How George W. Bush Happened

Love him or hate him ... collectively, we voted overwhelmingly to elect him at least once.

He was opinionated, acted from the gut rather than planning, led and compelled with raw emotion and pronounced judgment on anyone he deemed to be a threat.

But why did we elect someone like that? I believe it's because he was representing the world.

I think it was evident after the towers were attacked and after the Iraq war started. People were calm, collected and tolerant on the surface, but underneath it all they were generally ready to dump it all when times got tough in favor of nationalism.

Our governments since World War II have been increasingly nationalistic. The US and the Soviets frantically rushed to scoop up all the Nazi scientists before the other, and formed the KGB and CIA as copies of the Nazi SS. The atomic bomb was invented out of fear that the Nazis would create it first. In a sense, the Nazi ideology prevailed in that it transformed the whole world into an image of itself. It created an intense international competition and gave birth to the Cold War and the arms race. National security became paramount as diplomacy took a back seat to McCarthyism. The military industry became the most well-funded technological machine on Earth. It became accepted that the path to peace was through strength and military superiority, and that such superiority derived from industry. People were convinced that good industry was a result of fair dealing, and so strong offensive and defensive capability was seen as a result of justice.

Whoever has the power is right.

That would be the logical conclusion. (Ultimately, I believe that this is correct. However, that doesn't prevent horrible atrocities from occurring before it 'balances out'. reference: WWII). The problem is that protection and development contend for the same resources.

Perhaps the only way for the world to understand this contradiction was for it to be played out to its logical conclusion.

Enter George W. Bush. Maybe he knew about the contradiction and maybe he fell for it. I don't know. One thing's for sure though ... he ran with it. He said, "Oh, you want nationalism? You got it!" ... and the flags flew from coast to coast. People got more and more and more nationalism. And they rallied behind the cause with some of the highest approval ratings in a long time. (Of course now they all deny it and throw it away, but hey, it's a fad culture, so what do we expect, right?). And they followed and they followed and they followed. Eventually most of the world thought it was wrong, but still the Americans believed. And they followed and they followed. And they paid. "700 billion dollars for the war? No problem." "900 billion dollars more for the war? No problem." And they followed and they followed.

Then, one day the economy crashed, and suddenly they got a conscience, "Maybe this isn't such a great idea"

It sort of reminds me the stories of the dads that catch their kids smoking and force them to smoke the whole pack until they get sick. The difference is that smoking generally doesn't hurt anyone outside of the room.

I think we should all be a little bit ashamed of the fact that it took a personal impact before we started considering whether or not our support and our actions have been misguided.

I think we also should be a little bit ashamed of the fact that we keep propping up our leaders ... celebrating them like super-humans when they are succeeding and then burning them as witches when they aren't. We celebrate #1 as the person who can conquer all people, and then we are dismayed and shocked when they do exactly what we ask for.

Maybe the problem isn't with the supply. Maybe the problem is with the demand.

We want a quick turnaround. We want results. We want them fast. We don't want to have to think too much about it...that's somebody else's job, right? ... so here's a bunch of money and some guns ... go fix it.

But wait, isn't the whole point of the country the fact that people died so that ordinary people could have a voice? Well what's the point of that if everyone just lays down and hands that voice over to one person? What good is it if everyone punishes people who have other opinions? Heck, who needs a secret police when the people do it on their own (Reference : The Dixie Chicks).

My point isn't to single any one person out. In fact, my position has been the same this whole time. I find it a bit ironic that the same thoughts that once made me feel like a detractor of George W Bush now have a little bit of the opposite effect. It's not because my view has changed, it's because everyone else's has.

Where was all this public outrage when Rumsfeld was in Iraq giving weapons to Saddam to use against Iran? Where was the outrage when the precursors to Afghan extremist groups were being trained and equipped by the US to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan (movie: Charlie Wilson's War) and then subsequently abandoned when their purpose was done, leaving a power vacuum that was ultimately filled by the Taliban. Where was the public outrage when the US suggested to the USSR that they democratize all at once, resulting in the complete economic collapse of the entire region? Is it any wonder why China is not in a huge hurry to sign up for that?

I think George W Bush reflected America's desire to be seen as a flawless all-knowing light of the world. I think we clearly realize now that we are not. However, I still believe, and always will believe, that our principles ARE that great.

What's a shame is when we don't use them.