Happy Independence Day! I wanted to take a few moments this 4th of July to talk about why I'm unabashedly, unreservedly and apologetically in love with this country even though I'm not sure that's altogether a popular sentiment these days. Don't get me wrong, I think the vast majority of Americans are patriotic and love their country. But that love is often distant and removed, more passive than active. Well most of his will wave a flag on occasion and sing the national anthem at baseball games, I'm not sure that many of us are in love with our country in a way is passionate and involved.
It seems so passe, naive even, in our globalized age to talk like that. After all, America isn't a perfect country. Our past and our present have deep flaws. We mustn't forget that there are many other fine and wonderful countries in the world and we therefore ought to guard ourselves against international arrogance.
Those things are true but the conclusion we draw from them is not. America has real problems, but those problems aren't really her. America is Thomas Jefferson's immortal words that all men are created equal. The past evil of slavery and the modern evil of abortion aren't America, and when we fight against them we are not seeking to change America but to recover her.
As for other nations, I agree there are many that are fine and wonderful. I am not in love with America because she comes out first in some contest. I am in love with her because of what she is. When I see my wife in a crowded room she is the most beautiful to me not because of what the other women aren't but because of what she is.
Up until recently I've found that, even though I've always tried to wear my patriotism on my sleeve, I'd also fallen in this trap of loving without being in love. Theodore Roosevelt, a man who is a hero to me and one of the finest leaders America has ever had, changed my mind. Throughout his life he was passionately in love with his country. At first glance in his diaries it comes across as arrogant elitism. But the more you get to know the man, the more you realize that's not even close to the truth. His love didn't grow from something ugly and evil, it grew from a childlike wonder and a fiery passion that refused to die long after life had done its best to make old and callous. To use a biblical analogy, it was faith like a child.
And that's how I choose to be in love with my country.
So what is America? America is the belief that God has given us the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and that those rights are worth dying for.
America is George Washington arriving at the First Continental Congress dressed in uniform and ready to go to war for freedom.
America is fifty-six men on July 4, 1776 signing their names to a document that was a death sentence should the war be lost.
America is the Christmas Day crossing of the Delaware River, one last desperate attempt at freedom in a cause that was starting to look doomed to fail.
America is thirteen wildly diverse colonies coming together as states to form a single nation.
America is Abraham Lincoln issuing the Emancipation Proclamation and setting the slaves free.
America is the soldiers landing on Normandy Beach on D-Day to fight the evil of Nazism and keep tyranny at bay.
America is a forty year struggle against Communism and Ronald Reagan calling for the destruction of the Berlin Wall.
America is New York's firemen standing in the rubble of the World Trade Center and hoisting a flag in defiance of a new wave of tyranny.
America is our brave men and women fighting in Iraq to spread freedom and democracy and to defend our country.
America is waking up every morning and knowing you're free from tyranny.
America is passing on this history and these traditions to every child and thanking God they're there to carry the promise of freedom to a new generation.
America is the day (and I pray it is not too distant) when every unborn child will not live in the shadow of legalized abortion.
I am in love with America for all of this and more. God has blessed this country and her people beyond anything the Founders could have imagined. Men and women have spent nearly two and half centuries spilling their blood to fulfill and prolong the promise of the Revolution, of the fifty-six men who on this day committed treason to one nation and pledged allegiance to another. From 1776 to 2008 their sacrifices have always been worth it. And that's something that's not only worth loving but being in love with.
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Friday, July 4, 2008
Saturday, June 28, 2008
The Joy of the Internet
Like a lot of people, there are plenty of things about the Internet, and modern technology in general, that drive me nuts. But there's plenty of good too. For me, one of the best things about the Internet is the ability to get expensive books for cheap.
As part of my goal to read a biography on every US President, I'd decided to read Thomas Jefferson & The New Nation by Merrill D. Peterson. Unfortunately the book costs $50 to buy new. For the life of me, I can't figure out why. We're not talking some fancy, gold leafed volume with glossy, color pictures. It's a standard trade-paperback book with only a handful of black and white pictures. Yes it's long, but so are a lot of books I read that cost $10.
