| It was with a mixed sense of dazed inevitability and born-again horror on January 20 that I watched President George W. Bush being sworn into the world’s most powerful office for the second time. Gone was any hint of reaching out to rebuild bridges, either with the Democrats at home or allies abroad. Instead, the president’s trademark smirk could barely mask the full-blown shit-eating grin that lurked below. He had taken on all comers – notably the might of Hollywood – and finally buried the ghost of the "stolen" election of 2000. This was all about George.
And he knew it.
It soon became clear that Bush was not speaking to those assembled in front of the Capitol, to the media, or even to his fellow Americans. He was, without doubt, speaking directly to history. His speech, and the curious vision of the world it contained, reflected Bush’s belief that the world is at a critical juncture, and that he has been placed in charge to ensure we follow him down the right path.
… our duties are defined not by the words I use, but by the history we have seen together. For a half a century, America defended our own freedom by standing watch on distant borders. After the shipwreck of communism came years of relative quiet, years of repose, years of sabbatical – and then came a day of fire.
Bush’s vision was laid out in 2,000 words that took about 20 minutes to deliver. It was, it appears, largely the work of chief speech writer Michael Grierson, but the theme and thrust were all Bush’s. "I want this to be the freedom speech," were his instructions shortly after last November’s re-election.
Well, that’s what he got. The word "freedom" appears no fewer than 27 times; "liberty" comes in with a respectable 15 mentions. The speech itself went through 21 drafts, presumably each one trying to cram yet another reference to "freedom" in somewhere just in case we missed the point.
That proved unlikely. The following day, Robert Fulford in the National Post declared Bush’s address to be "one of the great inauguration speeches in American history." William Safire, writing for the New York Times, went one better. "I rate it among the top five of the 20 second-inaugurals in our history," he declared, placing it ahead of the likes of Thomas Jefferson’s. Only the Globe and Mail, in its editorial, threatened to rain on the parade. "Stirring, indeed," it said of Bush’s goal of "ending tyranny in our world," but then asked: "Does he really mean it and what will he actually do about it?"
Fair questions, I suppose, but for me the trouble goes much deeper. Indeed, there were at least three elements to Bush’s inaugural speech that gave new cause for concern.
Today, America speaks anew to the peoples of the world: All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for liberty, we will stand with you.
First, Bush signalled his continuing intention to see the U.S. replace the United Nations as global policeman, a function the UN has performed for the past six decades. Maybe the UN’s record on this score is patchy, but the point is this: there will come a time when neither Bush nor those of like mind hold office in the White House, and in the absence of such a self-appointed "defender of democracy" the world cannot afford a UN weakened to the point of irrelevance. Bush himself concedes the task of ending tyranny to be "the concentrated work of generations," but adds this "is one excuse for avoiding it." Fine words, maybe, but the born-again Christian in Bush might wish to recall just where the road to good intentions actually leads….
Eventually, the call of freedom comes to every mind and every soul. We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery. Liberty will come to those who love it.
Second, Bush’s black-and-white vision of the world is now complete. Previously defined as either being for or against "terror," it has now been widened to embrace a deeper philosophical understanding. The choice now is between freedom, liberty and democracy, on the one hand, and tyranny on the other. "That’s thinking big, with history in mind," wrote Safire, suggesting that nations such as China, Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia have now been served notice to reform themselves.
Yet notions such as "freedom" and "liberty" have been notoriously difficult to define or quantify once set within specific contexts or circumstances. How much of either will be sufficient to meet Bush’s approval? "America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling," Bush assured us. That’s a relief, because America’s creaky system of checks-and-balances and its antiquated electoral colleges are relics of a fundamentally undemocratic era, and today do anything but reflect what passes for the "will of the people."
In America’s ideal of freedom, citizens find the dignity and security of economic independence, instead of labouring on the edge of subsistence…. By making every citizen an agent of his or her own destiny, we will give our fellow Americans greater freedom from want and fear, and make our society more prosperous and just and equal.
Third, for all his emphasis on the fight against "tyranny" around the world, Bush’s greatest legacy may yet be a virtual revolution at home. His promised plans to "reshape" America’s social security system will be unveiled at next month’s State of the Union address, but there was enough in his inaugural speech to glimpse the shape of things to come.
Despite its echo of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s "freedom from fear and want," Bush’s phrasing made plain – albeit in code – his intent to abolish the welfare state founded by Roosevelt in the 1930s and ’40s. By "dignity and security of economic independence," read "an end to government assistance." For "agent of… destiny," substitute "no more handouts." At the same time, Bush’s sly reference to "even the unwanted have worth" signals an imminent challenge to the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion legislation.
Is this the "new world order" George Sr. had in mind, all those years ago? |
Copyright ©2005 FFWD. All rights reserved.