What I hear him saying is that it's not so much the ideals themselves, the shining cities on the
hill, that are hard to grasp; but rather the landscape -- practical, problematic realities of where the society is,
with respect to distance and terrain, in achieving anything like those ideals.
Even here, where we like to think
it all happened more or less "organically" (for most white people, and people with the biggest guns, anyway) the
ugliness of the landscape we have crossed and are crossing strains the imaginiation at times.
Rather, the lions
share of the former responsibility, to make clear the ideals and benefits of liberty and democracy; remains ours.
And it is not a matter of our words, to put it mildly. What good is it for them to learn more, when we have so much
to learn before we can teach anybody much more than a confusing, and at times nonsensical story?
There are
certainly those who think we have done a great job of "spreading democracy", and consequently its ideals. But that
belief happens most everywhere to evoke fiery and divisive debate more than any kind of understanding.
If we
ever achieve liberty and democracy here, for more than a minority, and demonstrate some integrity with that; there
will be no problem anywhere in the world finding a majority of people to buy into it. It is now a very small world
with a substantial collective consciousness. Most people want desparately to believe in ideals like these, on one
level; but they have their good reasons for not doing so.
A movie that brought some of this to light was
"Control Room", a documentary about individuals working for Al Jazeera in Iraq, individuals who would have
absolutely loved to spend their days dreaming about democracy, all other things being equal. I once reviewed it
here.
Bookmarks