George Herbert : Christmas

(From The Temple. First published in 1633.)

All after pleasures as I rid one day,
My horse and I, both tir’d, bodie and minde,
With full crie of affections, quite astray,
I took up in the next inne I could finde.

There when I came, whom found I but my deare,
My dearest Lord, expecting till the grief
Of pleasure brought me to Him, readie there
To be all passengers’ most sweet relief.

O Thou, whose glorious yet contracted light,
Wrapt in Night’s mantle, stole into a manger,
Since my dark soul and brutish, is Thy right,
To man, of all beasts, be not Thou a stranger:

Furnish and deck my soul, that Thou mayest have
A better lodging than a rack or grave.

From a letter to my goddaughter

The following are extracts from a letter which I wrote to my goddaughter this past May. Both she and her husband, who is in officer training in the U.S. Army, were students of mine at St. John’s College. I have not asked her permission to publish these extracts, but, since they contain nothing of a personal nature, and may help to clarify certain recent statements on this blog, I suppose she wouldn’t mind my printing them here. Towards the end, I am adding two sentences that were in the original draft but were left out of the actual letter; otherwise, it is as it was sent.

* * * * *

…Regarding the war: I have the greatest respect for those American soldiers who are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. It seems to me that they have been presented with a nearly impossible task, and, aside from certain deeply shameful incidents like the tortures at Abu Ghraib, have been fulfilling their tasks with honor and distinction….

My issue with the war is not with the men who are fighting and dying in it, but with its original conception. From the start, I thought our going into Iraq was a grand and foolish mistake, and that it was very likely being done for reasons besides the putative ones of finding weapons of mass destruction. I am now fairly convinced that we invaded Iraq in 2003 primarily for two reasons: (1) to ensure a supply of cheap oil to America and the West, and (2) to make the Middle East safe for Israel. Both of these were arguably worthy and laudable goals; as is becoming increasingly clear, America faces an energy crisis and a future of increasing dependency upon foreign oil, a dependency which cannot fail to have important political consequences, especially since the largest oil suppliers are also exporters of Islamic fundamentalism. As to the second reason, Israel is an important ally, and long historical experience has taught the Jews to take threats to their safety very seriously, and not stand by idly and benignly while men like Ahmadinejad of Iran and others boast that they will annihilate them. Some of George W. Bush’s closest strategic advisers, like Perle and Wolfewitz, had previously advised Likud governments in Israel. It seems quite clear that such men saw Israel’s and America’s long-term strategic interests exactly to coincide. Perhaps they were right.

What troubles me is that neither of these reasons for our initiating the war in Iraq was ever fairly argued before the American public. Even now, candidates avoid publicly discussing them, as though to do so were to commit political hari-kari. It is not the goals themselves that disturb me so much as it is the lack of any real debate about them, the way these goals — which, in the end, appear to have been thoroughly unrealistic — managed to motivate a war that was justified on fraudulent grounds and was pushed through by a manipulation of the media and a general contempt for legal process, which left me, during much of George W. Bush’s presidency, with real fears about the continuing viability of our democracy, fears which have not yet totally gone away.

If the Democrats had not regained control of the Congress in November 2006, this country would now almost certainly be at war, not only in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also in Iran. That is, we would now be attempting to conquer and subdue the whole region from the borders of Syria to the borders of Pakistan. That Bush and Cheney were actively pushing for this, and were prevented from extending the war only through their loss of a rubber-stamp Congress and through certain courageous people in the CIA (who, early in 2007, unexpectedly announced that Iran does not pose an immediate nuclear threat) — all this seems to me incontrovertible.

Unless some major change takes place in my thinking, I plan to vote for Obama this fall. The idea of simply, unilaterally pulling out of Iraq does not make much sense to me, nor am I a great fan of timetables. But some form of reduced presence in Iraq is inevitable. Inevitably, the Iraqis are going to have to take on more of the burden of their own defense and internal security, and arrive at political solutions for their divisions. Inevitably also, there will be some continuing American military presence in the country. Whoever becomes president will have to oversee these changes, and will have to do so in cooperation with the rest of the international community. If the United States is not to suffer economic collapse like the Soviet Union did, it will have to temper George W. Bush’s imperial ambitions.

The deeper issue for me is the viability of our own political institutions. I think the Republicans have done much to corrupt them over the past eight years and more. As seen in Livy and Thucydides, oligarchy is impatient with the rule of law, and much prefers the rule of men; in that respect, Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are classic oligarchs. McCain has, I think, a deeper respect for the rule of law. But he is old and mortal, and in any case he will be politically dependent upon the oligarchs to get anything done; if he defies them in any serious way, one might expect to see a regrettable decease during his tenure in office. Obama is also mortal, and the Democrats have their own temptations to political sin, chiefly, a temptation to identify law and right with the will of the many and to ignore divine law, which ultimately judges individuals and nations. But I have read Machiavelli, and my sense is that the religious carrots the Republicans dangle before the Christian right are dangled for essentially Machiavellian, cynical reasons. They best serve their purpose when they are unattainable.

My sense of Obama is that he is a fundamentally decent man, and not someone who ignores divine law; quite the contrary. If he can get elected in spite of the latent racism of much of the country, and if he manages to keep the Republican attack-dogs at bay, I think he has the makings of a great president; certainly the times will require one.

So much for my political views.

Thanks, but no thanks

I sit upon the shore
Of the ocean of time
And watch the waves that lap
At my feet
And the heavy, heavy weight
That weighs upon my heart
Feels like a burden of eternal
Defeat

I see the ship of state
That flounders in the night
The captain, he has taken
To drink
A new captain waits
To take on the command
At least he is able
To think

I hear the angry voices
Of a thousand thousand men
Their chorus like a mighty organ
Swells
They say that this new captain
Is not really born again
And damn him to a thousand, thousand
Hells

I smell the heavy sweetness
Of your incense which ascends
It stings my eyes and throat, and makes me
Nod
A fiery oblation
To destroy that which offends
And propitiate your angry, angry
God