When something like this happens, my favorite site to go to is fetchbook.info. This site goes out and searches several used book sites (Half, Abebooks, Ebay) and comes back with the lowest prices. Using this, I was able to get my Jefferson biography, virtually new, for a fifth of the cost.
All 1,000+ pages of historical joy were waiting for me when I got home tonight. So now I'm happy, the used online bookseller is happy, and my wallet is happy. About the only person who's not happy is Merrill D Peterson who's not getting any additional royalty money because of how outrageously expensive his book is. I highly recommend fetchbook.info both for cases like this and for out of print books.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Bias Side Note
A brief add on to the last post. As I've thought about the issue I think it's important to also point out there are some forms of bias and of expressing bias that are always unacceptable. The most common modern example is comparing people we disagree with to the Nazis.
Just the other day I was reading reviews on a Hitler biography and saw several references, irrelevant to the material, comparing Christians, Republicans and George Bush to the Third Reich. Thanks to the moveon.org crowd, these comparisons have become nearly mainstream in the last several years.
This type of bias does nothing but detract from debate. It ought to be possible to believe George Bush is wrong on everything and still recognize he is not Hitler. You should be able to be a card carrying atheist who believes the church a terrible institution and recognize the difference between the church down the street and the Nazi death camps.
I don't limit this criticism to the extreme left. More than once I've heard Hilary Clinton called Hitlery Clinton. For as much as I dislike the woman and am thankful she won't be president, that's wrong and inappropriate.
Hitler and his thugs are enjoying their just rewards in the afterlife. Let's leave them there, where they belong, and recognize that no matter what role bias has in history or public debate, this sort is NEVER ok.
Just the other day I was reading reviews on a Hitler biography and saw several references, irrelevant to the material, comparing Christians, Republicans and George Bush to the Third Reich. Thanks to the moveon.org crowd, these comparisons have become nearly mainstream in the last several years.
This type of bias does nothing but detract from debate. It ought to be possible to believe George Bush is wrong on everything and still recognize he is not Hitler. You should be able to be a card carrying atheist who believes the church a terrible institution and recognize the difference between the church down the street and the Nazi death camps.
I don't limit this criticism to the extreme left. More than once I've heard Hilary Clinton called Hitlery Clinton. For as much as I dislike the woman and am thankful she won't be president, that's wrong and inappropriate.
Hitler and his thugs are enjoying their just rewards in the afterlife. Let's leave them there, where they belong, and recognize that no matter what role bias has in history or public debate, this sort is NEVER ok.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Is Historical Bias OK?
This week I've been reading The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt by Edmund Morris. For the most part the book is excellent, engrossing and more than a little tough to put down. However, every now and then Morris, whose voice usually fades into the background as he tells the story, will pipe in with his own opinions on some of TR's choices. For example, when discussing TR's opposition to a minimum wage he spends a couple of paragraphs making it clear he doesn't agree with TR and treating his subject as unenlightened (never mind that it's still a legitimate debate with good arguments on both sides). The same thing occurs when he's discussing TR's hunting exploits. He makes it clear he doesn't approve of how high the body counts were.
As I'm reading the book I've found these incidents to be distracting. But as I thought about it I began to wonder if what was bugging me was that Morris is occasionally commenting or that he's commenting negatively on a man I greatly admire.
I am not someone who considers bias to be a dirty word, especially when it comes to current events and contemporary politics. Actually, I think respectful bias is important and has a long tradition in the American system. A political system without bias scares me far more than one with. However, I do think it's important to be upfront about bias. From that perspective I think my annoyance at Morris is legitimate. This isn't a book making an argument one way or another about TR. It's simply telling the story of his life. To me that makes even occasional bias inappropriate.
I'd gotten this far in my thought process when I began to then wonder what my reaction would be if the historical subject in question was someone I didn't admire as much. If, for example, something similar happened while I was reading a biography of TR's distant cousin Franklin Delano (a great leader to be sure but one who, in my opinion, is more flawed) would I be upset by similar occasional criticism but from a conservative perspective?
