« Statement from William K. Wolfrum: "We White Men are now an infinitesimally oppressed, slightly less powerful majority" | William K. Wolfrum's Blog | Sarah Palin quits the Presidency she expects to win in 2012 »
We were born an honorable nation
When Tom Tancredo
stood up in a coffee shop in Iowa and told the two dozen or so
collected diners that he believed the U.S. should respond to an attack
by Islamic extremists by bombing Mecca, it wasn't just the surrealistic
ramblings of a politician with no concern of human life. It was also a
perfect example of just how far America has fallen from the path laid
out by the Founding Fathers.
It was but a few months more than 230 years ago that Gen. George Washington made a decision at Drakes Farm in New Jersey that would help shape the ideal to so many that the United States was the greatest nation on Earth.
During the American Revolution, there was a battle of American against British and Hessian soldiers. The Americans were forced to retreat, and left seven wounded soldiers on the field of battle. One of them, Lt. William Kelly offered to surrender to the British. His offer was refused.
When the British took over the field after the battle, they brutally murdered each of the wounded American soldiers.
When word of this reached Gen. Washington, he stood firm and made it clear to his men - we will not do this to them. "We are fighting for a cause. And our cause demands we behave with honor."
As the war continued and the tide turned, Americans took more and more German and British prisoners of war. And they were all treated respectfully and humanely. Gen. Washington's words were heeded, and Americans were honorable in their treatment of POWs.
The nation was in peril, the ink on the Declaration of Independence was not yet dry, and Americans fought for their very survival against the most fierce armies on the planet. And America won. And did so with honor.
In the end, nearly 25 percent of the Germans who fell in to American hands on the field of battle chose to stay in the new nation. This story is well retold at NPR's podcast "Krulwich on Science" with Robert Krulwich and historian David Hackett Fisher.
Click here to head over to NPR to download the podcast, and listen for yourself about the America that Washington and his fellow founders fought for more than two centuries ago. And compare it to the blood-thirsty, torturing, paranoid and fearful nation the U.S. is today.
"We should not look back unless it is to derive useful lessons from past errors, and for the purpose of profiting by dearly bought experience," Washington has been quoted as saying.
It is time we look back and remember we were once an honorable nation.
(Author's Note: I wrote this almost two years ago, but with President Obama pondering indefinite detention for some at Gitmo, I felt it had pertinence today, as well. Thanks - WKW)
--WKW
Crossposted at Williamkwolfrum.com
It was but a few months more than 230 years ago that Gen. George Washington made a decision at Drakes Farm in New Jersey that would help shape the ideal to so many that the United States was the greatest nation on Earth.
During the American Revolution, there was a battle of American against British and Hessian soldiers. The Americans were forced to retreat, and left seven wounded soldiers on the field of battle. One of them, Lt. William Kelly offered to surrender to the British. His offer was refused.
When the British took over the field after the battle, they brutally murdered each of the wounded American soldiers.
When word of this reached Gen. Washington, he stood firm and made it clear to his men - we will not do this to them. "We are fighting for a cause. And our cause demands we behave with honor."
As the war continued and the tide turned, Americans took more and more German and British prisoners of war. And they were all treated respectfully and humanely. Gen. Washington's words were heeded, and Americans were honorable in their treatment of POWs.
The nation was in peril, the ink on the Declaration of Independence was not yet dry, and Americans fought for their very survival against the most fierce armies on the planet. And America won. And did so with honor.
In the end, nearly 25 percent of the Germans who fell in to American hands on the field of battle chose to stay in the new nation. This story is well retold at NPR's podcast "Krulwich on Science" with Robert Krulwich and historian David Hackett Fisher.
Click here to head over to NPR to download the podcast, and listen for yourself about the America that Washington and his fellow founders fought for more than two centuries ago. And compare it to the blood-thirsty, torturing, paranoid and fearful nation the U.S. is today.
"We should not look back unless it is to derive useful lessons from past errors, and for the purpose of profiting by dearly bought experience," Washington has been quoted as saying.
It is time we look back and remember we were once an honorable nation.
(Author's Note: I wrote this almost two years ago, but with President Obama pondering indefinite detention for some at Gitmo, I felt it had pertinence today, as well. Thanks - WKW)
--WKW
Crossposted at Williamkwolfrum.com
Advertisement
















Nothing to add here but, GREAT POST!
