It was a progressive, revolutionary, ultimately earth-shattering notion, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.” This assertion, central to American Ideals and prominent in the Declaration of Independence, draws attention to the extent to which the American Founders were concerned with equality – the basic moral equality necessary for democratic governance. Since those first, radical, anti-Rome, anti-Crown, anti-hereditary nobility intellectuals (oh, yes, they were serious intellectuals) got together to assert the essential dignity of each and every property-holding man, the history of the United States has continued to be one of increasing equality.
United States Democracy – this experiment in honoring the dignity of each individual – has always been an ongoing, radical, progressive project.
At each turn, those Americans who believe in equality and common human dignity have met resistance from those who believe it is better to maintain stability, preserve traditional values, and honor the traditions that precede us. That was as true at the time of the revolution as it was during the Women’s Rights and Civil Rights movements. Permitting equal access to education for girls was a radical move – a step forward for human equality. When Rick Santorum speaks proudly of his mother’s story, he’s calling attention to a key moment in US History that saw further expansion of equality.
This expansion of equality did not come without the state. Government was centrally involved as the institutionalized moral expression of a progressive populace advocating for change. The state provided equal access to public schools. Citizens campaigned for and saw the passage of the 19th Amendment, to ensure women’s voting rights, in 1920.
When Bill Gates, one of our most successful business leaders, visits Saudi Arabia and suggests they cannot fully develop until they become seriously involved with women’s liberation, he’s making a statement about the progressive, rights-oriented values that are central to the American Experiment. He’s drawing attention to the extent to which conservative, often theocratic states undermine equality, undermine their economic potential, and ultimately – most important – fail to offer opportunities for each individual to reach his or her full human potential.
Citizens reasonably disagree over how best to promote equality. That sort of implementation uncertainty does not concern me. Reasonable minds may disagree on means. What does concern me is the rhetoric that does not value our common historical trajectory that promotes the dignity and rights of each individual. Our disagreements these days are many, but several relate to whether our increasingly unequal economic system actually offers the kind of opportunities our narratives celebrate.
We want to be the land of opportunity. That’s a statement about equality too. Everyone should have a good, reasonable shot. Strong data, from a diverse set of sources and researchers, indicates wealth is far more important for educational experiences and opportunities for class mobility in American than it has been since at least before the Second World War (See articles in The Atlantic, citing CIA data; extensively researched and cited in Slate; or in a New York Times article that cites the data and the concern with this issue on the right). This is a problem worth addressing, and it should be addressed in light of the long-standing, historic, radical, progressive, continuous, and quintessentially American commitment to equality.
Where do you stand on the use of violence to catalyze a progressive movement? This question always confuses my sensibilities because the values of the founding fathers were achieved through violent struggle. I see this all over the place, not everywhere though: ideals achieved through violence because there was no alternative. Perhaps there are more alternatives to violence now with the Internet and independent (non-corporate) media as watchdogs? This is something that really challenges my underlying pacifism and I'd love to hear your thoughts.
ReplyDeleteThere is always a need for more pacifists. This is a complicated question, but my default response is that the world needs more people who always lean toward pacifism. I like Wendell Berry's thoughts on this in "Sex, Economy, Freedom, and Community" (Ch. 6).
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, violence requires a kind of certainty about what's right for the world that I don't think is supported by history. Most of the time, most of us would do better with more humility. Humility deeply undermines the notion that we frequently know enough to support moves toward violence.
ReplyDelete