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 for this post are now closed
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"The national interest cannot be achieved by settling old scores, vengeance for past wrongs, and demonization of those with whom we disagree."
Oh, spare us, won't you please? Disagree? What of lawbreaking? Accountability? Your proposed response to shuffle along with "Nothing to see here, folks" has only aided the repeating cycles of unpunished criminality of Watergate and Iran-Contra, which undoubtedly led to the widespread illegal behavior of the Bush 43 administration. If the actions of this cabal are not aired out and punished, they will only be repeated to greater effect the next time around the block. A Truth and Reconciliation Committee would do the trick, I'd imagine.
No, there should ABSOLUTELY be demonization cast upon those who have destroyed the American system of government in our time. There should be mountains of shame heaped readily upon those who have contributed, aided, abetted, and enabled this government. Those who have rushed to defend the Bush administration should be castigated and tossed out of the public policy sphere.
Your post is a completely transparent and intellectually insulting attempt to position yourself positively to the HuffPo community before upcoming the Boren/Nunn Univ. of Oklahoma Unity Bloombergfest. This country actually needs some truth and honesty from it's representatives about what has happened to get us to this point, not a call for business as usual under new ownership.
Sorry, Senator, but bringing war criminals to justice is neither vengeance nor demonization. It is respect for morality, law, and human rights. If Democrats refuse to prosecute all those who have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, they are as complicit as the Bush/Cheney war criminals themselves.
Whoa, Senator, any implication, intended or otherwise, that concern for and discussion of - ANY candidate's CURRENT stand on corporate led pre-emptive geopolitical imperialism for natural resources, might be somehow "settling old scores", is some serious 'PARTY kool-aid' this ol' Indy is NOT prepared to swallow.
YOU may be first, last and always a Democrat, sir, but it will be 'the' candidate and party that vows to return OUR country to pre-9/11 'CONSTITUTIONAL' Rule of Law that will win the LIFE-LONG support of THIS voter.
From the unPatriot Act, to the criminal violations of treaties and torture 'conventions', followed by the unbelievably Unconstitutional Military Commissions Act (ex-post-facto pardon of war crimes already committed), ...Democra
It appears to me the Democrats have let their party be co-opted by moderate neoCON republicans, the far right wing of your party is MOST in bed with corporations, and it seems to control the DLC. They walk, talk and act like republicants - calling any people that want us OUT of Iraq NOW, or want universal single-payer health-care(a majority of the country btw), the 'far-left'.
I'm typically a fan of yours, Senator, but this is 180 degrees wrong, it's the Democratic Party itself that "...does not know what it stands for or what its principles are", and an entire generation that're looking for representation that contains an ounce of integrity.
That, and some LITERAL enforcement of OUR Constitution, ...by OUR elected leaders.
With all due respect, Americans are angry and they have a right to be. The confusing messages coming from our politicians is enough to enrage the most mild mannered among us. At this point, all I want to hear is the truth and I don't much care who it comes from. However, any sane person has got to admit that this President and those who support him have lost all credibility by virtue of the fact that they won't even admit that they've made a mess of things. It's infuriating and to suggest that Americans can't express their outrage after 7 years of crap is preposterous.
Mr. Hart,
Do you believe in the rule of law? If so,
charity and forgiveness must be secondary considerations.
If the criminal acts and actors of the Regan-Bush era had been prosecuted instead of pardoned they wouldn't have come back to aid in creating the current disaster we call Bush 43.
If we respected the rule of law a bit more, Bush wouldn't even have been "elected".
a VN Vet
Mr. Hart's powerful words are not often heard from those at the top of the political food chain. Imperialism, empire, cabals ... these are words usually reserved for the savvy masses who are held at a distance poking at the beast seemingly with little impact.
Are we likely to see issues you raised, like empire and excessive concentration of wealth, prominently discussed during the "political season?" Will we hear tangible solutions to the abuse of our democracy by monied interests? Will we hear uncompromised solutions to the global warming crisis or will they be "triangulated" for political reasons? The words you used contain a vision sadly lacking in most of what passes for political discourse.
As for the issue of vengeance and the national interest, the purpose of prosecuting those who have so badly trashed our nation's values should not be vengeance; it should be justice and it should be the education of the voting public that derives from rendering that justice. How can we effect an educated, informed electorate and still allow "the big lie" to not be exposed?
When you speak of the national interest and moving ahead to address our nation's problems, it seems to me you somehow have compartmentalized the national agenda from the rules and power structure that set that agenda. The two must be seen as yin and yang; you cannot focus on either without the other. Seeking justice, and in the process shining the brightest possible spotlight on the crimes, the lies, the tools and the greedy purposes committed by this Administration, and by members of both parties who looked the other way, is a critical ingredient to righting the wrongs that obstruct any hope of achieving the national interests you've so rightly identified.
Perhaps I could agree with you that vengeance is not the goal; justice is. Those traitors who have done all they could to subvert the national interest must be held to account. Absent that, necessary lessons will not be learned and, as the saying goes, we are then all condemned to repeat history. There's not much future in that.