The truth is, I don't know.
Intellectually I would say that if you're writing a book that is not agenda driven, you have a duty to keep your opinions out of it. Realistically I'd say I'm not sure that's completely possible and in this case I would say I was probably bothered more by the nature of the criticism than by the criticism in and of itself. Even more to the point, does a highly opinionated/biased guy like myself have any cause to complain about bias no matter what the context is?
And now for the anticlimactic ending of this post: I don't have a good answer to these questions at this point. It's an issue that's very interesting to me both intellectually and personally. I'm still thinking through this one (as you well know after reading through my jumbled thoughts!). If I come up with a more concrete answer on this I'll let you know.
Note: I want to briefly restate that anything I've said in this post isn't meant to take away from Morris's work. The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt is a great book. Any small qualms I have do nothing to detract from that.
As I'm reading the book I've found these incidents to be distracting. But as I thought about it I began to wonder if what was bugging me was that Morris is occasionally commenting or that he's commenting negatively on a man I greatly admire.
I am not someone who considers bias to be a dirty word, especially when it comes to current events and contemporary politics. Actually, I think respectful bias is important and has a long tradition in the American system. A political system without bias scares me far more than one with. However, I do think it's important to be upfront about bias. From that perspective I think my annoyance at Morris is legitimate. This isn't a book making an argument one way or another about TR. It's simply telling the story of his life. To me that makes even occasional bias inappropriate.
I'd gotten this far in my thought process when I began to then wonder what my reaction would be if the historical subject in question was someone I didn't admire as much. If, for example, something similar happened while I was reading a biography of TR's distant cousin Franklin Delano (a great leader to be sure but one who, in my opinion, is more flawed) would I be upset by similar occasional criticism but from a conservative perspective?
The truth is, I don't know.
Intellectually I would say that if you're writing a book that is not agenda driven, you have a duty to keep your opinions out of it. Realistically I'd say I'm not sure that's completely possible and in this case I would say I was probably bothered more by the nature of the criticism than by the criticism in and of itself. Even more to the point, does a highly opinionated/biased guy like myself have any cause to complain about bias no matter what the context is?
And now for the anticlimactic ending of this post: I don't have a good answer to these questions at this point. It's an issue that's very interesting to me both intellectually and personally. I'm still thinking through this one (as you well know after reading through my jumbled thoughts!). If I come up with a more concrete answer on this I'll let you know.
Note: I want to briefly restate that anything I've said in this post isn't meant to take away from Morris's work. The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt is a great book. Any small qualms I have do nothing to detract from that.
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Transformation Through Fire
Over the past couple days, Annie and I spent some of our drive to North Carolina listening to David McCullough's 1776. The book covers the plights of George Washington and the Continental Army from the siege of Boston through the Christmas Day crossing of the Delaware. Now I know that for some of you the mere mention of history makes your eyes glaze over but bare with me for a few sentences. I promise this post will be about more than (really cool) Revolutionary War history.
What most of us don't know, and what McCullough brilliantly describes, is that George Washington was not always the brilliant commander and leader we remember him as. In fact 1776, his first full year of command, was almost a complete failure. His first major battle, the defense of Long Island, couldn't have gone worse (leading John Adams to summarize "In general, our generals were out generaled"). To make matters worse he followed up Long Island with three more miserable defeats.
Morale was very low and the patriotic fervor that had enveloped the nation following July's signing of the Declaration of Independence was gone. What had begun as whispers of his incompetence had grown into a very loud and open discussion. A good portion of the colonial population (not to mention the British) were convinced that the war was completely lost and that Washington was to blame. He was a failure and he would go down in history as the man who cost America her independence.
But then something happened. Transformation occurred. He began to learn from his mistakes, his indecisiveness started to slip away. He became more comfortable with his command and his daring crossing of the Delaware helped turn the tide of the revolution and save the young country.
