It is a time of freedom and fear, of Gaia and of borders, of many paths and the widening of a universal toll road, emptying country and swelling cities, of the public bought into privacy and the privacy of the public sold into invisible data banks and knowing algorithms. It is the time of the warrior's peace and the miser's charity, when the planting of a seed is an act of conscientious objection.

These are the times when maps fade and direction is lost. Forwards is backwards now, so we glance sideways at the strange lands through which we are all passing, knowing for certain only that our destination has disappeared. We are unready to meet these times, but we proceed nonetheless, adapting as we wander, reshaping the Earth with every tread.

Behind us we have left the old times, the standard times, the high times. Welcome to the irregular times.


 
What is the moral worldview of the Republican delegates who gathered in New York City to nominate George W. Bush as their champion? According to Leonardo Alcivar, spokesman for the Bush convention, "Our delegates understand the old adage, do unto others as they do unto you." (Source: New York Times August 31, 2004)

We'll take Alcivar's word for it that "do unto others as they do unto you" is an accurate representation of the ethical perspective of the central circle of Bush conventioneers. Unfortunately, that phrase is not an accurate quotation of the old adage known as the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule actually reads "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

The difference between the Golden Rule and the Republican Rule is not trivial. As Alcivar articulated it, human action in a society should be organized according to payback: if someone slaps you upside the head, you should slap them right back (lest you think this was a misquote or a slip of the tongue, Alcivar mentioned the Republican version of the adage as a way of letting reporters know that whatever anti-Bush demonstrators might dish out, conventioneers might be inclined to dish right back). The Golden Rule, on the other hand, asserts that if we act toward others not as they act toward us but as we wish they would act toward us, the standard of conduct in a society will come to resemble our wishes.

The Golden Rule is instructive, self-sacrificing, with a vision for the long term that offers a strategy for improvement in the way we deal with each other as individuals, groups and nations. The Republican Rule is vindictive, self-guarding, short-sighted and offers no hope for improvement in the way people, groups and nations interact with one another. George W. Bush stands for the Republican Rule, not the Golden Rule. And that's another reason to give Bush the Boot in 2004.

Alcivar's misconstrual of the Golden Rule establishes another troubling tendency among Bush's core of supporters at the convention: apparently, they enjoy referring to the Bible more than they enjoy reading it.

The Golden Rule is clearly enshrined in the New Testament of the Bible, in two places:

• (Matthew 7:12 RSV) "So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets."
  
• (Luke 6:31 RSV) "And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them."

Do we have to quote the Bible to the ostentatious Bible-thumpers? Apparently we do. The Bush conventioneers that Alcivar refers to aren't nearly as Biblical as they say they are -- and we certainly don't need another four years of self-righteous ignorance masquerading as piety.


Posted by James Cook at 10:30 AM. # (permalink)




Return to the Irregular Times Main Page

Read our Blog Archives