President Bush keeps sayingover and over again that he wants to export American democracy toIraq. But how can you export something that you do not have? Or, atleast, how can you export something that you are in the process ofdestroying on a daily basis?
If the Patriot Act is anexample of democracy, then the activities of the Secret Police of theNazis and the Communists were supreme examples of constitutionalgovernment in action.
If the cabal of government, big business, andreligious fundamentalism are an expression of the hopes of theFounding Fathers, then mediaeval feudalism is an excellent casehistory of democracy.
If secret meetings among top government officialsreflect a government of a free society, then the Star Chamber Courtsof James I and Charles I are a fine examples of democracy.
On January 6, 1941, President Roosevelt in hismessage to Congress announced that "In future days, which we seek tomake secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essentialhuman freedoms." He listed 1. Freedom of Speech, 2. Freedom ofWorship, 3. Freedom from Want and 4. Freedom from Fear as the fourcornerstones upon which the world's hopes should be built.
The latter two freedoms are not specificallymentioned in either the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. But theyare goals of a society that in the Preamble to the Constitutiondeclared "the people of the United States, in order to form a moreperfect union…establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,promote the general welfare…do ordain this Constitution…"
If these four freedoms represent the goals of ademocratic society, it will not be long before the collective gooseof the world will be cooked. The present administration disregardseach one of these four prescriptions for a world of freedom andpeace.
1) Freedom of speech and freedom of the press aresimply two sides of the same coin. On more than one occasion, thePresident's representatives have firmly stated that to disagree withour Chief Executive Officer indicates a lack of patriotism. If suchexpressions represent the President's beliefs, then he has no rightto speak of constitutional governance.
Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black quoted in "TheNew Republic," July 2, 1945, said, "The constitutional guarantee of afree press rests on the assumption that the widest possibledissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources isessential to the welfare of the public, that a free press is acondition of a free society…
"Freedom to publish means freedom for all and notfor some. Freedom to publish is guaranteed by the Constitution, butfreedom to continue to prevent others from publishing is not."
Is it not interesting that the President wants tobring democracy to Iraq but our provisional government denied freespeech to an opposition newspaper? This is a throwback to the papalright prohibiting publication of books that do not meet partystandards. Is not such action a return to the mentality of the DarkAge?
Iraq has had that sort of censorship under Saddam.What is it we are exporting? Is it not fair to ask that perchance weare importing Saddam's repression of free speech into the U.S.?
2) Freedom of Worship is guaranteed in the FirstAmendment. Yet is has taken on a strange turn in recent years.Jefferson in a 1813 letter to Baron von Humboldt wrote, "History, Ibelieve, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining afree civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, ofwhich their political as well as religious leaders will always availthemselves for their own purposes."
In a letter to C. Clay in 1816, Jeffersonremarked, "This loathsome combination of Church and State." ThomasPaine in "The Age of Reason" wrote, "The adulterous connection ofchurch and state…."
The present administration embraces the politicsof religious fundamentalism. The big issue revolves around abortion.By some legalistic contortion, derived from religious convictionsrather than law, Supreme Court justices ruled that a fetus is ahuman
being. The scriptural basis for such thinking isfound in Jeremiah 1:5. God said, "Before I formed you in the womb Iknew you, and before you were born I consecrated you." Nowhere,except in religious dogma, do we find any support for the idea that afetus unable to sustain itself outside the womb is a living human.
There is nothing in the Constitution requiringanyone to accept the Bible as an absolute statement issued by anassumed perfect God. The Constitution does not force anyone tosurrender a religious conviction even if it is based on pure bias,myth, or ignorance. However, it does not grant anyone the right toimpose her or his conviction on anyone else.
Some profoundly religious people do not subscribeto Jeremiah's assumption. There is no right to impose any tenet offaith on anyone else. Fundamentalists sneak in through the back door,claiming that abortion is the equivalent of murder. The state has theright to prevent murder--not on religious grounds--but solely for thebenefit of the welfare and the peace of the state. By declaring thefetus a human being, fundamentalists attempt to make the state anenforcer of a religious view.
But when does a zygote--a fertilized egg--become ahuman being? The developing embryo passes through stages reflectingour evolutionary ancestry. In the fish stage, the embryo actually hasgill slits. The brain of the developing organism forms from theinside out. It first forms the neural chassis, then the basal ganglia(the reptilian brain), then the limbic system (the pale mammalianbrain), and finally the neocortex (the neomammalian brain).
