This is America!

[jbg]

This morning, as I walked into my office building through the clean, warm, dry and comfortable late August air, I noticed the leaves moving in the breeze, and the beautiful sun in the sky. As I was walking, I was reflecting on my night's reading, and thinking how wonderful and special America was. I was saying to myself "this is America".

Last night, I was catching up on my reading. I was reading the Summer 2007 issue of Reform Judaism (link) among other things. I was also reading a copy of the recent Supreme Court decision in FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION v. WISCONSIN RIGHT TO LIFE, INC. (link to decision, open PDF reader first) affirming, once again, the virtually unlimited freedom of speech that is the US citizens' alone. I was reading the Supreme Court decision for the benefit of a Canadian active in politics, seeking to ensure that the Charter grants similar freedoms for political speech in Canada to US First Amendment protections, i.e. the persuasive value of the decision.

There was a unifying theme to the articles, which were about the seeming impossibility of an Islam that respects human rights and the right of others to exist in peace (link to parellel thread on article, with cite to article), and the difficult struggle of German Jewry to climb back from the Nazi Holocaust, and the Supreme Court discussion. Let me explain.

Prior to the colonization of the New World, the Old World was dominated, depending on where you were, by Islam and/or Christianity (we'll leave Buddhist and Hindu Asia out of the discussion for now). The one thing both had in common was that each was rife with rules and restrictions on what non-majority religions or ethnic groups could do or not do. These restrictions often took a deadly form, wtih the Spanish inquisition as but one example. Even Moorish Spain, considered a bright spot by many, imposed humiliating restrictions on Jews, known as "dhimmitude". Virtually all European countries prevented Jews from owning land, holding office and, where applicable, voting. These restrictions existed even in England, the cradle of liberty and freedom.

Fortunately, the dam burst during the two centuries after 1492. The Americas were a place where, at least initially, the various King's courts and priests' writs did not run. The focus was on what people could do to tame a wilderness, not the way they chose to worship G-d.

Now, how does this tie back to the Supreme Court decision, and the articles? Simple. The Supreme Court decision, while not unanimously supported, reflects the reluctance to curb speech. In other words, in America, people have the right to say something, and people have the freedom whether or not to listen. As to the articles, one of the articles, about the recovery of Jewish life from the Holocaust, focuses on the tragic and bloody extremes discrimination could go, and the fact that a gentle, scholarly people who always contributed much to the world and asked little were almost wiped out. The article about Islam demonstrates the extent to which one-third of people still, even after the fall of the Iron Curtain, live under the oppressive brow of a culture stuck in theh 8th Centurty. Mass media reflects the fear of violence and the false belief that the threat will go away if we just appease them. The bleating for "peace" ignores the fact that while we want peace, they do not.

Well, even with these threats, it is still wonderful to breathe the morning air, and bask in the freedom and material prosperity nurtured by that freedom. That is how I feel about my country. I hope it's how Canadians feel about theirs.

[jefferiah]

Great post JBG.

[jbg]

Great post JBG.

Thanks. I get hammered for posting "Amerigasms" (link) enough.

[Guest American Woman]

Why do you feel the need for these 'rah rah America' posts, jbg? I really don't get it. I can certainly understand defending America if someone is unjustly criticizing it, but why the need to start a 'we are just so great' thread? I noticed a lot of Canadians haven't jumped in saying how great things are 'only in Canada.' Seems to me when someone has confidence in their 'greatness,' they don't have to be shouting out to the world about how great they are.

[sharkman]

Uh, nobody's shouting. The American protection of free speech is something that we in Canada don't even have. Priests have been threatened to have their parishs' tax exempt status removed for criticizing a fellow Catholic, Paul Martin. If you ( American Woman) don't appreciate your freedoms enough to leave a positive comment, I do.

[capricorn]

Sometimes, a good dose of unabashed patriotism is healthy. Good on you jbg.

I wish more Canadians would love Canada more than they dislike the US! On the whole, Canadians seem to reserve showing affection for their country for July 1st.

[jawapunk]

We don't need to say anything to critisize the thought process of this post. Team America: World Police mocks it well enough.

[sharkman]

But then again maybe you do need to say more, what does Team America have to do with freedom of speech?

[guyser]

Uh, nobody's shouting. The American protection of free speech is something that we in Canada don't even have. Priests have been threatened to have their parishs' tax exempt status removed for criticizing a fellow Catholic, Paul Martin. If you ( American Woman) don't appreciate your freedoms enough to leave a positive comment, I do.

Cite?

[jawapunk]

But then again maybe you do need to say more, what does Team America have to do with freedom of speech?

You are missing my point entirely. So don't worry about it.

[Guest American Woman]

We don't need to say anything to critisize the thought process of this post. Team America: World Police mocks it well enough.

That was a great movie. And you're right.

[jbg]

Why do you feel the need for these 'rah rah America' posts, jbg? I really don't get it. I can certainly understand defending America if someone is unjustly criticizing it, but why the need to start a 'we are just so great' thread?

Try again.

It was what was on my mind that morning, and I converted it into a post.

I noticed a lot of Canadians haven't jumped in saying how great things are 'only in Canada.' Seems to me when someone has confidence in their 'greatness,' they don't have to be shouting out to the world about how great they are.

The post below answers your comment better than what I originally typed out:

Sometimes, a good dose of unabashed patriotism is healthy. Good on you jbg.

