On October 23, 2006--the 50th anniversary of the beginning of the
Hungarian Revolution--an article by the Hungarian
émigré Peter Nadas appeared in The Wall Street
Journal. Mr. Nadas was a young participant in the revolution,
so his article said many interesting and insightful things, but
perhaps the most revealing is this:
To this day I can recite the chronology of those 13
days. Even today I cannot quite contain my romantic frenzy
felt over the sensation that everybody is with us, the whole world
is with us. You couldn't be everywhere at the same time, but all
the news, the stories and the legends of glory reached you. Upon
hearing them you experienced them vicariously, relying on your
reserves of empathy and you embellished them, hence the greater
number of variations. The Revolution recognizes a first person
plural which, instead of excluding the first person singular,
accommodates and even absorbs the latter with all of its
characteristics. [Emphasis added.]
As I said, it is a very revealing
quote--one with which I happen to disagree. When I say that I
disagree, let me be clear: It may very well be that Mr. Nadas and
his cohorts shared these feelings during the revolution. I
certainly do not dispute his memories or his feelings about
them.
What I do question is his understanding
and explanation of the pull and appeal of the revolution. It may
have been what moved Mr. Nadas, but if that is so, it is too bad.
It is the wrong way to approach a revolution--or, at least, it is a
highly imperfect way. I understand the pith and eloquence of his
explanation. I understand and sympathize with part of its meaning.
But the part about the first person plural absorbing--that is to
say, "swallowing up"--the first person singular is a dangerous
temptation in all revolutions, and it is one, I am happy to say,
you Americans have been fortunate and wise enough, by and large, to
resist.
It was, I think, precisely this
sentiment--so poetically described by Mr. Nadas--that helped doom
the Hungarian Revolution to failure. Ironically, some 33 years
later, this same tendency toward absorbing the first person
singular would be one of the things cited as a justification for
the destruction of the Communists whom the revolutionaries of '56,
in their fervor, had meant to expel. The irony is that the
revolutionaries of Mr. Nadas's memory had so much of an elemental
nature in common with their enemies.
Or perhaps it is not ironic, just sadly
predictable, in a land without the blessings and habits of liberty.
The individual can never really--and should never really--simply be
absorbed into the political. No legitimate political cause
would ask such a thing of a man. It is a kind of madness and
barbarism. But this lesson, though sometimes deeply felt in the
heart, is difficult to internalize in the mind and externalize in
action, particularly in the face of the kind of "romantic frenzy"
described by Mr. Nadas.
In America, each generation has to be
educated in our principles of right, the natural rights that stem
from those principles, and about our constitutional soul, which
gives these rights their functional order. As Madison put it,
"liberty and learning always have to be attached." In this unique
country--this novus ordo seclorum--citizens have to be made
because it is not enough that they be born.
Unfortunately, it took me a very long
time to come to that realization. Born, as I was, in post-war
Hungary, becoming American was not just an obstacle of birth; for I
came to America in late 1956, just as the revolution failed. I was
only 10 years old, so my education about America came mainly in
America.
But it did not come to me in any
organized or systematic way. Much of it--too much of it--came to me
by way of happy accidents. Though I fumbled about looking for it on
my own--in your public schools and in your state universities--it
was not until I reached graduate school that I really began the
study of American liberty. Only there did I have the opportunity
and the guidance to introduce myself to men like Jefferson,
Madison, and Washington on their own terms. That is, I was able to
read them without being distracted by Marxist or Freudian
interpretations. But even then, I was lucky. I happened to have a
few good professors, and they happened to have the good sense to
let these men speak for themselves.
These "old time men," as Lincoln called
our founders, persuaded me that we Americans--that is to say,
ordinary human beings--are capable of something quite
extraordinary: self government. But their wisdom and my experience
with tyranny also persuaded me that self-government is a fragile
commodity. The project of self-government is not well served by
"romantic frenzy" and absorbing the "I" into the "we." It is much
too serious a business for that kind of mindless sentiment and
drive. In Madison's words, "The people must arm themselves of the
power which knowledge gives." So I set my mind to learning from
these "old time men."
