even there America didn't invent slavery, but inherited it from Europe. From the start, everyone knew we had to get rid of it because it was unjust and contradicted the country's Founding principles and was thus destabilizing. The Founders on the whole really wanted to abolish it, but politically couldn't. The problem is half the economy depended on it, and people are really good at not understanding something their livelihoods depend on them not understanding. Rooting up slavery meant breaking the economy of the some of the richest parts of the country, which is what happened when we finally did it. It was the morally correct thing and necessary, but the reason people resisted wasn't just because they wanted to be cruel or racist. They knew ending slavery meant throwing the entire region into an economic backwater for a century, which is more or less exactly what happened. The South which had been very rich before the Civil War was an impoverished backwater until the 1960s and is still catching up today.
So nobody is whitewashing the past, but the narrative that America is fundamentally evil is also historical nonsense. The reason we repeat it doesn't even have to do with civil rights but the Vietnam War. The New Left, who didn't want to go to Vietnam to "defend democracy," developed and spread an ideology that overtook the left that America was unjust, immoral, and evil, and shouldn't be morally respected. They did this to push back on the jingoism pushing to send them to fight a war they didn't want to fight.
America is morally better than most, if not all, great empires in history. This is just a fact. It's one we should also acknowledge and embrace, because believing it is important to getting everyone to be better tomorrow and the day after. Telling people America is a moral hellhole doesn't make people better. It tells them they don't have to. What makes people behave better when its not in their interest to do so is telling them they have a duty to carry on the heavy burden of their nation, culture, and ancestors. Telling people America is bad makes people worse. Telling them its good makes people act better.
Frank, I agree with the point you’re making. On balance, the US has been by far a greater force for good in the world than cruelty. We have also acted with more restraint on the use of power and with more charity towards former enemies than any other great power I am aware of. For example, how we spent so much money and effort to rebuild Germany and Japan after World War II, turned enemies into allies, and let them govern themselves (in contrast to the Soviet Union’s cruel post-WWII domination over Eastern Europe).
But I also agree with Shagbark that we should not seem to be downplaying American cruelties of the past. It’s not clear to me how much the two of you actually disagree. I don’t see Shagbark saying America is, or has been, fundamentally evil. His follow up comment says he is just making the point that America has a history of cruelty, notably regarding slavery and Native Americans. I think his point is valid and important - not for the purpose of denigrating America, but to help prevent such cruelty from happening again. That is the point of your essay. Americans, like all humans, are capable of great good and evil. Unfortunately, cruelty and hypocritically acting contrary to Americans’ professed values was not limited to slavery. The “five civilized tribes” (so-called, because they did everything they were asked to do to assimilate into American culture and Christianity) were repaid for their attempt at assimilation by being forcefully, marched on the trail of tears to the Oklahoma Indian territory, many dying along the way. This included the Cherokee, who had been military allies of the early United States, fighting with the US against the Creek in 1813-14. Also, I don’t think it is fair to characterize the cruelty of slavery as being limited to an economic issue that clouded people’s better judgment. If that were the case, black Americans would not have had to suffer 100 hundred years of segregation and oppression after the Civil War that included lynching, murder, and even the bombing of a church that killed young children, supported and excused by some elected officials, police, and juries.
Anyway, my point is not to criticize you or America. It is to note that the things Americans do are not inherently good simply because they are being done by Americans. But the founding principles of our country, as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, are good. When we stick to those principles, and show fairness and forgiveness rather than cruelty and retribution, our country is a great force for good in the world.
I'm with you that Slavery is evil and what happened to the natives was cruel, but what exactly is unique about what America did? Slavery has existed in many forms since well for a really long time and people have been conquering and displacing others for thousands of years and the natives weren't exactly embodying the "Noble Savage" myth. They slaughtered and conquered each other as well.
Did I say America was unique? Nope. As to the rest of your statement, does it have anything at all to say about my statement. Also nope. The question is: Was the US never cruel? That is what is being addressed here. Keep your Red Herring to yourself, sir.
I'm just saying it's stupid to hate ourselves over past misdeeds. Self-hatred and hatred of one's own people is never a good thing.
Strong writing, sound argumentation and the humanism without which there's not much point in living. Great stuff Frank.
A good state has to have certain standards it just won't allow itself to slip below no matter what. I agree with Trump on his push for peace in Ukraine, but on Palestine and immigration, there's just so much hate, cruelty and barbarism.
'I don’t believe in the Rousseauian blank slate, that people are inherently good and corrupted by society', yeah, fully agree. I have always found Hegel's interpretation of the state of nature by far the most compelling. He said it was a fiction (even before we knew historically and scientifically that no human ever lived outside of society) for the reason that a human was a social creature by definition. A human living on its own would not in fact be a human.
We now know that the first human social institution was the band. This was our first state of nature. It was very democratic too and never seems to have had hereditary rule, unlike many tribes.