I wish more Canadians would love Canada more than they dislike the US! On the whole, Canadians seem to reserve showing affection for their country for July 1st.

[Guest American Woman]

Try again.

It was what was on my mind that morning, and I converted it into a post.

The post below answers your comment better than what I originally typed out:

Sometimes, a good dose of unabashed patriotism is healthy. Good on you jbg.

I wish more Canadians would love Canada more than they dislike the US! On the whole, Canadians seem to reserve showing affection for their country for July 1st.

Yes, "sometimes" it is. I said that it's understandable when responding to undue criticism. What I don't get is this 'only in America' attitude, which I thought I made clear. Canadians don't seem to have that same attitude. One can be patriotic without making false claims that such and such exits only in my country. That is what I don't get, if that wasn't made clear enough in my first post. We don't even have freedom of speech. Those who support Bush do while those who don't, don't.

[August1991]

Fortunately, the dam burst during the two centuries after 1492. The Americas were a place where, at least initially, the various King's courts and priests' writs did not run. The focus was on what people could do to tame a wilderness, not the way they chose to worship G-d.

The English colonies in America were initially colonized by Puritans who brought their own form of censorship. Their disagreement with the State concerned precisely the religious disputes in Europe at the time.

As to Europe itself, both Holland and Switzerland offered havens of freedom of speech in the middle of the last millennium and Hollan was particularly liberal for Jews. England was the first in country in modern times to elect a Jew to a senior political position.

The US does not have a monopoly on western liberal values.

[jbg]

We don't even have freedom of speech. Those who support Bush do while those who don't, don't.

I wish I had more patience for ingrates. I don't.

[Guest American Woman]

I wish I had more patience for ingrates. I don't.

And I wish we had freedom of speech. We don't.

[bush_cheney2004]

And I wish we had freedom of speech. We don't.

Speak for yourself....are you willing to die for it?

[Guest American Woman]

Speak for yourself....are you willing to die for it?

I'm speaking for myself and all other Americans who don't have freedom of speech. And our forefathers already died for it.

[jbg]

And I wish we had freedom of speech. We don't.

And who has restricted your speech? In what way?

[Guest American Woman]

And who has restricted your speech? In what way?

Surely you've heard of free speech zones. This is supposed to be a free speech country.

You talk about freedom of speech as if we own the concept, which is ludicrous in itself, but we don't even have freedom of speech. Bush has seen to that. What would you say if it were China shoving anyone who didn't agree with the present government out of sight? You'd likely respond by saying you're sure glad our great country has freedom of speech -- but you'd be wrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm speaking for myself and all other Americans who don't have freedom of speech. And our forefathers already died for it.

OK....I'll take that as a NO.

[Guest American Woman]

OK....I'll take that as a NO.

Take it any way you want it. It's irrelevant. jbg is on about our freedom of speech, how it's so unique to America, and we don't even have it. We're supposed to have it, but we don't. That's the issue. Can you refute the issue?

I'll take your attempt to change the topic as a NO.

[bush_cheney2004]

Take it any way you want it. It's irrelevant. jbg is on about our freedom of speech, how it's so unique to America, and we don't even have it. We're supposed to have it, but we don't. That's the issue. Can you refute the issue?

I'll take your attempt to change the topic as a NO.

Then you must not want it very badly...except that others should die that you may have it? Perhaps you don't deserve "it" after all?

Diatribe such as yours goes in cycles....here is Clinton's version:

Clinton Rejects Freedom of Speech!

In the summer of 1996 Glenn and Patricia Mendoza attended A Taste of Chicago, in Chicago, Illinois. An event which President Clinton was also attending. Mrs. Mendoza allegedly yelled, "You suck! And those boys died." Referring to the earlier incident in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, in which an explosion was set off, probably by a terrorist, killing 19 servicemen. Mrs. Mendoza believed Mr. Clinton was somehow at fault for the explosion, explaining her comments. Some feel that Bill Clinton caused or contributed to the cause of these murders, though I'm not sure how.

At any rate, 15 minutes after Clinton departed the event, Mrs. Mendoza was arrested for her comments. "You might need a lawyer!" her husband Glenn shouted, then found himself in cuffs as well

[jbg]

The English colonies in America were initially colonized by Puritans who brought their own form of censorship. Their disagreement with the State concerned precisely the religious disputes in Europe at the time.

That lifted as a result of competition from freer colonies such as Rhode Island, New York and Pennsylvania. THeir economic dynamism, resulting from the lack of stultifying restrictions, was overwhelming.

As to Europe itself, both Holland and Switzerland offered havens of freedom of speech in the middle of the last millennium and Hollan was particularly liberal for Jews. England was the first in country in modern times to elect a Jew to a senior political position.

True, but all were somewhat fickle. Britian didn't give Jews full rights until 1831, and Disraeli had converted to the Anglican Church.

The US does not have a monopoly on western liberal values.

They have a monopoly on relatively absolute freedoms.

[Guest American Woman]

Then you must not want it very badly...except that others should die that you may have it? Perhaps you don't deserve "it" after all?

Here are the facts. Other have already died for it, so we could have it. Therefore we should have it. That's my point. jbg says we already have it, which you seem to agree with, yet you're asking me if I'm willing to die for it. So. Since you think we should have to die for it again, then in effect you are agreeing with me that we don't have freedom of speech. That it's been taken away from us. Which, once again, is the topic; the point I have been making.

Edited August 30, 2007 by American Woman