Now I am honored to be one of those
professors who lets these men speak for themselves and to work at a
place that Benjamin Rush might have called a "republican
seminary"--the John M. Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs at
Ashland University. Here, I teach mainly native Americans--that is,
the sons and daughters of you who were born in this great
country.
What I do with these American natives
is to remind them of the axioms of a free society. I start with a
simple thing about their country and themselves. I tell them that
they are among the fortunate of the earth, among the blessed of all
times and places. I tell them not only that their country is the
most powerful and the most prosperous nation on earth, but also
that it is the freest and the most just. Then I tell them how and
why this is so. I teach the principles from which these blessings
of liberty flow. I invite them to consider whether they can have
any greater honor than to pass this great inheritance of freedom
undiminished to their children and their grandchildren. Then we
talk for a few years about how they might accomplish this.
But the irony of my situation is not
lost on me. How did this Hungarian immigrant become a teacher of
American things to native-born Americans?
Revolution and
Escape
I came to this country on Christmas
Eve, 1956--one day after my tenth birthday. The revolution had
begun exactly two months prior to our arrival. The Soviets moved in
and crushed the Hungarian revolutionaries on November 4. My father
told my mother that he had had enough. He had wanted to leave the
country for years, but because of all the ties to kith and kin, he
was persuaded to resist the temptation.
But the coming of the revolution had
stirred up new hope in my father--who had suffered first under Nazi
and then under Communist oppression. He had witnessed the
brutalization and near starvation of his own father in a Communist
gulag for the high crime of having had a small American flag in his
possession. The doom of this revolution was too much to bear. He
told my mother it was time to get serious about leaving.
Hesitant at first, for all the usual
and expected reasons, she knew in her heart that he was right. But
she needed support in this decision, and perhaps because she could
not discuss it with the elder members of our family for fear of
putting them in danger, she told my father that she would go only
if the children agreed. So my mother approached me and told me that
my father was thinking of leaving the country. She asked if I would
be willing to go with him. My mother claims--though I don't
remember saying this--that I responded to her question by saying,
"With my father I am willing to go to hell."
Like the statement from Mr. Nadas
above, there is something that appeals to one's emotions in that
response. I am tempted, still, to like it. But upon reflection, one
sees in my response an imperfection very similar to the
imperfection of Mr. Nadas's formulation. But I was young. I had not
quite developed a sense of right and of wrong that went much beyond
familial piety. Perhaps I was ready to be swept up by a "romantic
frenzy," and I might have been, had it not been for the natural
courage and good sense of my father. For my father informed me that
our destination was not "hell"--we were already there--but
someplace rather its opposite: America.
I do remember asking him this next
question because his answer, in reflecting something greater than
familial piety, turned out to be one of those pithy and moving
moments that stays in your mind, not only because it is a good
memory, but also because it shapes you and moves you through life
in a certain direction as opposed to another one. I asked him, "Why
are we going to America?" Dad answered, "Because, son, we were born
Americans, but in the wrong place."
Born Americans but in the wrong
place? When my father said these words, they settled our minds
and calmed our hearts. I don't claim that we understood the full
import of his words--indeed, I've spent the better part of the last
50 years working to more fully understand them. But the good sense
of his pronouncement had a jolting effect, and if we didn't grasp
all the implications and permutations of this very American
concept, we certainly knew that it wasn't completely insane. We
sensed that he was on to something.
Of course, we knew something about
America in that vague way that Europeans then did--and probably
still do. Although today there is much more distraction with the
attention given to mass media and popular culture, in those days it
was not uncommon for schoolchildren of my age to have read, as I
recently had done, The Last of the Mohicans, Uncle Tom's
Cabin, Tom Sawyer, and Huckleberry Finn.
