I have been reading historian William Leuchtenburg’s
excellent The American President: From
Teddy Roosevelt to Bill Clinton.
It’s a hefty meaty book and a good read. I’m purposely taking one president at a time, pausing
between them to read something else while considering their individual
legacy. Being born into and raised in
the twentieth century, the book covers a good chuck of my lifetime. So it’s familiar territory put in perspective
by an astute observer. Professor Leuchtenburg,
in his vigorous 90s, is hard at work (mostly here in Chapel Hill) on a
Washington to McKinley volume. I look
forward to it.
Assessing presidencies is tricky business. Who were truly the best, who the worst,
requires some time and distance. It also involves, even for the historian, a
dose of subjectivity. What strikes me in
reading of their collective tenures is how imperfect, even flawed, each of them
were. Faced with momentous decisions, they
often made significant steps forward, but at times each also made disastrous
mistakes that took decades, if ever, to set right. We like to think of our leaders, particularly
the ones for whom we have voted and supported, as something special. Some of them are, of course, but always in
the context of being human. They may
play on history’s stage with breathtaking brilliance but at times with dazzling
ineptness. Of course, while in hindsight
we may see their missteps clearly, they were often far from self-evident at the
time. They could lead us to victory but could
also snatch defeat out of a victory that had been it hand. One prime example was when Harry Truman, after
successfully achieving his stated goals in Korea, disastrously extended the war
into what remains an unresolved stalemate.
We still suffer the consequences.
To be sure times change and with them our view of things,
sometimes leading to some ironic twists even in how we add color to the scene. Reading about the 1950s under Truman and then
Eisenhower brought back especially vivid memories. They were my formative school years. For today’s nostalgia buffs, let me tell you
that the 50s were not a great time in American.
They were dominated in large measure by an obsessive fear of communism. That obsession impacted both our foreign and
domestic policy for decades to come. Communism
had a color: red.
Our ears and eyes were exposed to scarlet words,
attributes and slogans. There was red by
itself, “the Reds”, “red states” (especially Red China), “red bating”, the “red
scare” and, of course, the “red menace”.
The Cold War was in its infancy in 1950 and Truman himself submitted to the
hysteria. The House Committee on Un-American
Activities
(first established in the 1930s) infamously grew in reckless power running
roughshod over individual rights. Senator
Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin became a national largely unchallenged
finger-pointing figure. The lion’s share
of this terrible decade was presided over by war hero Dwight Eisenhower supported
by fellow Republicans an right wing Southern Democrats (who would switch over to
the GOP a decade later).
That history brings me back to the color red. It’s no wonder that in reading about those
years in a current context I couldn’t help but think of a supreme irony. While the GOP in the 1950s derisively
referred not only to communists as red and liberals as at least “pink”, today’s
Republican dominated states are, of all things, labeled red. They wear the red designation with pride
hoping to spread it across the land. How
times change us and how we talk.
I am not of the “history repeats itself”
school. That said, it’s not surprising
that echoes of other ages — of human behavior — find their way into the
present. The Soviet Union is no more
and the meaning of “red” has clearly taken a sharp attribution turn, but there
is something of the 1950s in our present discourse. And it’s something no less disturbing or, if
it gets out of hand, threatening to our democracy. Today Islamophobia has replaced our 1950s
irrational fear of Communism and people who sound increasingly like the
purveyors of a “red scare” are seeking to fill us with twenty-first century
terror. The idea of barring Muslims from
entering our borders or seeking that citizens who happen to follow Islam should
take some kind of loyalty oath or disavow tenants of their faith and practice
are chilling reminders of past trumped-up bad times. Yes, I know what you’re thinking but
“trumped-up” is the good English language term to describe what happened during
the late Truman and Eisenhower years. It
fits again.
This is the year of an appeal to fear. It’s what we heard or read about all last
week. And it’s not over. Just as Trump and the Republicans stoked up
fear of the Other whether an implied Islamic “third column” or its equally
dangerous Mexican criminal immigrant counterpart, Clinton and the Democrats are
sure to invoke the fear of what his presidency would bring. Now don’t get me wrong. This isn’t a matter of being even handed —
there is no moral equivalency in these two candidates or their present party
configurations — but to state how things are likely to go down between now and
November. Objective reasoning will probably
go out the window because it simply won’t work in the present national
mood. Lyndon Johnson’s infamous 1964 “Daisy Commercial”
was the ultimate presidential election appeal to fear. It helped bring down Barry Goldwater. And by the way, don’t let anyone tell you
that going viral is something new, the exclusive domain of our digital
age. Daisy aired only once, but its
power reverberated to such a degree that it remains controversial more than
fifty years on. Despite a lack of social
media and instant communications everyone knew of it and even those who didn’t
see it aired in real time can still picture that little girl picking daisy pedals
in a countdown that ends in a mushroom cloud.
Some version of Daisy is likely to raise its ugly head during the
current campaign.
I know what I’d like some future historian to be
writing as the 2016 election. My only
hope is that a majority of Americans feel the same. I think my hope will be fulfilled, but there
is no guarantee. Absolutely none. We have had demagogues on the scene
throughout our history and some, like Huey Long and Joe McCarthy, were elected
to statewide public office. We’ve had
bitter campaigns with poisonous rhetoric since John Adams and Thomas Jefferson
contended in the early days. But we’ve
never had the likes of Donald Trump nominated for the presidency by one of our
two major parties. Nothing is sure in
elections and his being on the ballot represents a real and meaningful
risk. He appeals to those who want a
return to an America that once was. That’s
impossible. So his big lie is that his
victory will almost certainly insure an America that neither they nor we have
ever seen before. And looking at what
happened in Cleveland last week, it will be a very dark America.
The color red was considered dangerous to America in
the 1950s. As things have evolved since
the 1980s its morphed redness, most especially since John McCain brought the
person and ilk of Sarah Palin to the national ticket, seems no less so. At least that’s how I see it and hope a
majority of my fellow citizens will as well.
We’ve taken down the demagogues and fringe politicians in the past. Hopefully, we will have the will, the courage
and most importantly that we will make the required effort, to do so again.
No comments:
Post a Comment