Being a historian gives you a different perspective on things than many other observers.  We often celebrate our past, wrap it in symbols and glory, but do we understand it?

America was a nation founded on act of sedition, a choice of violence, and many years of armed conflict between citizens and the government which claimed to represent them.  Where we know George Washington as the founder of our nation, history might have easily remembered him as a traitor to the Crown in the Royal Colonies of America.  Had the British won, this would have been true.

When you pause and think about that, it really makes you have to consider what is right and what is wrong.  I think each person has to find that answer for themselves, but what I know I cannot accept is blind loyalty to any nation, party, or ideal.  We are rational people with rational minds, and must always reserve to ourselves the choice for how we would live, and what we will and will not accept.

I am neither an extremist nor a zealot by nature, but as the state encroaches further on the liberties of all men, I know that violence can only escalate as people seek to defend the right to make choices that are being taken from them.  This is the ground of conflict for this next generation:  liberty vs. security.

The sooner we realize that the old left/right paradigm no longer applies, the better we will be served.  The choice is whether or not we will seek to have a state that handles all of our needs at the price of individual liberty, or whether we will embrace liberty with the cost being inequity that is inevitable.  Intelligent people can make arguments for either, but as people feel that they are either losing or being deprived of basic rights, anger will rise and so too will even greater polarization.

This is what history suggests is happening in America today, and though no future outcome is certain for good or for ill, we should all make the effort to be aware of what we support and what we want our future to look like.  We create that through our actions and what we are willing to do today.  The time to get involved is now, while it is a matter of choice, and while words and actions can still accomplish much.
 
 
These are going to be the colors for my brother's forthcoming wedding (Congratulations, James!), but that isn't why I'm sharing them tonight.  After looking over what was said at the State of the Union Address last night, it has me thinking about what I think should happen.  Here's my tri-color strategy for improving America with our current government.

White:  We start with a blank slate, taking all the bills pending off the table as America neither wants nor can afford them.  The issues remain salient, but anything that will be passed will require real communication involving both parties as well as the people themselves.  Call it a white flag of truce or surrender, but there is something better to be found, and I know this Congress lacks the resolve now to carry forward with anything discussed previously.

Green:  People need more green in their pockets, and since we have an administration that is committed to being involved, why not involve one of their favorite items:  green technologies.  Use green technologies to upgrade the national infrastructure, revitalize our industry, and create both blue collar and white collar jobs so people can have some green in their pocket.  Wall Street does not create wealth.  Jobs, small businesses, and factories do.

Black:  After spending to create jobs, focus on getting this nation into the black.  Now that the debt ceiling is about to rise to $14.1 trillion dollars, we absolutely must get this down or America will be bankrupt.  This is not a partisan issue; it is a national security issue.  Cut all other spending and allocate toward debt reduction.

This isn't what I think will happen, but if Congress and the President had vision and a willingness to work together for the good of America, this is the best I can imagine they could accomplish together.
 
 
I read an interesting article in the Financial Times today talking about the new role of America in the world.  Countries that are nominal democracies such as India and Brazil gladly line up with China as partners, looking for something different than they once did.  I am not so naive to believe international politics is about anything more than power, but when you look at the geopolitical situation, and bring it back home, you have to wonder.

America has spent much blood and treasure in the world.  Some of the motives were pure, some were not.  But in sum, for all the missteps, we created a world where the idea of freedom was possible and desired.  We have an idea where people would prosper in liberty rather than toil under authority.  Even now, we find that battle happens daily under our own shores as we have a government that seems more concerned with the interests of the few rather than the benefit of the many.  But, I ask now, what would we become as Americans?

I have a vision of a nation that finds prosperity through liberty.  Democracy means nothing where people don't have the chance to think and decide things on their own freely.  We have celebrated that ideal for too long, not recognizing that democracy without the idea of individual freedom is just a rubber stamp for mob rule.  I am not claiming any country is that, but I also know democracy alone will not make the world safer or better.

We live in a dangerous world, and to pretend otherwise is folly.  America, for our benefit, security, and our own people must look to its own.  That we depend on other nations for so much of our resources and industry is a threat to our security.  Moreover, it is foolish.  We have people here who want to work, who are industrious and willing, and ample natural resources to produce for all our needs and be the great traders of the world.  What we lack is leadership that shows the vision how we can take those resources, take our very best beliefs, and build a future both prosperous and just.