Everybody read those books, and they probably still do read them in
many places around the world--except, of course, in American high
schools and colleges.
My father was on to something deeper
than these vague and imprecise notions we all had about America.
Everyone understood America to be a free and a good place where one
might prosper unmolested. But in saying that we were "born
Americans but in the wrong place," Dad, in his way, was saying that
he understood America to be both a place and an idea at the same
time. It was a place that would embrace us if we could prove that
we shared in the idea.
We meant to prove it. We could not so
express it at the time, but we meant to show that we were, in
Lincoln's words, "blood of the blood, and flesh of the flesh" of
all true Americans because "the father of all moral principle" in
us was the same as that of those "old time men" who brought forth
this fine nation dedicated to the proposition that "all men are
created equal." We had never heard these ideas so expressed, but
that did not matter. We knew that our dignity as human beings
demanded that our government respect us accordingly. We knew that a
government that failed to do this was no government at all, but
tyranny.
And so, we left Hungary.
Our escape was not without its drama.
Such escapes were rarely simple matters--else they would not be
called "escapes." But my father was an enterprising and a clever
man. He plotted a way for us to go that would attract the least
amount of suspicion, and he knew the countryside along the Austrian
border. We could not tell anyone--least of all our remaining
family--that we were leaving. Though this was certainly the best
policy for their safety and ours, it caused us some anguish, for we
knew not whether we would survive our attempt at escape, let alone
whether we would ever see them again. We had to hope that we would
survive and to assume that we would not see the rest of our family
again.
We took almost nothing with us. My
mother had a little satchel with some jewelry and mementos. My
sister, who was then four, and I each carried a little doll. My
father had some U.S. currency that took him a lifetime to squirrel
away. It was about $17 in single dollar bills. We boarded a train
headed for a town on the Austrian border. No one spoke on the
train, for we all knew that most of the people aboard were engaged
in the same endeavor. My father shook his head as he saw a large
number of these folks exit the train at a particular stop. He knew
that they would not succeed if they took that route. He was
right.
When we exited the train and began
walking, it became clear after a while that although this was the
road less traveled, it was still pretty seriously traveled. Before
long, we had amassed a group of some 50 people as we picked up
stragglers along the way. My father became a kind of de
facto leader of this group, as he had grown up around here and
played in these fields as a child. I remember picking up small
children crying over the dead bodies of their parents, shot by
Soviets. But we had to be very careful in doing this. It was a
well-known Soviet trick to use a crying child as a trap.
It was nearly daylight when, after
crossing a little bridge, we heard people speaking German. We had
done it. We were in Austria. I remember being amazed, as a typical
little boy, by watching the Austrian guards approach our group,
saying something I couldn't understand, and then seeing the members
of our group unload an arsenal of every imaginable kind of weapon.
That was, to my young mind, one of the most fascinating things
about our journey. I could not fathom the fear that had caused
these men to come so prepared.
Some 200,000 Hungarians left Hungary in
the aftermath of 1956. Nearly a quarter of these would also decide
to come, if not immediately, then eventually, to the United States.
Who knows how many more wished to come but could not find a
sponsor?
The story of our amazing good luck in
finding our sponsor involves a bit of serendipity that sounds
almost contrived as a bit of bad fiction writing. As we recuperated
from our journey in a camp outside of Nickelsdorf, Austria,
representatives from different embassies would meet with the
refugees and try to persuade us to come to their country, depending
upon the refugee's occupation, their needs, and so on.
Since "Schramm" is a German name, the
man from the German embassy informed my father, we would be
considered Volksdeutschen in Germany, and so we should
consider moving there. He told my father all about the great
generosity of their welfare system: We would have an apartment, a
car, and a guaranteed monthly income. We had virtually nothing,
mind you, but my father responded with, "No, thank you, I'm not a
German."