None of that transformation would have occurred without the failures.
And that's so much like our lives. So often the only way God can make us grow us by knocking us flat. It's one of the central mysteries of the Christian walk: the only way up is down.
No matter how we look to the outside world, we all go through times where we feel like complete failures. We've let ourselves down, others down and God down. Nothing makes sense. We blew it bad and everything is lost.
I believe that it's at those times God can truly begin to work in us. We cannot be built up sitting in comfort on the sidelines. Washington was commander for over a year before Long Island, before his transformation truly began. It took going through the fire, both literally and politically, for him to become the man he would. It takes going through the failures and disappointments of life for God to make us who He truly would.
This is tough and I don't claim to be any expert in it. But God's grace is always waiting for us to get us through those times and help us to get out of His way so transformation can begin.
What most of us don't know, and what McCullough brilliantly describes, is that George Washington was not always the brilliant commander and leader we remember him as. In fact 1776, his first full year of command, was almost a complete failure. His first major battle, the defense of Long Island, couldn't have gone worse (leading John Adams to summarize "In general, our generals were out generaled"). To make matters worse he followed up Long Island with three more miserable defeats.
Morale was very low and the patriotic fervor that had enveloped the nation following July's signing of the Declaration of Independence was gone. What had begun as whispers of his incompetence had grown into a very loud and open discussion. A good portion of the colonial population (not to mention the British) were convinced that the war was completely lost and that Washington was to blame. He was a failure and he would go down in history as the man who cost America her independence.
But then something happened. Transformation occurred. He began to learn from his mistakes, his indecisiveness started to slip away. He became more comfortable with his command and his daring crossing of the Delaware helped turn the tide of the revolution and save the young country.
None of that transformation would have occurred without the failures.
And that's so much like our lives. So often the only way God can make us grow us by knocking us flat. It's one of the central mysteries of the Christian walk: the only way up is down.
No matter how we look to the outside world, we all go through times where we feel like complete failures. We've let ourselves down, others down and God down. Nothing makes sense. We blew it bad and everything is lost.
I believe that it's at those times God can truly begin to work in us. We cannot be built up sitting in comfort on the sidelines. Washington was commander for over a year before Long Island, before his transformation truly began. It took going through the fire, both literally and politically, for him to become the man he would. It takes going through the failures and disappointments of life for God to make us who He truly would.
This is tough and I don't claim to be any expert in it. But God's grace is always waiting for us to get us through those times and help us to get out of His way so transformation can begin.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Summer Reading
Woo hoo! My summer vacation books showed up today! Annie and I are leaving next Friday for a couple of weeks of relaxation in the Carolinas. I'm the type of guy who likes to bring a bunch of books on a trip, not because I'm necessarily going to get to them all but because I never know what I'm going to be in the mood for at any given time. I also like to mix in several rereads. I love revisiting old stories and vacation is a great time to do so. Here's a few snippets of what I'll probably be reading over this year's vacation, starting with the new stuff first.
I'm really excited about this one. I have yet to see the HBO miniseries based on this book but I love David McCullough's writing. Adams is one of the more interesting founding fathers, but smothered between the giants of Washington and Jefferson, his presidency tends to be overlooked. I'm hoping this can help round out some of my knowledge of the early presidents
Epic is one of the few things by Eldredge I haven't read (though i have heard him do a live version of it). The basic idea is to present the Gospel as a story going back before the beginning of time, through the rebellion of Satan, to redemption on the cross and the promise of future victory.
Reading Philip K. Dick is an experience. I've never read another author quite as mind boggling as him. But it works and if you can accept the weirdness it's a blast. If you can't, best to stick to the toned down movies based on his stuff like Minority Report and Blade Runner.
I've never read anything by Brennan Manning before but I've heard enough about him to be excited about giving him a shot. His books all have very high marks on Amazon and I'm hoping he becomes another of the wonderful Christian writers I've discovered in the last year.
