The National Interest and 2008

There is something called the national interest. It is not an ideology. It is not the possession of a single cabal of self-appointed imperialists. It is not achieved by substituting consensus for principle. It is not "bipartisanship" for its own sake or in pursuit of bad policy. And it is not a euphemism for oil.

Our national interest is the product of more than two centuries of national history which constitutes an amalgam of colossal mistakes, most notably Iraq, and grand sacrifices and noble actions. It required a terrible civil war to establish that slavery was not in our national interest. It required a cold war to establish that alliance and collaboration was in our national interest.

Oil dependence, climate change, nuclear proliferation, concentrated wealth, fear of terrorism, theocracy, empire, corruption in government, an arrogant and ignorant executive, and violation of civil liberties are not in our national interest.

Equal rights for all, respect for our constitutional guarantees, including most notable habeas corpus, economic opportunity, regulation of market excess, our natural heritage and environment, fairness, justice, and checks and balanced government are all in our national interest.

The age of Roosevelt was replaced by the age of Reagan which itself is coming to an end. The age of Reagan was relieved only briefly by a rare period of peace and prosperity in the 1990s. The brief Clinton era pursued "centrism" at the cost of blurring the fundamental principles of the 20th century Democratic party -- a sense of national community (Roosevelt), citizen duty (Kennedy), and equality and justice for all (Johnson). Return to the age of Reagan, under the current administration, destroyed the security alliances established by Truman.

There will, presumably, always be a conservative party. But it must be retaken by pro-environment, anti-interventionist, fiscally responsible traditional Republicans. For its part, the Democratic Party must redefine itself for an American generation that does not know what it stands for or what its principles are.

The national interest cannot be achieved by settling old scores, vengeance for past wrongs, and demonization of those with whom we disagree. History operates its own court of justice and vengeance is the enemy of progress.

Together, the two new/old parties must recapture a sense of the national interest, above partisan victory and advantage, willing to achieve consensus for the good of the country as men and women of good will and leadership define it, operating in good faith and mutual respect, and most of all bound by constitutional guarantees and constraints.

I choose to be a Democrat. But I am able to do so because I am first an American.

Comments

[union79]

Thank you, Mr Hart for the kind of post we need as we close out this year and enter 2008 ~ a year when we (individually and collectively) will have so many opportunities to reshape our national purpose.

That you wrote so clearly about our past without attacking or vilifying the players was refreshing since it allowed me to get your message without a lot of static.
I found food for thought from your description of how the Roosevelt, Kennedy and Johnson blended their vision and values so that we as Americans regardless of party would be the benefactors.

It is only when we are Americans first that we have the potential for doing the right thing ~ both as individuals and as the collective "we the people" Thanks for the reminder.

Happy New Year!

[slg]

Noble thoughts. As much as I admire your idealism I submit there is a time to avenge wrongs and seek justice. Fords' pardon of Nixon was a travesty. Subsequent leaders have acted with impunity.

There must be an investigation, a trial and punishment for those who defiled the Constitution and lied to the electorate. People need to see such things cannot be forgiven that they will know they are protected by the laws of the land. There can be no progress without justice.

[LizM]

And, unless I am mistaken, you sound very much like a Biden supporter.

And just what is going on around here when real experience becomes a bad word and bipartisanship is just another word for bad policy. What has happened when the most qualified leader to stand for President in very long time, if ever before, can be so easily ignored and otherwise dismissed by the electorate, the media (national, mainstream, whatever), the blogosphere and by those who make their very living working in the the so-called national interest and who should know better?

Or does the 'national interest' itself mean nothing these days?

What the hell happened when I wasn't looking!