Most people thing of history as a static truth; that X event happened on Y date. The reality, of course, is that history is fluid and full of interpretation. Like the proverbial stone in a river, the rough edges are worn away with time and a more whole picture of the subject emerges over time. When you are in the stream of history, it’s nearly impossible to approach a subject with real objectivity. With that being said, I’ve spent my time this morning wondering how history will treat George W. Bush. With the rancor and raw hatred of many of his critics, it’s nearly impossible to think that history won’t treat him better than his contemporaries have. Will history paint him as the happy warrior, hell bent on spread democracy or as an imperial and secretive president the likes of which has only been seen in one other administration?
I suspect that history will take something of a middle course. The presidency of George W. Bush has all the hallmarks of a classic tragedy. It was an administration full of possibility that failed to live up to that possibility. It was a portrait of the danger of governance by ideologs. And it was a remarkable tribute to the capacity of the American people to come together in the face of withering adversity and of how a leader could fritter away that goodwill. George W. Bush will remain something of a question mark in many ways. Say what you will, he staked out a clear ideological position on many issues and then stuck with them through thick or thin. On the keystone issue of government intervention in the free market, however, he turned those stated beliefs on their head to lead the largest government intervention since the 1930s. Enigma much?
Fifty or a hundred years from now, we’ll have a much fuller picture of the man who we elected king these last eight years. For now, we’ve had the fortune to live in interesting times. Would you really want it any other way?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment