If you ask me that is one of the most ridiculous questions making the rounds of the TV politico-chat fests these days. That question is everywhere, as if things are so bad in this country that the only logical questions is: when, in our history, did we do so much better, when was our judgment so much better tuned to the times?
Washington? Check. Lincoln? Check? Reagan? Check, if you sit on the right side of the national divide. Clinton? Check if you sit on the left side of the national divide? Obama? This is probably a bad time to ask.
But that’s the problem, and that’s why the question is totally irrelevant. The times are the times, and the times are special to the times. One era’s president is another era’s disaster. If you take one of these supposedly great presidents and give them a whole other set of problems, their reactions might be altogether unsatisfactory. Wars, technology, culture–they all change with the times and presidents react to the times they’re serving in, and also to the people they served. Opinions change, outlooks change, politics certainly changes. We need to start looking at presidents in the context of their times and stop wondering what it would be like if they were still around to steer the wobbly ship of state.
It wouldn’t be that surprising to find that one of those “great” presidents from a hundred years ago would today be attacked and reviled for being ineffectual, confused, do-nothing, do too-much, socialist, communist, fascist etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment