“A President and a Rug: Hidden History” by Kate E. Bradley

November 4, 2013November 4, 2013 / gouverneurmorris / 1 Comment

Here is a fascinating portion of the back story behind Dr. Deranian’s research that has become the recently published book, “President Calvin Coolidge and the Armenian Orphan Rug.” The suffering and loss endured by over one hundred and thirty-five thousand orphans and more than one million others through Turkish genocide brought the best out of Americans, who contributed millions of dollars, supplies and, for some, even their own lives to rescue as many of the Armenian people as possible. It is a long overlooked detail of President Coolidge’s foreign policy that he encouraged the relief effort, even meeting two of the orphans in 1926 who would eventually call America their home. An enormous rug gifted to President Coolidge in gratitude for America’s actions through the rescue effort headed by Near East Relief, speaks not only to the good will between two peoples but to the timeless reminder that America responds with open hearts and ready service, without a single government mandate, to help defend life and freedom for the most unfortunate anywhere in the world.

Now that the Smithsonian has been inexplicably denied permission by the White House to display the rug, it is shamefully not too far-fetched to conclude that this particular Administration has little concern for the gift’s meaning and even a deliberate interest in suppressing a celebration of the force for good Americans have been not only to Armenians but multitudes of others throughout our history.

A few of the more than 4.5 million knots lovingly forming this 11′ 7″ x 18′ 5″ rug. 400 orphan girls spent 10 months preparing this gift to America.

On “The Duties of Citizenship”

November 3, 2013November 3, 2013 / gouverneurmorris / 5 Comments

Dr. Thomas Sowell

While not a November during an election year, it is fitting that Thomas Sowell, one of America’s preeminent economic minds, presented the contrasts in policy and attitude that set Calvin Coolidge far ahead of the current White House occupant. It is appropriate mainly because on this day eighty-nine years ago, the President “wired up” on radio broadcast to speak about the responsibilities every citizen possesses. He did not lecture them on the need for sacrifice in the form of higher taxes, less freedom and more supervision. He did not appeal to a prejudice against American traditions and institutions. He did not stir up resentment for the opposition party in order to keep the agenda rolling. Instead he appealed to confidence in the people, not Washington bureaucrats, to decide rightly what needs to be done.

“The institutions of our country rest upon faith in the people. No decision that the people have made in any great crisis has ever shown that faith in them has been misplaced. It is impossible to divorce that faith which we have in others from the faith which we have in ourselves.” Coolidge was not talking about a communal reliance, that subjugates the rights and blessings of the individual to that of an amorphous collective. He explains what citizenship requires, “Unless each of us is determined to meet the duty that comes to us, we can have no right to expect that others will meet the duties that come to them. Certainly we cannot expect them so to act as to save us from the consequences of having failed to act.” To Coolidge, citizenship was of always personal. It was never a requirement imposed upon others that exempted yourself. If you failed to uphold your obligations to participate — from the ballot box to the town meeting to the daily exercise of obedience to law — who were you to expect it of someone else? How can you expect the proverbial “someone else” to pay for a program you want, if you are unwilling to pay for it yourself? How can you decry the results of an election or a failed policy if you have been complacent or negligent as anything less than an energetic and active citizen?

The result of opting out of one’s citizenship obligations was plain in a country where the people are supposed to be sovereign. “If they do not vote they abdicate that sovereignty, and they may be entirely sure that if they relinquish it other forces will seize it, and if they fail to govern themselves some other power will rise up to govern them. The choice is always before them–whether they will be slaves or whether they will be free.” To retain freedom, Coolidge declared, there can be no substitute for the active and energetic exercise of citizenship’s privileges coupled with a faithful discharge of its duties. “It is not to be secured by passive resistance. It is the result of energy and action.” Bad policies do not go away on their own. They are defeated by informed and engaged citizens. Action alone would not suffice, however. The President continued, “To live up to the full measure of citizenship in this nation requires not only action, but it requires intelligent action. It is necessary to secure information and to acquire education.” The two principal places for this intelligence in the electorate are the school house and the house of worship. The moral and intellectual training in citizenship is grounded here. These are to prepared each person for the purpose of a campaign: to send an informed individual to the ballot box. All the money, advertising, organization, speeches, effort are utterly wasted if anything less than informed and engaged citizens vote when the day comes.