Now, I am sure Jeremiah knew nothing of that. Soassuming that God really spoke to the prophet, the former did notwant to befuddle the old seer with 20th Century knowledge. Givingexpression to a religious conviction, Jeremiah just assumed that Godtold him while he was still in his mama's womb that God knew who hewas--gill slits and all.
If some folks nowadays want to assume that belief,that is fine. The Constitution gives anyone the right to spurn modernscience and to remain in a state of ignorance. But the Constitutiondoes not grant the right to impose mythological assumption on anyoneelse! Legal imposition of religious doctrines is a dogmatism nodifferent from a dictator's fiat that one and all must subscribe tothe party line--right, wrong, or indifferent.
I fear that the President in siding with religiousfundamentalists has forgotten his oath to uphold the Constitution.Neither the President, nor the Pope, nor Pat Robertson has the rightto inflict his dogmatic religious convictions on others.
If that is what the President is seeking to exportto Iraq, they already have that kind of stuff.
3) While not in the Constitution, freedom fromwant is certainly a goal in keeping with the Preamble's intent to"promote the general welfare." You can't promote the general welfarewhen over 40 million Americans do not have health insurance. Youcertainly can't "insure domestic tranquility" when your major goal isto cut taxes and thereby undercut and destroy the infrastructure thatis the life of any culture.
You can't promote freedom from want when thegovernment spends money like a bunch of drunken sailors to benefitthe favorite few. Present monetary policy favors the in-crowd butleaves millions upon millions facing declining pensions, decliningSocial Security, and a Medicare system that will soon be in shambles.
I am sure the Iraqis do not need to have that sortof stuff imported. Under Saddam, the few wealthy became evenwealthier and the rest just grub for a living. America's fiscalpolicies do not promote the Constitution's goal to "establishjustice, insure domestic tranquility…promote the generalwelfare, and secure the blessings of liberty."
What present policies do is to establish a feudalsystem in which the rich think of themselves as lords and the rest ofthe folks are serfs. The idea of the divine right of kings went outthe front door a long time ago. But it seems the concept has sneakedin by the back door in the last few years.
Iraq already had that during Saddam's reign.
4) President Roosevelt's "Grand Design" includesfreedom from fear. I started to express my fears about the authorityof the 130,000 people who are on the Homeland Security Force. Whatare the functions of these employees? In a country kept in fear withcontinuous rainbow alerts, how well are these troops being trained toprotect us from terror while also maintaining our civil liberties?Where are they being trained? Who does the training? What are theirqualifications?
I started to think about fears created by thecovert operations of the CIA that seemingly always aligns itself withdictators and suppresses the welfare of the masses.
But just then my wife came into my office andcalled my attention to a website about the Medicare-Approved DrugDiscount Cards. I went to that site, downloaded four pages that toldme next to nothing. Then I clicked on another reference which wasabout 36 pages long. After reading that gobbledygook I am more afraidof a Congress that passed such a law and the bureaucrats who willimplement it. If that is looking out for the "general welfare" of thepeople, then we are in bad shape indeed. About all it does is givefolks on Medicare a mere lick of the lollypop while the privateinsurance companies and pharmaceutical manufacturers get to swallowthe whole thing.
Thinking about it, I am more afraid of senatorswho pass legislation to finance the building of an artificial rainforest, a local museum, battleships the Navy does not want, and whopork-barrel our limited funds to death.
I am afraid of the deceit, the mendacity, theunfairness which our government is palming off on us. We don't needthat kind of stuff and I am sure the Iraqis will say, "No, thanks. Wehave already been there and done that." If that representsconstitutional democracy, we are in bad shape indeed.
What is it we are importing to Iraq? Maybe thebetter question is, "What is Saddam importing to us?"
________________________________________________________
John Brand is a Purple Heart, Combat Infantryveteran of World War II. He received his Juris Doctor degree atNorthwestern University and a Master of Theology and a Doctor ofMinistry at Southern Methodist University. He served as a Methodistminister for 19 years, was Vice President, Birkman & Associates,Industrial Psychologists, and concluded his career as Director,Organizational and Human Resources, Warren-King Enterprises, anindependent oil and gas company.
He is the author of "Shaking the Foundations" and"Rebuilding the Foundations".
John Brand encourages your comments:jbrand@YellowTimes.org
YellowTimes.org is an international news andopinion publication. YellowTimes.org encourages its material to bereproduced, reprinted, or broadcast provided that any suchreproduction identifies the original source,
Copyright 2004 West-Art, Prometheus 92/2004