Am I "Anti-American"?
February 26, 2002

by Joe Sobran

     Liberals used to accuse me of being an extremist 
radical right-wing superpatriotic cold warrior. I didn't 
exactly enjoy having these labels slapped on me, 
particularly by Mom, but at least I could understand why 
some people used them. They were a caricature, which is 
an exaggeration of real features.

     Lately, though, I've been called some unflattering 
names by people I used to think of as my fellow 
conservatives. One, a radio talk-show host, has gone so 
far as to call me "anti-American."

     How did I go from being superpatriotic to being 
anti-American, or even, as some have called me, 
"treasonous"? I haven't joined the Taliban, endorsed 
terrorism, waged war against the United States, taken 
bribes from foreign governments, or sold sensitive 
military secrets to Chinese or Russian spies. Wherein, 
then, have I offended?

     That's easy. I haven't joined in the spirit of 
primitive patriotism that is expected of us in wartime. 
In fact I deny that such patriotism deserves to be 
honored as patriotism.

     Discerning anthropologists have enumerated traits by 
which certain social types may be recognized. You've seen 
the lists: "You may be a redneck if ..."

     In the same way, I think there are traits by which 
we can identify an anti-American.

     If, for example, you think the U.S. Government 
should abide by the Constitution even during wartime, you 
are anti-American. If you think the government should at 
least declare war before waging it, you are anti-
American. If you deprecate a war that hurts and kills 
innocent people without achieving its stated goals, you 
are anti-American.

     That's not all. If you judge your own country's 
government by the same standards that you apply to other 
countries' governments, you are anti-American. If you 
think America is not immune to the sins that have often 
afflicted other countries, you are anti-American. If you 
think our government has made us enemies we don't need, 
you are anti-American.

     If you think that even America's "good wars" -- the 
Civil War and World War II -- had terribly tragic results 
for this country and the world, you are anti-American.

     America is an extension of Western civilization, one 
of whose deepest principles is rationality. The Founders 
of the American Republic established standards, embodied 
in the Constitution and explained in THE FEDERALIST 
PAPERS, by which that Republic and its rulers should be 
judged. They didn't expect automatic submission to the 
government; on the contrary, they set down the grounds on 
which citizens should criticize the government and, if 
necessary, remove its officers. A true patriot would be a 
critic, not a serf, of the government.

     This whole approach was in deliberate contrast to 
the principles of absolute monarchism. A loyal American 
could judge his government wanting, because the people, 
not their rulers, were sovereign. They would have no 
sacred ruler set over them in the name of God and 
claiming divine authority.

     But this original sense of measure has been lost. To 
judge your government by its own supposed criteria -- the 
specific and limited powers named in the Constitution 
which our officials are sworn to uphold -- is disloyalty 
and treason. Obey, or be damned!

     This reversion to primitive authoritarianism would 
have shocked the authors of the Constitution. But they 
are more alien to today's "patriotism" than the Taliban. 
Today they would be considered anti-American.

     Those men assumed that the Constitution would be a 
constant rein on the Federal Government. It would be used 
to rebuke any attempted usurpation of power; and for a 
while, it was. But in times of war especially, the 
Constitution has proved a frail instrument. During the 
Civil War, as Paul Craig Roberts recently put it, Abraham 
Lincoln "exalted the Union above the Constitution." 
Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt went much further 
than Lincoln. All three are now honored as "great 
presidents." Those who respected constitutional 
limitations are said to have been "weak presidents." And 
George W. Bush is already being praised, in some 
"conservative" quarters, as a "great president."

     The question of constitutionality rarely comes up, 
except in the feeble and marginal whimpers of pseudo-
constitutionalists such as the American Civil Liberties 
Union, which actually favors socialist-style government 
in most respects. No president has ever been removed for 
exceeding his powers. President Bush doesn't even have to 
worry about that.

     So if you consider the ruin of a noble experiment in 
limited government "Americanism," just set me down as 
anti-American.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Read this column on-line at 
"http://www.sobran.com/columns/020226.shtml".

Copyright (c) 2002 by the Griffin Internet 
Syndicate, www.griffnews.com. This column may not 
be published in print or Internet publications 
without express permission of Griffin Internet 
Syndicate. You may forward it to interested 
individuals if you use this entire page, 
including the following disclaimer:

"SOBRAN'S and Joe Sobran's columns are available 
by subscription. For details and samples, see 
http://www.sobran.com/e-mail.shtml, write 
fran@griffnews.com, or call 800-513-5053."