I've just finished reading Frank Herbert's original Dune series. This is his son's continuation/conclusion based on notes and outlines found after Herbert's death in 1986. I know there are lots of Dune fans who loathe what Brian Herbert has done by trying to finish his father's series but I'm optimistic.
I've been meaning to read the medieval mystics for a while now. I've heard great things about St. John of the Cross and this is probably his most famous book.
To be honest, I know almost nothing about this book. But it's a sci-fi classic and as a certified sci-fi nerd it qualifies as a major hole in my reading. Hopefully it's as good as the hype.
Rereads:
Shadowland by Peter Straub - Straub is probably my favorite living horror writer. I don't remember this very while but I enjoyed it the first time through. It's not as scary as his brilliant Ghost Story but it's a good book nonetheless.
L.A. Confidential by James Ellroy - The movie is better known but the book is a lot of fun too. They're pretty different from but this is one of those cases where both movie and book are equally good.
Miracles and The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis - These are two of Lewis's best books. It's been a while and God has taught me tons since I first read them. Hopefully I'll get even more out of them this time around
Something Wicked This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury - This is my favorite Bradbury novel (unless you count The Illustrated Man as a novel). It's been a while so hopefully it holds up to my memory.
The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson - This is one of the great haunted house novels of all time. Over half a century later it's still very scary and a blast to read.
Solaris by Stanislaw Lem - This is a brilliant and beautiful science fiction novel. I'm one of about five people who actually liked the George Clooney movie based on it. But the book is different enough where even if you hated the movie you'll want to give this one a shot.
I'm really excited about this one. I have yet to see the HBO miniseries based on this book but I love David McCullough's writing. Adams is one of the more interesting founding fathers, but smothered between the giants of Washington and Jefferson, his presidency tends to be overlooked. I'm hoping this can help round out some of my knowledge of the early presidents
Epic is one of the few things by Eldredge I haven't read (though i have heard him do a live version of it). The basic idea is to present the Gospel as a story going back before the beginning of time, through the rebellion of Satan, to redemption on the cross and the promise of future victory.
Reading Philip K. Dick is an experience. I've never read another author quite as mind boggling as him. But it works and if you can accept the weirdness it's a blast. If you can't, best to stick to the toned down movies based on his stuff like Minority Report and Blade Runner.
I've never read anything by Brennan Manning before but I've heard enough about him to be excited about giving him a shot. His books all have very high marks on Amazon and I'm hoping he becomes another of the wonderful Christian writers I've discovered in the last year.
I've just finished reading Frank Herbert's original Dune series. This is his son's continuation/conclusion based on notes and outlines found after Herbert's death in 1986. I know there are lots of Dune fans who loathe what Brian Herbert has done by trying to finish his father's series but I'm optimistic.
I've been meaning to read the medieval mystics for a while now. I've heard great things about St. John of the Cross and this is probably his most famous book.
To be honest, I know almost nothing about this book. But it's a sci-fi classic and as a certified sci-fi nerd it qualifies as a major hole in my reading. Hopefully it's as good as the hype.
Rereads:
Shadowland by Peter Straub - Straub is probably my favorite living horror writer. I don't remember this very while but I enjoyed it the first time through. It's not as scary as his brilliant Ghost Story but it's a good book nonetheless.
L.A. Confidential by James Ellroy - The movie is better known but the book is a lot of fun too. They're pretty different from but this is one of those cases where both movie and book are equally good.
Miracles and The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis - These are two of Lewis's best books. It's been a while and God has taught me tons since I first read them. Hopefully I'll get even more out of them this time around
Something Wicked This Way Comes by Ray Bradbury - This is my favorite Bradbury novel (unless you count The Illustrated Man as a novel). It's been a while so hopefully it holds up to my memory.
The Haunting of Hill House by Shirley Jackson - This is one of the great haunted house novels of all time. Over half a century later it's still very scary and a blast to read.
Solaris by Stanislaw Lem - This is a brilliant and beautiful science fiction novel. I'm one of about five people who actually liked the George Clooney movie based on it. But the book is different enough where even if you hated the movie you'll want to give this one a shot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