It is not the responsibility of one man, one party, one government, or one state to do this.  Instead, I think of this as our mission to share together, where we can find and create the America of our imagination.  There is no other place in the world that can do this, or desires to do this.  They would have wealth, but what about justice?  They would equality, but what about plenty?  What about the individual?

It is this conflict that will define this decade, and this century.  Will humanity chart a course whereby we choose to become a social organism, sublimating our desires and skills to some larger created purpose by a fortunate elite?  Or, will we choose freedom, ushering in an era where the innovations we create serve to allow each man, woman, and child, a chance to better their lives?

The world seems to be making their choice.  We must begin making ours.  Liberty or security?
 
 
I make it a point to read different sources.  Some are from different viewpoints ideologically, some are from different nations, and some are just plain different.  But, I note a recurring theme in some quarters that questions how America can make decisions without regard for what the rest of the world (and by this, I really think this means more their governments than their people) think.  My answer is:  Easily.

I am someone who enjoys communicating and sharing ideas.  I think it is a great thing to work with others, to find common ground, and to realize that there is a shared investment in our future.  After all, we are one species, and our success will ultimately be measured by that same standard.  But for all that, it doesn't mean we should compromise core beliefs for the purposes of being agreeable.

You can either have a system rooted in principle or in consensus.  America, for better or worse, has stood strong based upon clear and easy to understand laws, designed to protect liberty, with respect for the individual, and that cherishes that.  In contrast, consensus seeks to deny the rights of the individual when they interfere with some social good.  They ask sacrifice, but I think we as a people, must choose individually where and when that is warranted.

If every nation on Earth wanted to come together, under no other protection that a well-intentioned bureaucracy, I would work more tirelessly to make sure America remained apart.  We must stand for beliefs, and stand for a simple and enduring hope:  that we are individuals, and will not be treated as anything else.

We will work with others.  We will lead.  Sometimes, we will follow.  But we will do so on our terms, not because we're better than anyone else, but because we believe that what you believe is always more important than who you partner with.  It is why we, as a nation, were first to help the nations rebuild that fought against us.  We are all people, but how we choose to live, that is what makes us American.

There are those who will never understand this and who will denounce us as simplistic and arrogant.  Let us hope we never count ourselves among them, or I fear no nation will stand up for the rights of the few against the dominance of the many or the powerful.
 
 
Having been to more than my fair share of political gatherings over the year, I've heard the lament:  "If only people made decisions based on ideas, the world would be a better place" at least a thousand times.  But it made me wonder...

Throughout history, people have defined themselves in many ways.  The most basic unit is the family, and then the town, and then eventually the nation, but it was always grounded in some concrete relationship.  Whether the binds be the red of blood or the green of the earth, there was something physical that transcended all people and was all inclusive (or at least, had the potential to be such).  Tribal identity, if you want to call it that, was predictable in that it brought people together to some social norm and some set of common expectations.

Functionally, it is hard to imagine there was a previous alternative as people needed to work together for their survival, against the elements, against other predators, and against one another.  Specialization of labor results, but people still bought into the idea of a shared identity, based on location and need.  While there were communities based on ideas (the most prominent of which were religious), these were largely isolated and existed outside the state, and found themselves being integrated more often than not.  Also worth noting is that these were often as compulsory as the state itself.

Today, we have something different happening.  Thanks to technology and the advent of the internet, our social groups are changing.  We now can build communities based on ideas and identities we choose that transcend borders.  Our physical needs being met much more easily, I wonder what it means for civilization when we can so easily choose just to associate with those who share something in common with us.

Can you imagine a new future where classes aren't economic, but simply societal?  The nerds, geeks, jocks, drama people, and all the groups that exist in high school never having to blend, never having to find some center.  Imagine politically, a nation divided house by house into two worlds with different ends and in contempt of one another.  Not knowing each other, not caring, and feeling justified in their righteousness.  And in absolute freedom, could there be absolute chaos?

I don't know.  It frightens me.  Without a sense of social responsibility (which I freely admit is cultivated), I could imagine that.  The sort of elitism that pervades groups set apart (which I know too well from my own education and some of the people I met) could easily become a dividing trait hidden beneath the veneer of an all-encompassing individualist ethic.

I don't have an answer for this, but I have a suggestion.  Read something that you disagree with, not to change your mind, but so that you can understand a more basic truth:  what unites us is greater than what divides us.
 
 
One of the recurring challenges that I face in my efforts to organize politically is that many of the people with whom I associate are proud individualists.  I find this makes for many interesting personalities, and I respect and embrace that the idea of liberty encourages us to each seek our own path.  I enjoy meeting people who have their own reasons for doing things, but sometimes, it makes it harder to work together.