July 9, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are those who have believed that part of the reason the Americans prevailed against the British imperial army and navy was because of their cause and because of their honor. The two go hand in hand. I believe that is a huge part of the reason we are losing and will never win the two imperial wars we are now so foolishly engaged in. Our cause there is not honorable or just and our behavior is anything but.
July 10, 2009 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, it was because of the French. The cause of our nation was to replace a monarchy with an oligarchy. Hardly a honorable pursuit no matter what the literature stated.
July 10, 2009 9:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Again, you display a shallow knowledge of American history.
July 10, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cogent response.
July 10, 2009 2:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's always curious to me that we find it so hard to define honor without pointing to some obscure time in the past. I am pretty sure the Japanese have a different view of our honor than the Germans do. We have been plenty ruthless throughout our history given the proper motivation.
July 10, 2009 9:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's because the writer is resorting to the typical cliche of "then and now", which always makes it easier to lard on heavy layers of melodrama and outrage.
July 10, 2009 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to break it to you, but George Washington owned slaves.
July 10, 2009 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to break it to you, but there are no saints.
July 10, 2009 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Which is a good reason to stop canonizing the Founders.
July 10, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Founders were far from perfect men but their vision for this country was, well, visionary.
I don't canonize the Founders Jason but they literally did put their lives on the line to establish this country...they could have easily all 'hung together'. But what endures isn't who they were as private men but their ideals for a better way.
Which was almost immediately subverted by forces of organized religion and business.
July 10, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
The most important lesson being that those ideals were tossed aside almost immediately.
Notwithstanding the sacrifices made by the original revolutionaries to secure the fortunes of that founding cadre of gentry with more to gain than a largely symbolic freedom, we need to be realistic about how we view this experiment we are still conducting. Noble intentions and literature aside, we replaced an unaccountable monarchy with unaccountable oligarchy. One that remains to this day.
I suspect Thomas Jefferson and George Washington would be amongst the harshest critics given a chance to comment on the missed opportunities over the last 230 years.
July 10, 2009 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. Criticism of people living 200 years ago for owning slaves or having objectionable opinions of other races is nonsense. It was normal then; they never would have been remembered by history if they had been laughed out of the Continental Congress for randomly freeing all their slaves or what have you. Our morality is not the morality of 1776 (that was Wolfrum's point).
2. I'm far from certain that under proper circumstances George Washington wouldn't have been perfectly comfortable with "indefinite preventative detention". Certainly there's nothing in the story about not murdering wounded soldiers that contradicts this position... or even suggests what Washington's views of habeas corpus might be.
3. I agree that the revolutionary war was won because of the French, and not any moral high ground occupied by our side. That isn't to say that we didn't occupy a moral high ground (wherever that might be), but it wasn't why we won.
4. If we were fighting imperial wars we'd, you know, get something out of it. Like an empire. Instead, we waste our young men's lives trying to inflict democracy on people who have no need or interest in democracy. That's not imperialism. It's idiocy.
July 10, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're right. It's stupid to apply contemporary standards to historical reality.
July 10, 2009 12:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's what Justice Scalia says all the time.
July 10, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
July 11, 2009 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great comment. Agreed on all counts.
July 10, 2009 1:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn! I wish I hadn't missed all these bipolar comments about American history yesterday.
There's one troubling comment that should not go uncorrected, however:
This notion is completely wrong. Slavery was a widely contentious topic in this country since the mid-1700s. That's because it was considered "evil" by many Christians.
But don't take my word for it. Please take Joseph Ellis's word for it in his fascinating Pulitzer-winning book, Founding Brothers. It's a great read.
You can also peruse some primary documents regarding the controversial topic of slavery for the Continental Congress (search "slave"). And of course there's always Wiki for a primer on abolition.
Our 2nd president never owned slaves, so our moral positions today do in fact intersect the moral positions of 1776.
July 12, 2009 12:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Our 2nd President was a workaday lawyer and farmer from Massachusetts. He never had the opportunity or business to own slaves. My point, anyway, is not that slavery had no moral relevance in 1776; it is that slavery was not morally decided in 1776.
In 1776, it was, perhaps, like abortion today, an issue some people cared very much about making illegal, some people fervently believed should be legal, and most people didn't give a darn about either way.
My point is, I don't think that people on either side of the abortion debate should be characterized as "evil" or morally bankrupt today, and the same should go for slaveholders in 1776.
July 13, 2009 1:34 PM | Reply | Permalink