The decision before all of us, this year, next year and at every policy proposal, is “whether we wish to be ruled by all the people or a part of the people, by the minority or the majority; whether we wish our elections to be dominated by those who have been misled, through the presentation of half-truths, into the formation of hasty, illogical and unsound conclusions; or whether we wish those to determine the course of our Government who have through due deliberation and careful consideration of all the factors involved reached a sound and mature conclusion.” A discontented few were active then no less than now. They only changed the country’s direction not because they were right or advocated just causes against the majority of Americans but because “a sober second thought” exercised by the people for their welfare and that of future generations “sat out” from their duty to participate. Our country was never meant to be directed and its policies decided by a “minority moved in part by self-interest and prejudice.” The faith that cements our foundations was not entrusted to a part of the people, Coolidge affirmed. “It means faith in all the people. Our country is always safe when decisions are made by a majority of those who are entitled to vote. It is always in peril when decisions are made by a minority.” That minority, be it an autocratic President, a Cabinet member permitted plenary power, a presumptive Supreme Court justice or a club of incumbent Senators, was not given the power they now exercise by our system as founded. It is a corruption to behave as it did. Even more, though, we have been seriously remiss in our duties to allow this wholesale abdication of our sovereignty to take place. Those we send to our county seats, state capitals and Washington serve, not for themselves, but as our employees. They work for us. Yet, we ourselves are but stewards and, as Coolidge would say, “trustees” exercising citizenship for the “benefit of…country and…countrymen.” We are no more at leisure to sanction policies, by vote or abstention, that favor a few while hurting others than are those we send to represent us in government.

Coolidge brings his radio message to a close with a firm rebuke of complacency toward our duties of citizenship. “They have no right to say they do not care. They must care. They have no right to say that whatever the result of the election they can get along. They must remember that their country and their countrymen cannot get along, cannot remain sound, cannot preserve its institutions, cannot protect its citizens, cannot maintain its place in the world, unless those who have the right to vote do sustain and do guide the course of public affairs by the thoughtful exercise of that right…They do not hold a mere privilege to be exercised or not, as passing fancy may move them.” This great trust charged to each of us, “one of the most important and most solemn which can be given into the keeping of an American citizen,” warrants the thoughtful seriousness worthy of its importance.

Last year we witnessed the product of an uninformed and complacent citizenry and the whole country now suffers for a vast disengagement and ignorance. We dare not repeat that costly mistake by continuing to be inactive and uninformed, forsaking our duty to be citizens, in choosing the candidates and direction America is to take in the primaries and general elections coming in the months to follow.

On “The Genius of America”

October 16, 2013October 17, 2013 / gouverneurmorris / 4 Comments

Having spoken the previous day about the power of religion on the making of America, Calvin Coolidge addressed a group of naturalized citizens on this day eighty-nine years ago. He not only told his audience how glad he was to welcome them to the White House but he even made a couple jokes, the first of which went, “if Methuselah (the longest living man, Genesis 5:27) were at this time an American in his period of middle life, and should drop in on our little party, he would regard us all as upstarts.” With his dry wit, Coolidge underscored the youthfulness of our country among the aged nations of the world.

How was it then that America, still so new among civilizations, had “been blessed with an unparalleled capacity for assimilating peoples of varying races and nations”? What other nation could claim so rapid a population growth in so short a time? While, the population trends were predominantly in a western direction, something different was at work than the simple relocation of peoples that had filled Europe over the centuries.

“It was the fate of Europe to be always a battleground.” Animus over the differences between race, religion, politics and social standards made peace the abnormal condition of life. For Europe, as with most of the globe, it has been war disrupted briefly by conciliation that has been the norm. “It is one of the anomalies of the human story that these peoples, who could not be assimilated and unified under the skies of Europe, should on coming to America discover an amazing genius for cooperation, for fusion, and for harmonious effort.” They were the same people who left the shores of the Old World and stepped into the New. What made the difference? What furnished that incredible genius that transformed antagonism into collaboration and perpetual discord into a people united? Coolidge enumerated three factors responsible for shedding the “ancient antagonisms” of race and class.

First, the “broadly tolerant attitude that has been a characteristic of this country” was responsible. Used in its fullest sense, Coolidge meant the wide forbearance Americans show on a daily basis to each other in regard to religious opinions, political differences and social relationships. These differences, as long as they remained law-abiding, did not hinder fellowship as equals. The increased perception of partisanship is due to an intolerance (not native to American ideals) for mitigating racial and class distinctions. While an intolerant few wish to equate so quintessential an American trait with conformity and compliance, Coolidge saw the strength of this country’s success in its ability to look past such irrelevant differences to real equality. This equality was not a suppression of differing opinions or a coerced conformity of outcomes. This equality rested in maximizing opportunity for “every American to become the architect of whatever fortune he deserves.” The opportunity, not the result, afforded by forbearance is what set apart America from the inherited caste systems of Europe. Leaving the security of the crowded cities and old towns of Europe for the open chance to start anew in America, immigrants quickly found forbearance and cooperation were necessary to succeed.

