Kinsley on Bush
Friday, September 29, 2006
Our Hopeful One AKA Decider has merited much more attention than one is able to provide. I suppose there is perhaps a Decider fatigue setting in, inspite of the strong emotions he continues to generate. Bob Woodward’s new book may produce more fireworks but Michael Kinsley has an interesting OPED in the Washington Post today. Kinsley compares Bush’s position on life in the context of stem cell research and Iraq war. I recommend that you read the entire piece but here are the concluding paragraphs:
A commander in chief who must face life-or-death questions such as these deserves a bit of sympathy. I would sympathize more with Bush if his answers weren’t so preening and struggle-free. It is wonderful to be so morally pure that you won’t allow a single embryo to be destroyed in the quest for medical cures that could save lives by the thousands. You are way beyond Gandhi, sweeping the path ahead to avoid stepping on an insect: Insects have more human characteristics than a six-cell embryo.
And regarding Iraq you are quite the man, aren’t you, “making the tough decisions.” A regular Harry Truman, consigning thousands to death in order to bring democracy and freedom and peace to millions. But Truman actually produced democracy and freedom and peace, whereas you want credit for your hopes. That’s not how it works. If you want to be the hard-ass, you get judged by results. And you can’t be Gandhi and Truman at the same time.
Obviously, the reference in the first paragraph to avoiding stepping on an insect is to a standard practice among Jain monks and not to Gandhi. But the comparison of Gandhi and Truman is pretty neat.
Actually, I have been thinking about the source of Bush’s moral certitude a lot. While the recent debates on torture has been one context for these reflections, we also read edicts of the Mauryan emperor Ashoka in one of my classes. What I find striking is not Ashoka’s transformation after witnessing suffering and violence during the Kalinga war but the tone of his moral message. Sure, Ashoka didn’t have to worry about winning mid-term elections and so he didn’t need to demonise his enemies. Still it is an interesting comparison and one of these days, I want to do an Ashoka number on Bush.