Very nice writing by an eloquent and obviously intelligent and well respected (by me anyway) Sen. Hart. I hope he is correct but I fear that Paul http://www
The reason to forsake vengeance is not because of soft-heartedness but for a far more practical reason.
If it is true that those in power are guilty of High Crimes and Misdemeanors, War Crimes, financial crimes and profound dishonoring of the U.S. Constitution, surely they will not allow themselves to be voted out and replaced by those who would prosecute them.
We are dealing with desperados who still are in control of awesome levers of power.
The ONLY way to change course without imploding is to grant a comprehensive amnesty to those in power. This would enable them to step aside.
Cleaning up the mess we have made will be difficult enough without the complication of blame placing. Our failings are too widespread and the potential for a cataclysm too likely for vengeance to succeed.
A divided, armed to the teeth America will need wisdom and forbearance to navigate the months ahead. Some form of Amnesty should be considered.
Sorry but I disagree COMPLETELY.
We cannot simply forget the criminal aspects of an administration like the current one with a simple and to be honest STUPID attitude of, Oh well it's in the "National Interest" to just let it all go when one looks at the incredible things that are outright CRIMINAL that this cowardly democratic congress has just passed on with this idiotic attitude of "let's not get them mad at us because we think they should be held accountable".
Every single thing Shrub and Cheney has done should be brought up for criminal investigation. Most of his cabinet were actively working to undermine the constitution.
Using your logic of "Nothing to see here, move along, forget anything that happened" we should not have tried any Germans or Japanese for war crimes.
Hell we shouldn't do anything about any crime committed.
This administration is simply put the most criminal this country has seen in it's history. AND using your logic of don't bother because it doesn't help; that does EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.
IT tells future administrations that they can do whatever the hell they want because we now have a belief that investigations, criminal charges and being held accountable "are not in the National Interest"
Worst thing I have read here in a while Mr. Hart and I generally have a great deal of respect for your writings here, but not this one.
You are dead wrong.
It IS in the National Interest to hold administrations COMPLETELY accountable for their actions.
Mr. Hart, there is one additional principle that I feel we must fully restore: "law enforcemen
If you are 'any civil officer,' and you break the law and violate your oath of office while in office (or especially by means of the powers of your office), you SHALL be "investigated, indicted, impeached" and then prosecuted.
No exceptions.
The Constitutional duty of the Congress to do this is not, cannot be, political or 'discretio
No exceptions.
Ever.
I think it's very much in our national interest to be honest and not let slide criminals who stole the 2000 election, used the tragedy of 9/11 to foist upon the public the same unconstitutional surveillance without cause or warrants that they'd been trying to push even before the attacks, and have claimed that a small number of extremists' acts of barbarity have so changed the world that the Geneva Conventions are incompatible with the safety of our citizens [even though they didn't threaten the safety of Americans when fighting an actual country, Nazi Germany, that had a lot more resources and allies than al Qaeda could ever hope for]
Oh, and how is it in our national interest that air travel is now a completely miserable experience? Standing around shoeless, clutching clear bags of grooming products, crammed in so tightly that hundreds of people die from embolisms caused by immobility during long flights in too-small seats and lack of access to food, not to mention security checkpoints that make it easier than ever for criminals to steal the valuables of travelers [at checkpoints]. Just because ever tighter security measures are possible, doesn’t mean they are worth the effort, inconvenience and depressing reminders of rare, unfortunate events. After the Pan Am Flt 103 bombing, air travelers weren’t forbidden from bringing tape recorders onto planes. Is it not possible that the Bush administration encourages such severe "security" measures not because they are likely to prevent further violence in the air, but because they know that people who are afraid ask less questions and are more likely to permit unconstitutional behavior by officials who claim to be "protecting" us? And what better way to keep the populace afraid than to remind us, at times that are otherwise happy, like visiting family and vacationing, that we could be vulnerable to the whims of angry, violent people?
You folks are so sad. Hart has stated an immutable truth, and done so so easily that it went almost unnoticed, and all you can do is carp at him for not being an asshole like you! Exactly why I left the Democratic party, folks like you. Mr. Hart, I salute you. We lost your statesmanship much too soon.
Gary, generally speaking I have had a lot of respect for your intellect and intelligence, but you can't expect people to just put all the crimes, death, fearmongering and lies of the last seven years behind and sing "Kumbaya". The national interest calls, howls, for justice. It may take decades for us to recover, but only a full accounting for what brought our country to it's present pass will bring us together again. And please: don't go screwing thingsup any more than the are with the idea of a third party candidate, especially one who would literally buy his way in. Talk about catastroph
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.
Indeed.
Last time I checked there is nothing in the U.S. Constitution regarding vengeance. There is, however, explict language regarding a procedure for removal from office for high crimes and misdemeanors. Without impeachment, there is no justice; and, hence, vengeance in the public court of history will be against the people.
Loading comments…
Posted December 31, 2007 | 05:42 PM (EST)