He waited for the man from the American
embassy to speak with us. Of course, we had to speak to him through
an interpreter, but we finally came to understand that getting to
America was not as simple as stating a desire to come. There was a
limit on how many people they could take, and there was a very
large number of people vying for those spots. It would be very
good, the man informed us, if we had a relative in the United
States. That would help us get to America faster. Of course, we had
none. "Well, even a friend might be helpful if he would sponsor
you. Do you know anyone in America?"
My father started to say "no," but my
mother stopped him. She ran back to her satchel and pulled out a
rumpled business card. She put it in front of my father. "Oh!" said
my father--surprised not only by the memory that it inspired but by
my mother's keen foresight in both saving the card and bringing it
with her on this journey.
The card, barely legible after all
these years, said "Dr. Joseph Moser, DDS, Hermosa Beach,
California." The man from the embassy is waiting patiently, but he
does not understand. "What does this mean?" he asked my father. "I
do know someone in America," my father explained. "I know this
man." Then he explained the following story to the American
ambassador.
In 1946, before I was born but while I
was on the way, my father was newly married and post-war Europe was
economically devastated. Hungary was no exception to this rule, but
my father was an entrepreneurial character, and so he was able to
fashion a rude sort of vehicle out of four wheels, an engine, and a
flat bed--in other words, random parts cast off from military
vehicles. He would use this vehicle to scavenge the countryside for
things to sell or trade. This is one way we existed for a few years
after the war.
Actual cars were almost never seen on
the roads in those days, so when Dad came across a broken-down
Volkswagen off to the side of one road--good will and
neighborliness were only two reasons to stop; curiosity compelled
it--it turned out that the man with the vehicle was an American
G.I., now on leave and touring Europe. He had been born in Hungary
and was taking advantage of an opportunity to see it again, but the
car had broken down, and he could not fix it. Dad could, and so he
did.
Naturally, the man wanted to give Dad
some money. Dad refused the offer and said it had been his pleasure
to help. Of course, in reality, the money would have been a huge
help to him, but something made him refuse it. So the man instead
handed him his business card and said to my father, "Well, you've
been very kind with your time and effort, so here's my business
card. If you ever need anything," he said with real meaning, "give
me a call." Of course, that was Dr. Moser. Ten years later, Dad
needed something.
The man from the embassy took the card
and looked skeptically at my father. "Have you had any contact with
this man in the intervening years?" he asked. My father reported
that there had been no contact between them. Still, he took the
card and went away. Three or four days later, he returned with good
news. Dr. Moser remembered the encounter with my father; he said he
would be happy to sponsor us.
Americans Come
Home
Thus it was that my family and I
arrived in New York on Christmas Eve, 1956. We moved to Camp
Kilmer, New Jersey, on Christmas morning to be processed, and by
January 5, 1957, which happened to be my father's birthday, we
arrived in Hermosa Beach, California, to meet with Dr. Joseph
Moser, DDS. Christmas and birthdays were all overshadowed by this
tremendous gift: the chance to start our new life in freedom.
We started out in a small beach house
the Mosers helped to secure for us. The shock of our new environs
was jolting at first. In our typical Hungarian arrogance, we had
scoffed at cornflakes in Camp Kilmer--Hungarians feed such things
to pigs--and we assumed that this house we were now inhabiting was
some kind of vacation beach shack. It was, in fact, a perfectly
nice home, but my point is that in all the ordinary ways, we were
entirely out of our element. We had much to learn about this
country.
Dad, of course, went to work
immediately. We had to make certain promises upon entering the
country and had to prove that we would not become a burden on the
American taxpayers. So Dad began moving and lifting heavy things
for the Hermosa Beach Daily Breeze newspaper. My mother
worked cleaning houses. Within a couple of years, they had saved
enough money to go into business for themselves.