Second, “our Republican system of Government” was responsible. Leaving behind the centralized governments of the Old World, where subjects neither shared in nor held power to make their own decisions, immigrants to America discovered what self-government truly means. Here equals shared in the burdens as well as the privileges of governance. The benefits of being American did not fall exclusively to masters in some distant capital. For the first time an individual could direct his own affairs through institutions which limited central authorities and liberated people.

Third, “our system of universal free education” was responsible. That system was to serve as an ever-watchful sentry against “the revival of old, or the creation of new regional or group hostilities.” No longer would the prejudices and jealousies of the Old World hold sway. Education was not merely for the wealthiest and most connected among us, it was a measure to which all could attain. The American ideal was to open the mind to the possibilities of the individual, not close it through the victimhood of class warfare and the paralysis of predetermined fate. Education was not for a select few to monopolize their peculiar status, it was the shared endowment of all who strove to become Americans.

Looking out over the audience gathered at the White House, President Coolidge expressed his admiration for those most recently arrived in a long line of loyal, patriotic and law-abiding immigrants. They understood, perhaps more keenly than most, the supreme treasure America’s opportunities afford. He knew and his audience understood that it required the best of each individual, hard work to reap the rewards. It was not gifted. It had to be earned. The only entitlement was for an individual to keep the fruits of his own labor.

When land was abundant and large territories still unsettled, conditions lent themselves to receiving large numbers of immigrants. That had changed by 1924. In order to preserve and maximize opportunity, first for those already here and then for those who have yet to become Americans, limits are applied. It has nothing to do with any of the classes or creeds of the Old World. Rather, it considers the good of everyone concerned. If too many came at once, the country would be unable to assimilate them, wages would fall and the means of bettering one’s conditions would be depleted. If America is to preserve robust opportunity to both the newcomer and those already established here, it must set limits on immigration.

Taking this principle one step forward, Coolidge ventured to his final point. If America welcomed the world, it would no longer remain a distinctive and exceptional place of opportunity for everyone. The first responsibility, however, the Nation owed was to its inhabitants, be they native or naturalized. Coolidge shared their sympathies to help the Old World with its “long established hostilities.”

How can America best help the world, though? Coolidge answered, “We want our America to continue an example and a demonstration that peace, harmony, cooperation and a truly national patriotic sentiment may be established and perpetuated on an American scale. We believe our first great service to the Old World will be in proving this.” Our example was to show how peace and strength come to nations by reinforcing liberty and shedding class differences. That example was to be done “on an American scale,” not a global scale. It was not ours to “Americanize” everyone else. It was up to the Old World to determine its own destiny. Yet, it would come by letting go of those long-cherished yet self-destructive habits. By proving this sentiment of peace, cooperation and patriotism, Coolidge continued, “we shall be doing the things that will best equip us, spiritually and materially, to give the most effective help toward relieving the suffering nations of the Old World.”

What was the best way for the individual immigrant to help the struggling nations of the world? It was not to throw money at the symptoms (hunger, poverty, war), while neglecting the causes: an institutionalized denial of forbearance, self-government and education. It was not to import the Old World’s “race prejudices and race hatreds into action here.” Transforming into the likeness of Old Europe would not work in America. “Bringing America down” would benefit no one and rectify nothing.

What was needed most, as Coolidge encouraged, was “devotion to religion.” To best help, an attachment to the faith of one’s fathers was crucial. America, and consequently the rest of the world, would be far weaker if allowed to drift away from the cultivation of religious faith. Coolidge fostered an environment where immigrants remembered their duty to God as well as man.

America sought to help everyone as the need arose. This policy was not offering to aid one and dispensing harm to another. Nor by hurting America would the world’s distress be alleviated. Instead, Coolidge declared, “We can be in a position to help only by unifying the American nation, building it up, making it strong, keeping it independent, using its inclination to help and its disinclination to injure. Those who cast in their lot with this country can be true to the land of their origin only by first being true to America.” It is then that the “genius of America” is at its finest, reinforcing individual opportunity that thrives in rejection of Old World intolerance, despotism and ignorance.