We are non-commercial, all volunteer and supported by our readers. Please help sustain the Dew by making a donation.
History Repeats itself in Libya… Sort of
On September 11th, The United States Embassy in Cairo issued a statement condemning the attempts of “misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.” The statement was in response to growing outrage stemming from an anti-Islamic movie produced in America. The movie was recently translated into Arabic and viewed via the internet throughout the Middle East and other Arabic speaking nations.
Although the statement issued by the U.S. Embassy was intended to assuage the offended and deter potentially violent reactions, attacks on American embassies ensued in both Egypt and Libya. Another attack followed on September 13th in Yemen.
The original statement by the U.S. Embassy met criticism from, among others, Mitt Romney. Romney cited the statement as “akin to an apology,” and felt that the statement did not “defend [American] values,” implying that the President did not support the first amendment freedom of speech exercised by the American film maker.
So let’s say Romney is right. Let’s make the inference Romney wants us to make and say that President Obama’s take on the first amendment is that it is not absolute, that it does not extend to those who offend Muslims. Even if this stretcher (as Mark Twain would call it) were accurate, it wouldn’t be the first time America denounced a foundational value in the face of Muslim opposition.
In America’s infancy, the government faced troubled waters, quite literally. American merchant ships were being attacked off the Barbary Coast by Muslim pirates. In order to establish more peaceful relations with the Islamic North African nations (modern day Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco), the American Congress proposed and unanimously ratified the Treaty of Tripoli in 1797.
The controversial legacy of this treaty lies in Article 11:
As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
The American Congress at the time clearly saw a benefit to denouncing America as a fundamentally Christian nation. The benefit was the safety of American sailors and hostages from hostile, state-sponsored Muslim pirates.
Now, if you are of the opinion that the United States was founded on the Christian religion, this section of the treaty can mean one of two things: 1) you are dead wrong, or 2) the United States was simply trying to ease relations between Americans and Muslims by telling an outright lie. I tend to favor option one, but I certainly wouldn’t put it past an American government to lie in a treaty. (By the way, if Congress did blatantly break the ninth commandment in the treaty, it does not help the argument that American government was founded on the Christian religion.)
Whether or not America was “founded on the Christian religion” can be debated, but the fact that it was founded by imperfect Christians who touted the guiding principles and values found in the Christian Bible is an indisputable truth. Still, the statement in Article 11 is clearly an attempt by the American government to distance itself from any American value derived from Christianity.
This brings us full circle to the statement made in Cairo.
In an effort to protect innocent lives, the American Embassy in Cairo distanced itself from a specific value that Americans hold dear: freedom of speech. Did America revoke the freedom of speech from the hateful individuals whose handiwork incited the violence that resulted in the murder of another American? No. Did America apologize for those hateful individuals’ actions? Yes, but only in an effort to safeguard Americans from the consequences of those idiots’ actions.
Ultimately, what has been revealed through Mitt Romney’s commentary regarding the situation in Libya is the unwavering belief many people have in American exceptionalism. But this is not simply a belief that America is exceptional; it is an arrogant worldview that incorrectly assumes that America can do no wrong and that Americans are always right, no matter who is killed as a result of their actions—even other Americans.
Worthy of Comment
Also on the Dew
Georgia's General Assembly began Monday. Watch out! Few of us are safe from its machinations! You can be sure with the super majority that the Republican Party now has in the Legislature, we will see many proposals aimed at reducing taxes, that will give the rich more power, and forget the underprivileged. In other words, more of the same. It's a wonderful day, say those of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), as it licks its chops anticipating that Georgia will join other states in tearing down progressive legislation and moving our state even in a more backward direction through adoption of Read on →
Not having grown up American, I find that I am often ignorant of American culture. On the other hand, when it is pointed out to me, I see it as an outsider and, I sometimes think, more clearly. That was the case with the car culture "discovered" by my spouse in the American cinema. We agreed that the ancillary side-effects of Americans' love affair with their cars -- urban sprawl, social disruption, environmental degradation, individual isolation -- are all deplorable. But, it was only recently that it hit me that the promotion of the private automotive capsule and the destruction Read on →
WARNING: This feature has nothing to do with politics, terrorism, or race relations. It does, however, touch upon your unavoidable visit from the Grim Reaper. Time is the coin of your life. It is the only coin you have, and only you can determine how it will be spent. Be careful, lest you let other people spend it for you. — Carl Sandburg In my explorations along back roads, deep woods, and left-behind places, I come across forgotten graveyards. Their tombstones, like tragic figures in some sad drama, long ago surrendered to weathering. Stones cut from rocks softer than granite appear to me Read on →
My friend Tom says most, if not all, great writers are fractured individuals. I hope he’s wrong about that; I’ve always been a happy, well-adjusted guy. I plan to achieve Great Writer status one day and would hate to think lack of a tortured soul, along with precious little talent, will prevent such dreams. The only thing even remotely dark about me is my middle name. If I had been a girl, none of this would have happened. I would have been Betty Louise. At least that’s what my mother said. The Mike part of my name originated with an old Army Read on →