Las Vegas Sun

March 29, 2024

Where I Stand — Brian Greenspun: Culture of the uninformed

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

WEEKEND EDITION

January 29 - 3-, 2005

Democracy isn't easy.

If we are learning anything in Iraq it is that the march toward democracy resembles more of a slog than a walk in the park. What the people of Iraq are going through in order to express their will at the ballot box today and what our men and women in uniform have been sacrificing to enable the Iraqis to have this day is nothing short of an incredible display of courage and determination to live and act as free people.

All of this pain should come as no surprise to a country which had to forcefully remove the yoke of an oppressive government from its shoulders almost 230 years ago in order for its people to live under the blessings of freedom and liberty. That others must do the same two centuries later or that we have to be complicit in the act of freedom should not be a surprise. Good things take longer to accomplish!

I realize this is taking a very long view of what is obviously a very painful time in our own nation's history. When we have taken up arms against another it had always been to protect and defend against immediate and known threats to our way of life. Making other countries safe for some kind of democracy to exist -- toward the end that it will make the world and, therefore, the United States as a major player also safer -- has been a stretch for most Americans to accept as being in our own national interest.

Whether you agree or not with the premise, the fact remains that the Bush Doctrine is a determination that such is the course this country must set for itself, and so there you have it. We are setting sail for a brave new world by changing the dangerous one in which we live one country at a time.

I don't know -- nor would I suggest anyone else does -- whether President George W. Bush's efforts to democratize the known world will work. If we live long enough, I suppose, history will make that determination for us. What I do know, or certainly believe, is that we will not accomplish our goal of bringing the light of freedom and liberty to distant shores if we cannot find a way to keep that fire alive in our own country.

I am compelled to discuss this issue today because of a very disturbing yet hopeful discussion I had with my young friend Garrett this past week. It was during a college interview that I learned he and his fellow students did what most people do in their own way during any election season -- they tried to determine their political positioning based on their views about certain issues. Iraq was one of them.

My young friend determined that he was somewhere in the middle on the war while some of his friends were "very conservative" and others "very liberal" on that issue. I asked what was the criterion for determining who was liberal and who was conservative. The answer didn't surprise me in the least. It merely confirmed what I have believed for a long time, that those who want to pigeonhole Americans based upon what they believe are doing a disservice to democracy because most times they have no idea what they are talking about themselves.

For example, if the kids believed that the United States had to go to war in Iraq to protect our country, to shake up the deck (as the neo-cons in the administration like to call it), to bring democracy to Iraq and to help build a nation more in our image than in the image of Saddam Hussein, then they were conservatives. That can also be read as Republicans. If, however, the students believed that we had no business getting into the internal affairs of another country, that we had business here at home and no interest in any nation-building efforts on the other side of the planet, that unless and until we were attacked on our soil we had no dog in that fight "over there," and that democracies weren't for everyone, then they were liberal. Read that Democrats.

My how things change. You know if people took those views in World War II or even World War I for that matter, they would be called just the opposite of what they are called today. The isolationists of yesteryear were conservatives, Republicans, and those who wished to meddle, because it was right and just and important, were liberals, Democrats, even Communists!

And, yet, some teachers would have their students think that believing in war is strictly the province of the GOP and that wishing for a more peaceful and quiet lifestyle, uninvolved in and isolated from the affairs of the world, was a liberal or Democratic position. And they would be wrong. At least they would be wrong for not explaining that positions about war and peace are not the province of any particular political party, even though the two major parties in this last election spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to persuade the voters that that was the case. Politicians are one thing, teachers are another and there needs to be a place in this society where our young people understand and appreciate the difference.

I don't particularly blame the teachers who fall prey to the marketing messages, nor do I consider the students who fail to be more critical of what they are learning to be sub-par. That is the way of our world today. We are too busy, too ready to accept what we are told and either afraid or too timid to ask the next questions. Those would be the questions that would force our leaders to answer critically and thoughtfully in a way that we could be more discerning in our own thoughts and positions.

What I do criticize is a culture -- that comes right from the top -- that suggests that people do not have to read newspapers and magazines to stay informed. When we hear that our own president doesn't read daily papers on any regular basis, that sends a message to every American that ignorance is OK. And whether you agree with the Iraq policy or not, every American can agree that a little more thought -- based on a lot more knowledge -- would have been helpful.

For example, I believe the world's leading expert on the Middle East today is a columnist for The New York Times. Thomas L. Friedman is syndicated in newspapers all over the country, including the Las Vegas Sun, and writes constantly about what he sees and hears in that part of the world and how our country might better effect a resolution to the problems that we face over there. If you don't read newspapers -- including the Sun -- and if you ignore other serious outlets for news and information, you will never be able to determine whether or not our leadership is pulling a fast one on us or, worse, missing some critical component in its determination about what our policy should be. When that happens, we fail to be good citizens because we have failed to stay informed.

Whether in high school or in adult life, critical thinking and accumulation of knowledge are the most important parts of being a good citizen. Right now the people of Iraq are learning that just staying alive is essential to creating and maintaining their incipient democracy. Thankfully, we are well past that hardship.

But we still must understand that the path of democracy remains a difficult one to travel. It requires knowledge and a determination to do what is necessary to acquire it. Even if others condemn us for exercising our freedom to ask questions, we must not be afraid to ask them nor of the answers they may provoke. A high school student I know has already learned that lesson. He will be a better citizen because of it.

But what about the rest of us? What kind of citizens are we willing to be? What kind of citizens should we be?

archive