Posted on 12/01/2004 5:31:56 AM PST by Clive
A poll done just before U.S. President George Bush's first official visit to Canada yesterday informs us that nearly three-quarters of Canadians view America as our "closest friend."
But the same poll also indicates Canadians in equal number dislike Bush.
There is something wrong when Canadians proclaim friendship for their most important trading partner and traditional ally, then distance themselves from the democratic choice of Americans, with whom their common continental destiny is joined.
The answer lies somewhere in the reality of an America that challenges Canadian self-identity, is unnerving and, hence, many Canadians indulge in caricatures of an America that Bush supposedly represents -- bellicose, simple-minded, uncouth, reactionary.
Following last month's election, with Bush winning his second term and Republicans making gains in the Congress as the majority party, it is time Canadians showed maturity in appreciating the reality of America as it is, rather than seeking comfort from the polemics of self-loathing Americans such as Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and their followers.
In a recent New York Times column, David Gergen observed, "George W. Bush is emerging as one of the boldest, most audacious presidents in modern history."
Gergen is not an uncritical fan of the president, yet he is an astute observer of his nation's politics as a media person and academic who has also served four U.S. presidents, Republican and Democrat.
Gergen writes that Bush "believes he has a mandate for a revolutionary agenda."
This can be frightening to those who are afraid of altering the status quo in domestic or international politics.
But no American president -- whether a Franklin Roosevelt or a Ronald Reagan -- can lead a revolution without the people's electoral support.
American politics is ultimately the people's business, or its representative majority, and Americans are arguably the most revolutionary of all people in the world.
This fact gets obscured due to the noise and images surrounding the term "revolution," associated with violent uprisings or repression.
But the modern American revolution at home, and by extension abroad, is the unceasing quest for expanding human freedom to constantly reconstruct the world. It defies past norms and skepticism of the faint-hearted everywhere.
A generation ago, Jean-Francois Revel, an uncommon French intellectual, wrote: "The revolution of the 20th century will take place in the United States. It is only here that it can happen."
In his most recent book, Anti-Americanism, Revel discusses once again how much of European antipathy towards America is driven by hostility to Jeffersonian democracy, rather than any rational analysis.
Europe, Revel reminds us, is the cradle of the two great criminal ideologies of the 20th century -- Communism and Nazism -- and it is America that rescued her from both, as it will most likely again from the perils of Islamist fascism.
Canadians' desire to be different from Americans, or be more European, makes us imagine rhetorically a value system more compassionate and more abiding of UN principles than that of Americans.
Americans decided after 9/11 to take their revolutionary principles of freedom and democracy into the heart of Middle Eastern darkness and, accordingly, gave Bush a second mandate.
Victor Davis Hanson, a historian at Stanford University, California states in a recent essay: "We are living in historic times, as all the landmarks of the past half-century are in the midst of passing away ... as the United States is proving to be the most radical engine for world democratic change and liberalization of the age."
Canadians are not required to join Americans in this venture, but at least they need to soberly understand the historic forces at play, rather than indulge in caricatures.
OOPS! Almost forgot - you're a doody-head.
Canada has a very bad case of little brother syndrome.
Relax - you've got my attention, moron.
We'll see what I do with it.
Then set me straight!!
What year did Canada fight for her independence?
Canada did not fight for her independence in 1812. To recognize it as fact is not irresponsible, or uninformed. Blame me if you will, I am accustomed to it....especially from Canada.
Go in peace. Congratulations on your victorious revolutionary war for freedom in 1812.
I don't believe you. I do love threats though.
Please confirm this for me. Right now! Today!!
You'll paint a protest sign, and attack the first bus of American children you come across. That'll teach me, eh?
We are done pal, I learned a long time ago not to get into a shitfight with an idiot because an idiot will only bring you down to his level and beat you to death with superior experience.
Want some more pics of our greeting?
Clever. You do not refute the facts I have stated, but the name calling is proto-typical Canadian.
Sorry. No response is called for.
I just can't stop laughing. You are a funny, funny guy.
(you are a guy, right?)
I did not call you a name, I just stated my phylosophy. You are free to make your own interpretation and your argument is so assinine it does not warrant a response.
I'm afraid nothing could penetrate your iron-clad skull.
I'm convinced you're a Quebec Separatist troll, attempting to stir ill-well between English-speaking nations.
But then, I'm the suspicious sort.
Great essay. I wonder how many Canadians read it and let the meaning sink in.
Did Canada take a bribe from France before the Iraq War? The quid being to stick the knife in the US back, for the quo...money? Fred Barnes was talking about this last night on Fox, but I missed the details. He said he was disgusted by Canada's actions.
You seem to be having a little trouble comprehending that Canada did not have a war of independance.
Canada used diplomatic and political means to gain her independance from England, rather than violent revolution and war. Canada's independance was confirmed and cemented in 1867 after the confederation conferences.
The same can be said for Australia, New Zealand, and dozens of former British colonies. Unfortunately, many of England's African colonies reverted to violence and corruption after being granted independance, but that is another matter.
India is a special case, wherein it was mainly a populist movement that won her independance.
I hope this helps a bit. I'm no historian, but I do remember a fair bit of the history courses I've taken.
I'm not making an argument. I stated that Canada did not fight for her independence in 1812. That is a fact. It is not an interpretation, or an argument.
For making that statement of fact, I have been pelted with insults by Canadians.
I'm insulted, and you are offended. Ironic, isn't it?
No. You're the threatening sort.
Is there anything special I should wear? Fishnet? Latex?
Be firm, be proud, be rough!! This is a typical, welcoming Texan you have threatened. Impress me.
I agree with most of Kagan's thesis, but we part ways over the meaning of 'paradise'. Americans have no desire to live in a European style country/govt. Quite rightly, we'd see more taxes and a loss in individual freedom....as Hillary put it -- 'For the common good'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.