As
you grow older, some of it does get old. Brief bursts of bright
blotches against the night sky no longer move me -- not, at any rate,
so much as the least glimpse of God’s own handiwork, like the more
permanent pattern-and-colorburst on the leaves of a coleus.
But
in another way, the meaning of this day grows ever deeper, even
sombre. For the success and permanency of the American Revolution was
by no means a foregone conclusion -- we were truly in uncharted
territory back then. The more you learn about history, and the more
history itself keeps happening, you are forced to conclude: Most
revolutions go awry.
To
begin with our own. Contrary to the impression we get in school, at
the time of the Declaration of Independence, a bare one third of the
American population was in favor of rebelling against Britain; a third
against; a third undecided. The perfect setting for an immediate
post-revolution civil war. Yet it did not happen (the Civil War a
century later fell along quite different lines). The only threat came
again externally, in 1812 (“the rocket’s red glare, the bombs bursting
in air”), when the wrath of the British Empire was again turned against
us, and the nation’s capital was set in flames. The pinwheels and
cherry bombs of latter days commemorate an actual peril.
Remarkably as well, we
managed, over the years and (by now) centuries, to maintain (most of us)
extremely cordial, even intimate relations with the Mother Country --
an unusual trans-hemispheric affinity, unmatched by the relations of the
Latin American countries to Spain and Portugal (let alone Haiti to
France).
Consider next the French revolution -- “next”, because in fact it was subsequent to our own, having broke out in 1789; though the way Europeans run on about it, you’d think it was the first revolution in the history of the world. Anyhow, it remains a proud occasion; the French version of Independence Day is Bastille Day, celebrated on July 14, with great fanfare. (For our friendly nod to our old ally, click here: Merci la France.)
Yet their revolution was -- franchise oblige -- a gorawful bloody cock-up. Not content with overturning centuries of monarchy, the revolutionaries proceeded to la Terreur, and to a sort of overreaching ideological Gleichschaltung that foreshadowed the Bolshevik excess. And to crown it all, it didn’t stick: within a couple of decades, the kings were back.
France
did not ultimately found a Republic that stuck, after the imperial and
revived-monarchical interludes, until 1871, with the Third Republic
(which segued into the Fourth and Fifth without a relapse into
pre-Republican polity). Nor did this event stem in any direct way from
the events of 1789. As William Shirer tells it, in The Collapse of the Third Republic (1969, chapter “A Freakish Birth):
It
came into being by a fluke. The National Assembly, elected in 1871 ...
had not wanted a Republic. Nearly two thirds of its members were
Monarchists. But they could not agree on a king …
So
the lawmakers … sort of backed into the harness of a republic … by a
majority of one vote … 353 to 352 -- though there would have been a tie
had one deputy, who was against it, not been late in arriving for the
balloting. Even then it was not clear to many members that they were
actually choosing a republic. The day before, they had rejected it, or
thought they had.
By contrast, the
Constitution that came out of our revolutionary days has lasted and
guided us down to the present, with comparatively modest and incremental
additions.
~
Since
the end of the Second World War, world history has been spotted by
rebellions and revolts, mostly anti-colonial, in quest of
independence. And for the most part, the results have not been pretty.
Myanmar. Zimbabwe. Algeria. Somalia. Cambodia. South Africa. Congo. The fragment that is Pakistan, and the mini-fragment of Bangladesh. And now most recently, South Sudan and Azawad. Names like tombstones along the the corpse-strewn path of History’s forced-march.
And thus the American
declaration of independence, which shone at the time, shines yet more
brightly now, against the contrasting dark. It is as though the metal
of which men then were made, deemed sturdy bronze at the time, were
revealed, in the fullness of time, with the reckonings in and the dust
dispersed, to have been, in actual and astonishing fact, of purest gold.
[The perspective of this essay thus falls under the general rubric of American exceptionalism.]
[The perspective of this essay thus falls under the general rubric of American exceptionalism.]
No comments:
Post a Comment