Of course, none of us spoke any English
right away. In addition, my parents had no formal higher education
or specific job training upon which they could draw in America. But
Mom could certainly cook, and so, together, Mom and Dad looked
around and said, "These Americans are nice enough people, but they
can't cook. Why don't we cook for them?"
And so it was that Schramm's Hungarian
Restaurant was born with $1,500 of hard-earned savings and another
$1,500 loaned by some trusting American banker. It was a small
place on Pico Boulevard in Los Angeles. I was about 12 and my
sister was six when we opened it. I say "we" because, as is typical
in such situations, we all worked there. My English and writing
were the best among us, so I was assigned to type the menus as well
as wash dishes, wait tables, and so on. We prospered, and in a few
short years, we were able to move into a larger location in Studio
City.
I mentioned that it was my
responsibility to type the menus. We would change them every week
or so, depending upon which foods and dishes were available. From
the beginning, the first and most popular dish was stuffed cabbage.
It was very good, very easy to make, and people loved it, so it was
a regular item on the menu.
Something like three or four years
after we opened the first restaurant, one of our regular customers
approached me and said, "Peter, I've been meaning to tell you this
for a while because I know you're typing the menus." "Vat eez eet?"
I demanded, sensing that I was about to be corrected and, possibly,
deeply embarrassed about something I had done. "Well, Peter, you've
been spelling 'stuffed cabbage' wrong." "Vat do szyoo mean?" I
asked in heavily accented English. "Peter, you've been typing
'stuffed garbage' all these years. I think it's time you knew
it."
Of course, I was just as embarrassed as
could be. My mother was mortified. But this is how we learned: in
bits and pieces, by trial and error. There was no "bilingual"
education in the schools, so it was up to me to learn English as I
could. There was a very kind little red-headed boy named Jeffrey in
my first American classroom, who would take me to the back of the
room and read with me. He would point to the words, and I would
read them. He would correct me. I would repeat it again until I got
it right. Eventually, after nine months of this painful exercise, I
began to understand.
Another boy in that first fifth grade
class--and I swear it is true that his name was "Butch"--used to
beat me up every day. This was probably because I was wearing
lederhosen until a kind woman from our neighborhood explained to my
skeptical--and somewhat appalled--mother that it was more customary
for American children to wear blue jeans and such to school. Butch
beat me up every day until the last day of school that year, when I
was finally able to pin him down and make him say "Uncle."
I suppose today some well-meaning
administrator might enroll Butch and my classmates in a sensitivity
training class, but I think this baptism by fire, painful as it
was, was more effective and did me and my classmates more good.
After I won that final fight, my classmates all cheered and
rewarded me with a baseball book that everyone, including Butch,
proudly and generously signed.
Mishaps and memorable misadventures
were my primary way of learning about America. One amusing example
happened on the third or fourth day after we arrived in Hermosa
Beach, when I stole a Bible. I still have it. I was walking down a
street, and there was some kind of a garage sale in progress. I
didn't know about such things in Hungary, so I assumed that the
people were throwing the things away. I saw the Bible lying there,
immediately recognized what it was, and--though I couldn't read it
yet--I thought it a shame to see it thrown out, and so I took
it.
So off I went with my new Bible, and
later that evening there was a knock at the door. Mrs. Moser had to
be summoned to interpret for us. This little boy and his parents
were there to inform my parents that I had stolen the Bible. They
were not worried about the Bible so much as indignant about my
apparent ignorance of the commandment against stealing. When
finally it was all explained, I was told to keep the Bible, and
their son became my first American friend and soon taught me to
swim in the Pacific Ocean.
In short, there was no systematic plan
for our assimilation as Americans, but in these many small and
innumerable ways, we did assimilate. As an immigrant to your
country, I must say that I find the concern that some people have
for these trivial kinds of assimilation to be very odd. These small
things that, upon our first meeting, make us uncomfortable in one
another's presence for one reason or another have a way of working
themselves out--or at least they used to--without much
interference.