One of the big questions that we face, though we rarely phrase it as clearly as this is whether or not we should be more concerned with individual rights or collective needs.  We don't exist in either extreme in most cases, but I've learned that one reason why people on the left tend to be able to pull people together better is because they naturally accept the idea of banding together for a cause, for a mutual benefit that is not always congruent with each person involved.

I'm not a collectivist.  I understand the mentality that you need to be aware of everyone, and what is happening to them, but I cannot get past the idea that it is up to people take responsibility for themselves as much as possible.  Most of the people I know feel the same way.  The problem is that this leads to people thinking that if we just let people do their own things, situations get resolved.  It isn't like that.

Sometimes, you need organization and teamwork.  Sometimes, you need to work collectively to achieve goals.  I spend hours each day working at this question of how we get people working on the same page, people who are happy to do their own thing, realizing that unless we use our abilities in at least some common pursuits, we can work as hard or as much as we want, and we will find laws come into being that simply force policies we don't like because we were too busy being ourselves.
 
 
As a historian, one thought that both amuses and frightens me is to imagine how the founders of this nation would be seen in the eyes of today's media.  It is humbling to think that they stood up, essentially, and said no more at the threat of such impositions as taxes on stamps, sugar, and tea, declaring that they would bond together in sacred honor to prevent these unjust impositions.  Our politicians and teachers celebrate that with the reverence only given those safely dead, but can you think for just a moment for what they might say today:

They would be seen as anarchic extremists, standing up against our beloved government (which has somehow become synonymous with our nation) who was only seeking to regulate us for our own protection.  Their threat of violence would be considered sociopathic, their political views odious, and I daresay, a majority of people would accuse them of trying to steal from them what the government freely gives.  We know that it really isn't free; it is either taken from somewhere else or simply made into creation at all our expense, but this is how the story would go.

It saddens me greatly to think of this.  The wonderful and truly exceptional thing about America is that as a nation of immigrants, our one shared heritage across the generations is that we all came here because we were running from something else.  Whatever the name of the system, we left a place where government did not allow opportunities within society and came here for the opportunity to forge our own destinies.  We were the frontier, whether it be farms in the west, or the Moon in the sky.  We were the bastion, standing for liberty and hope to all people.  We were proud and we were free.

Now, I don't know.  Truthfully, I'm not sure what Americans want.  I think it is entirely possible, maybe because we have been here too long and forgotten our own history, that people are embracing the idea of a state that cares for everything from cradle to grave.  I tend to believe most people who support this view do so with the very best of intentions, wanting to see people cared for in a way that I completely sympathize with, but at the cost and with the desire of allowing our government to determine what is acceptable, required, and will be enforced.

I am not a person who thinks or desires that we roll back the clock two hundred years.  People have come to expect the state to serve certain roles, and it would simply not be practicible to go back to the frontier land where anyone could do anything.  We have too many people who have been systematized for that.  But what we need to have is a conversation about what America will be in this young century.

We can choose to be a nation of liberty, of equality under law, of opportunity without undue intervention, and where rights and responsibilities come in equal measure; or we can choose to be a nation of security, where government protects us from ourselves and our neighbors, where we force economic equality, have set social goals, and where we have an ever expanding list of rights that become prescriptions to be followed.  My language is stark but warranted because as the founders well understood once you cede the authority to make decisions to the state, that is a power that will never be returned to the citizens.

Within those two very different frames, there is always room for discussion about policy about how we can realize those goals.  I am not someone who believes government is always bad; sometimes it helps people greatly.  But, I think we should always focus on the idea that we don't want people relying upon government, and we don't want government telling us what to do, what to think, or how to act.  We have it as a necessity to manage our relations with other nations, and with each other.  I would rather choose to trust we can find solutions to our problems together than have some governmental authority make those choices.

I have friends tell me I am an unrealistic idealist.  They may be right; but I guess it comes down to how you view human nature.  I know too many people who accept the idea that the only way we can successfully co-exist is through taking care of people who have chosen not to take care of themselves and who simply will not be able to do so.  Recognizing there are a few exceptions, I choose to believe that our nature is such that when given the chance to make more of ourselves, that is when we reveal the human genius and when we find a way to overcome, to build something stronger, and to work with one another.  Our nation could not exist if this was false, and it is in that view of humanity that I find hope.