On Columbus Day

Image

Few individuals in Western civilization have undergone as pervasive a demonization as Christopher Columbus. He has been designated the “poster boy” of all that is wrong with the West, in general, and America, in particular. He is blamed for Western racism and slavery (as if those policies are unique to dead white Europeans) because of his enslavement of the indigenous population, despite discovering a New World that would establish freedom as the governing ideal of human existence. He is blamed for Western Christendom because of his conversion of the natives, despite taking the first step toward what would become a haven of religious liberty and freedom of conscience in America. He is blamed for Western imperialism because of his accidental destruction (by an uncontrollable lack of immunity) of the various cultures with which he came in contact, despite introducing a New World that would form the greatest melting pot of diversity ever accomplished. It was nothing less than American opportunity and freedom, at the basis of our institutions, that made this possible. None of the good America has meant to human history and its unprecedented advancement would have happened without that first step into the dark unknown.

The same folks who discredit and ridicule men like Columbus for his failures not only defend the most violent thugs and genocidal regimes of this and the twentieth century — one need only recall the Western media’s adulation for Mao, Castro, Qaddafi and “Uncle Joe” Stalin — to recognize the double standard. The “blame America first” mentality illustrates the failure, not of America, but of human nature itself. The principles that formed America as the exception to the rule of human affairs is not at fault here. We honor our heroes not because they lack imperfections or never committed any wrongs. We honor men like Columbus because we revere and love what good they did accomplish. It is a respect for good above evil that merits our praise and admiration. Meanwhile, as Coolidge would say,

[I]t is a very hasty and ill-considered judgment to conclude that there is more bad than good in any one. We are all a combination of both elements. While we ought not to approve of the evil in ourselves or in others…The only perfect man ate and drank with publicans and sinners. It did not scandalize Him, it was some of those who were not perfect who were scandalized.

The politically correct demand for perfection is chasing an eternally elusive object. When the only subjects worthy of study are those who never violated the politically correct creed, we will have an extremely narrow, and uninformed, view of human nature. We may know much but without a full understanding of our nature, the good with the bad, it becomes a fantasy fixated on the reality we choose, not the reality which is.

Coolidge reminded those reading his daily column,

There is enough good in all of us to support the law of human fellowship. We shall be much more effective for good if we treat men not as they are but as they ought to be. If we judge ourselves only by our aspirations and every one else only by their conduct we shall reach a very false conclusion. When we have exhausted the possibilities of criticism on ourselves it will be time enough to apply it to others. The world needs high social standards and we should do our best to maintain them, but they should rest on the broad base of Christian charity. 

If the politically correct code sought to lift and inform the culture with higher standards, it would not mock the only Perfect Man Coolidge mentioned. Christ would be its greatest example. The hypocrisy evident in “blaming America first” is laid bare by this point. The offense of Columbus, in these folks’ eyes, is not what they claim it to be. His offense is helping to make America possible. The exploitation and oppression he perpetrated (meant to assign the full guilt we should all feel for being Americans) defines all we need to “know” about him. The good he did — not the first to arrive but the first to introduce the New World to the Old — is spoiled and negated by his sins against political correctness. Nothing but the evil he represents matters to such people because it fits the political agenda not honest historical perspective.

Ultimately, it is a denial of good itself. Truth learns from both the wrong examples and the right ones, honoring good where it can be found, even in flawed and imperfect people like Columbus. Pessimists and cynics may long for the “good old days” when Meso-American empires sacrificed their own human populations and chiefs, like Powhatan, consolidated power through war and genocide. But, if not for the Christian boy Chanco, murder would have continued unabated. Considering Americans were the first to appeal to higher ideals, ideals grounded in a moral conscience, Coolidge could rightly say of Columbus on October 11, 1930,

He is entitled to rank forever as the greatest of all explorers. But the glory of his exploit, great as it was, becomes almost unimportant when compared with its results. It marked the inception of the modern era. The minds of men were opened to new thoughts. The gold and silver of America gave a new trend to the life of Europe. The arts began to flourish. The people began to assert their rights. More colonies brought more trade. A new age appeared, great in captains, admirals, statesmen, poets and philosophers, and finally new nations dedicated to human freedom arose on this side of the Atlantic. These are partly the reasons why Christopher Columbus is entitled to be honored.

The substance for recognizing Columbus in this, the five hundred and twenty-first year since his discovery, resides not so much in what he personally did, or failed to do. It resides in the part he played in the opportunity to establish, for the first time, a place where people can live free to govern themselves, keep the rewards of their own work, and practice, unfettered, the obligations of their conscience before God and mankind.