On the whole, Americans tend to be
among the most kind and generous people on earth. For every Butch
there are a thousand Jeffreys. But when it comes to the important
and necessary kind of assimilation--that is, teaching immigrants
about the history and greatness of your country--there the public
schools, the universities, the government fall flat. There is very
little concern, unfortunately, for that kind of lack of
assimilation.
Becoming American
After fifth grade, I attended American
schools and a four-year university. I was never required to read
any kind of founding document in any of them. I probably read some
kind of textbook account of American history, but nothing worthy of
the subject. Though I was always an avid reader and had a general
interest in history, nothing I learned about American history in
school had any effect on me; there was no poetry in it, nothing to
inspire appropriate awe or respect.
The closest thing I got by way of an
education in high school was in an English class where a harsh
spinster of a teacher insisted that we memorize 40 lines from
Shakespeare. She was a serious person, and though we made fun of
her behind her back, I actually liked her and wanted to please her.
Unimaginatively, perhaps, I chose Hamlet's famous "To be or not to
be" soliloquy. In order to master it, I would pace up and down in
my bedroom reading aloud.
At first I only had a sense of the
rhythm and the music of the language. I liked it, but I really had
no idea what it meant. At some point, however, after repeatedly
reading it aloud, it hit me. I realized that I finally understood
what Shakespeare was saying, and, more than that, I realized that I
finally had some real grasp of the English language. Until that
moment, I was living in English but dreaming in Hungarian. After
that moment, I never had a dream in anything other than
English.
This modest beginning of an education,
though certainly very good for me, still left me without much
curiosity about the nature of the regime to which I had emigrated.
I still had no concept of the greatness of America or why, beyond
what my Dad told me and the contrast with tyranny that I had
witnessed, I should love it. I knew we were free here, but I had no
idea about how rare, how difficult, and how remarkable that freedom
was.
My experience at a California state
university did not do much to enlighten me. I started to ask
questions and to inquire about American history, but the professors
would denigrate it as a study in hypocrisy. Lincoln, of course, was
dismissed as a racist. I thought that was somehow odd. I didn't
know much about American history, but I knew that Lincoln was
certainly, in all the ordinary ways, known to be a very important
person in American and, indeed, in world history. Everybody has
always known this, including Leo Tolstoy, and here's my professor,
at an American state university in California, dismissing all of
this out of hand.
It was immediately after that class
that I went down and changed my major from history to political
science. I later had to change it back to history because another
professor--this time in political science--told the class that
anyone who believed in God should immediately leave his class. I
and another woman were the only ones who did this, but we got up
and left.
So I graduated with a degree in history
but focused on European history in order to avoid studying this
so-called American hypocrisy. I didn't want to study these
Americans who talked big about rights and justice and duty and
obligation and constitutional government but who were in fact
hypocrites who established slavery and then couldn't end it.
So I studied tyranny. I studied Louis
XIV and Stalin and Hitler. I figured it just made sense to take
things in their pure form without the hypocrisy, and it was rather
fun if one likes counting bodies and wars. So that's what I did: I
counted the bodies of the people that tyrants from Genghis Khan to
Stalin killed. I talked about why they were killed, and then I
counted more bodies. I was a typical history student, and all
because of that one professor who misled me.
Fortunately, I was still interested in
politics. It was the '60s, so I guess everyone was interested in
politics. I walked precincts for Goldwater in '64 and started
reading National Review. There was this organization called
the Intercollegiate Society of Individualists, now the
Intercollegiate Studies Institute, or ISI, that sponsored week-long
summer institutes. This group was appealing to me because I
certainly was not a Communist. I would go to these seminars, and I
would meet 40 or 50 really bright students from around the country,
and we would talk about things in a way that seemed more
intelligent and more intellectually and morally enlivened than the
conversations of most of my colleagues at the state college. And
they went deeper and further than my conservative friends in the
political world, looking back and beyond the immediate battles at
hand.
