|
n
the sixth book of his Histories, the Greek historian Herodotus
relates one of his many apparently silly but, in fact, edifying
stories. An array of young suitors were vying for the daughter
of Cleisthenes, the wealthy despot of the prosperous city-state
of Sicyon. Potential bridegrooms from throughout the Hellenic world
paraded to Cleisthenes's palace to compete for the hand of the young
heiress rival Greek aristocrats renowned for either their
looks, money, strength, character, or wisdom. The haughty Cleisthenes
kept them under suspenseful audit for a year, in a sort of humiliating
and non-ending nitpicking examination to find the perfect
and most submissive son-in-law.
When at last
the fateful day of decision arrived, and the Athenian Hippocleides
was to be announced as the lucky bridegroom-to-be, Cleisthenes offered
a great feast to honor the upcoming betrothal. But as the eating
and drinking waxed on through the night, the buoyant young Hippocleides
ordered more and more music and dancing to the increasing
disproval of his shocked host Cleisthenes. Yet not content with
the usual moves, Hippocleides at last ordered a table to be brought
in. Then he jumped up on it and danced a succession of jigs in front
of the startled guests and now-exasperated tyrant. Finally, the
irrepressible Hippocleides in his elation stood on his head and
kicked his legs widely in the air. Cleisthenes could take no more
of such shamelessness, and finally barked out, "Young Cleisthenes,
you have just danced yourself out of a marriage." Oblivious,
the now liberated ex-suitor paid him no heed, kept up his dancing,
and in his exhilaration barked back, "Hippocleides don't care."
Herodotus's
story reminds me of the "antics" of the raucous and "intemperate"
Mr. Bush, whose recent stern rhetoric has likewise ignored the finger
shaking of his hypocritical censors. Like Hippocleides, he was supposed
to mouth all the correct platitudes to media pundits, strike all
the right poses in front of the dour Europeans, be properly deferential
to the tyrants and autocrats of the Middle East, and hourly court
self-righteous international bureaucrats. If he was going to win
all their approval for "collective action," Mr. Bush was
obligated to express remorse over skipping the dishonest conferences
at Kyoto and Durban. He should have treated Sept. 11 as a containable
criminal affair, rather than a real and unpredictable matter of
war and so indicted terrorists instead of raining bombs down
on them and their hosts. But instead, the more the EU, the U.N.,
and other collective bodies expressed their growing disapproval
of Mr. Bush's independence and high spirits warning that
he was dancing himself out of a marriage as it were the more
he has sought to kick his legs up into the air.
The president
was notified not to renounce an antiquated ABM treaty signed years
ago with a now nonexistent empire, to express embarrassment over
his "gauche" cowboy "slips" like "Dead
or alive," to agonize over "cages" in Cuba, to be
more even-handed to Mr. Arafat and his terrorists, and to regret
his clumsy and "unhelpful" use of the metaphor "axis."
As a good suitor he was supposed to eschew words like "evil,"
impolite phrases such as "with us or against us," and
other undiplomatic absolutes. Instead, like a former President Carter
or Clinton, he should bite his lip, wrinkle his brow, sigh about
the human condition, and in pained expressions and hushed tones
use of our enemies at least a few weasel-words like "problematic,"
"challenging," "intricate," and "complex."
Unfortunately,
our liberated Hippocleides told the Koreans directly that the Communists
to their north are really not free, but rather dangerous peoples
and that such despots, not us, need to walk gingerly. He
talked of his religion and democracy in front of millions of unfree
Chinese. And, if we take him at his word, he seems to think that
Afghanistan is the beginning, not the end, of this war.
In these depressing
times, such self-reliance, trust in one's own culture and history,
and confidence in right as one sees that right are near-criminal
offenses. Indeed, an entire vocabulary has cropped up to demonize
aggressive defense of just such a rare and anachronistic belief
"unilateralism," "rejectionism," "triumphalism,"
"insularity," "saber-rattling," "naiveté,"
and so on that Western notions of freedom, personal liberty,
free critique, consensual government, religious diversity, rationalism,
individualism, and open markets are not only unique in history,
but, in fact, the only hope for mankind and so to be protected and
advanced at all costs.
History teaches
that we should watch carefully these Hippocleideses, for when they
finally have tired of conventional wisdom and protocol, they begin
to dance to a tune that is immune from both censure and blandishment.
After the great plague and the first two years of enemy invasions,
the maverick Pericles lectured the restless Athenian mob that he
didn't think much of their sunshine patriotism and that they could
do what they pleased with him for all he cared but he was
not about to sue for peace from the Spartans. The Theban liberator
Epaminondas shrugged off the admonitions of his illustrious neighbors,
and instead promised the badgering Athenians that he might well
march up to their hallowed Acropolis, tear down the magnificent
Propylaea, and haul it back into his native Thebes. A quarter-million
freed helots were the eventual dividends of his unilateralism. By
mid-1864 Lincoln was told by more "seasoned" pundits that
to stop the horrible carnage of summer he had either to let the
Confederacy go or to allow the coexistence of slavery in a reconstructed
Union. Instead, he put his faith more in Sherman taking Atlanta
than in Copperheads and envoys in Washington.
It didn't seem
to bother Winston Churchill that his "shrill" warnings
in the late 1930s were dubbed unnecessarily confrontational and
thus might unduly "provoke" Hitler, a leader whom the
British establishment thought it "could do business with."
Such "brinkmanship" would eventually save Britain. Truman
was advised that he might well be impeached should he remove General
MacArthur. But just as he dropped the bomb to save lives and drew
the line against Communism in Greece and Turkey to keep millions
free, he fired the vainglorious hero to preserve the idea of civilian
audit and let history worry about the consequences. The more
Reagan called an evil empire an "evil empire," and prepared
to confront their aggression abroad, the more he was accused of
lusting for World War II until a bankrupt and murderous Soviet
state collapsed. At some point all these leaders grew tired of the
harangues of the status quo, and at last decided to do what they,
not their detractors and pollsters, thought was necessary to preserve
the peace and advance the cause of democracy and freedom. Friends
and enemies should realize that once a president has that look of
Hippocleides in his eye that he would rather follow his heart
than focus groups and protocols he runs the risk of becoming
either a very great or a very embarrassed man.
Mr. Bush may
also have in mind the negative lessons learned from his father's
administration. Had the latter told his in-house experts that he
could not really listen to coalitions, the feelings of the Europeans,
and the resolutions of the U.N. when a wounded killer was still
in Baghdad free to murder thousands of innocents and threaten the
general peace, then he would have stayed president until 1996, and
things would now be far better in the Middle East. His "moderate"
and "in-the-know" advisers likewise later assured the
elder Bush that he could ignore prior promises, raise taxes, and
please everyone. Instead, he pleased no one and turned a potential
landslide reelection into an embarrassing defeat to his moral inferior.
Playing by
all the rules, listening to all the conventional wisdom, worrying
about making a single false step, all that may win you the much
sought after bride of world opinion as it loses your soul
and far worse for your people.
So, Mr. President,
listen to Hippocleides and try to keep on dancing.
|