Ships_of_Christopher_Columbus

On the Consequences of Compromise

Image

“The Congress threw away a great opportunity to help the people. If it has granted all necessary relief and then by a policy of rigid economy reduced governmental costs, avoided a deficit and more debt, the country would have looked on it as a savior. Politics is always present. Probably there were those who thought they would profit politically by being able to charge that business is bad and taxes and debt have been increased. Those making the charge in the future will have to explain what constructive measures they proposed to revive business, promote economy and reduce taxes and debt. Those voting for the largest peace-time expenditures any Congress ever authorized cannot escape responsibility” — Calvin Coolidge, March 4, 1931.

As talk of Congressional deals to reopen the government seem imminent, funding everything including Obamacare, what is not being discussed is how any of these proposals advance the interests of the people. On an unprecedented scale, we stand alone, without representation in Washington. The establishment of both parties, insulated from the impact of their own decisions, seem content to ensure surrender to the President and his agenda on every point of difference so long as they get to hold some measure of Congressional power over the money and committees.

Observing a Congress ready to embrace the largest peacetime tax increase up to that time, as proposed by President Hoover, Coolidge would live to see the first deficit in over a decade and its attempted remedy, the disastrous Revenue Act of 1932. The Republicans, flinching at the prospect of unpopularity, forgot the lessons of the 1921, 1923 and 1926 recessions. Instead of holding firm on reducing expenditures, cutting waste and following Coolidge’s recipe for success, fear prevailed over principles. The quick recoveries of past recessions due to strict economy by Harding and Coolidge were thrown overboard as passe and obsolete.

The election of 1930 was but a harbinger of F.D.R.’s sweep in 1932. The costs of abandoning the people in that crucial hour, refusing to stand in bold opposition to the expansion of government at the sacrifice of individual freedom, cannot be quantified. Had the 71st Congress demonstrated courageous and conservative leadership, like Senators Lee and Cruz have done, the losses both at the ballot box and to the people may have been curtailed, if not largely avoided. Whatever might have happened, this much can be known: it is compromise, not conservatism, that leads to defeat at the polls.

The timely warning Coolidge expressed in the spring of 1931 applies just as readily now as it did then. The consequences of compromising, when just a little more resolve and the pressure of time could win a huge victory for the people, will have enormous impact on every one of us. It will especially affect those currently in Washington who find themselves joining the unemployed after next year’s fast-approaching primaries and general election. Just as Coolidge put it, “Those voting for the largest peace-time expenditure any Congress ever authorized cannot escape responsibility.” The Washington establishment will not rule over and against the people with impunity. There will be electoral consequences for surrendering now to the radical and partisan wishes of this President.

On Instant Gratification, Perpetual Adolescence and Self-Discipline

“He who gives license to his tongue only discloses the contents of his own mind. By the excess of his words he proclaims his lack of discipline. By his very violence he shows his weakness. The youth or man who by disregarding this principle thinks he is displaying his determination and resolution and emphasizing his statements is in reality only revealing an intellectual poverty, a deficiency in self-control and self-respect, a want of accurate thinking and of spiritual insight, which cannot come save for a reverence for the truth…

     “We live in an impatient age. We demand results, and demand them at once. We find a long and laborious process very irksome, and are constantly seeking for a short cut. But there is no easy method of securing discipline. It is axiomatic that there is no royal road to learning. The effort for discipline must be intensive, and to a considerable degree it must be lifelong. But it is absolutely necessary, if there is to be any self-direction or any self-control. The worst evil that could be inflicted upon the youth of the land would be to leave them without restraint and completely at the mercy of their own uncontrolled inclinations. Under such conditions education would be impossible, and all orderly development intellectually or morally would be hopeless. I do not need to picture the result., We know too well what weakness and depravity follow when the ordinary processes of discipline are neglected.

     “Yet the world has never thoroughly learned this lesson…One of the greatest needs of the present day is the establishment and recognition of standards, and holding ourselves up to their proper observance. This cannot be done without constant effort and it will meet constant opposition…

     “I believe such a position arises from a misconception of the meaning of life. They seem to think that authority means some kind of an attempt to force action upon them which is not for their own benefit, but for the benefit of others. To me they do not appear to understand the nature of law, and therefore refuse obedience. They misinterpret the meaning of individual liberty, and therefore fail to attain it. They do not recognize the right of property, and therefore do not come into its possession. They rebel at the idea of service, and therefore lack the fellowship and cooperation of others. Our conception of authority, of law and liberty, of property and service, ought not to be that they imply rules of action for the mere benefit of someone else, but that they are primarily for the benefit of ourselves” — Calvin Coolidge, September 21, 1924

Image