As a result of these seminars, I came
upon some very interesting people--Harry Jaffa, Martin Diamond,
Bill Allen--all associated with Claremont Men's College, now
Claremont McKenna College. I really had no idea of what I was doing
at this point in my life. I only knew that I had stumbled upon
something very interesting and that I wanted to know everything I
could about it.
I had so many credits at the state
school that I was more or less forced into graduation. I panicked
because I thought this meant that I had to stop studying and
learning. I had no idea about graduate school, so being forced into
graduation nearly devastated me. Then Bill Allen suggested I enroll
at Claremont Graduate School, and I did. I was already spending all
my time over there, so it was a natural fit.
And so I began, in earnest, the study I
continue with my own students today: the study of the nature and
purpose of American constitutional government and the story of its
creation and birth. Put another way, as my Dad once put it, I study
what it means to be born American.
Teaching Americans
I know this is a wonderful country for
all kinds of reasons, not the least of which is that I now get paid
to think and talk and write and teach about these deeply
interesting things. The students I teach are usually native people:
Americans who happen to have been born in the right place, probably
the greatest country ever--meaning the biggest, the strongest, and
the most significant country, but even more interestingly, the
freest. This is the country that is the most self-consciously free,
the one that really talks about itself in wonderful philosophical
terms of justice, of rights, of individual liberty and dignity and
equality, and limited self-government.
I teach my students that this is a
unique thing. If you as an American, regardless of your political
opinions, left or right, don't understand that uniqueness or are,
perhaps, even offended or embarrassed by it, as some on both the
left and--I regret to say--the right are, then I think you're
making a very bad mistake, very much like the one I made in college
when I gave up studying American history. Take it up again or
discover it for the first time--but do it on its own terms.
This is a novus ordo seclorum--a
new order for the ages, and because everyone has always understood
that, it has also offended nearly everyone. When you stand up and
you say that an ordinary John Smith--a farmer or a mechanic or a
man his "betters" might have called a peasant dog--can govern
himself with as much ease as a George III and with as much right,
that offends the George IIIs and the would-be George IIIs of this
world. It offends all the self-appointed aristocrats who think
something flowing in their veins or beating about in their brains
gives them the right to govern themselves and everybody
else--without, of course, the consent of the governed.
This country isn't really just a
regime. It's the still-burning spark of a new world. Our fathers
then, and all of us now, have stood up in a manly way and said to
all the world that we can govern ourselves, and we are doing it,
despite the chaos around us; despite the fury of elections, the
horrors of war, and the grind of sometimes apparent stupidity.
The fact of the matter is that we've
done it all and done it in an extraordinarily good way. We have to
remind ourselves of what we are at our best. More important, we
have to remind our children of that, because Hungarians and Germans
may be born, but Americans are not. Nobody is really born an
American. You have to be made into an American.
In a certain way, you're born by nature
to be an American--in a kind of teleological way, if you like, as
an end or purpose. But for this purpose to be fulfilled, human
interference has to be involved. You have to teach a young person,
this would-be American citizen, what are the things worth fighting
for? What are things that might be worth dying for? And why? This
is a country worth loving not only because it is your own country,
but because it is good.
Lincoln might be right. America might
be "the last best hope" for freedom on this earth. To neglect her
is to allow the spark of this new order of the ages to be
extinguished. And that, I submit, we have no right to do.
Peter W. Schramm, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the John
M. Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs and a Professor of Political
Science at Ashland University. Previously, he served as Director of
the Center for International Education in the United States
Department of Education during the Reagan Administration and as
President of the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship
and Political Philosophy in Claremont, California. Dr. Schramm
earned his Ph.D. in government from the Claremont Graduate School
in 1981 and in 2006 was awarded the Salvatori Prize in American
Citizenship by The Heritage Foundation for his work in teaching the
principles of the American Founding.
This essay was published August 3, 2007.