If you do something wrong, isn't it common decency to apologize and seek to address the wrong done to the other? Well, unfortunately, that rule doesn't seem to apply when it comes to the U.S. government. For the full article, click on the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/29/washington/29rendition.html?th&emc=th
Here's an example of what happens when moral superiority is determined by the ability to use force. A man, who has been universally acknowledged as being wrongfully imprisoned, declares he was not only taken from his family but tortured and, when it was determined that he wasn't who it was supposed, left to return home by his own means. Deplorable does not begin to describe the decadence in morality that this shows our government capable of lowering itself to.
What makes it worse is that when the man wishes to simply be apologized to, the government claims that to do so would undermine national security. As pointed out in the article, how is it a matter of national security to acknowledge and compensate the illegitimate incarceration of this man?
But see, this is how the administration thinks. National security is synonymous with their moral superiority. To question one is to question the other. This explains the often repeated phrase that in times of war, the president is not to be questioned, because to do so undermines the nations ability to wage war. For those who don't see the ridiculousness here, let me tell an analogy. Take, for instance, a basketball player who is playing badly and who then gets criticized to fix his game or let someone else do it. Would it not be weird to hear the player tell you that criticizing him detracts from his ability to play the game? Of course it would. Criticism is not an obstruction, it is an attempt to understand more fully what is going wrong and seek to address the problems. Criticism is only ever dismissed out of hand when the person or party under question believes that they are incapable of being wrong.
And there it is. Anybody remember the debates between George W. Bush and John Kerry, when the question was asked of Bush as to whether he had ever made mistakes? Remember his answer? That's right, he couldn't think of any. Do you know what another example of a government leader incapable of admitting he makes mistakes? Hitler. The ideologies are patently parallel and with similar results, i.e. the death and destruction of entire nations.
Parents, teachers and pastors talk about the moral turpitude of this nation, but if people are to learn by example, perhaps our leaders should hold themselves to a higher standard. But then again, since Bush declares "God" to be on his side, perhaps his morality is the same as the Deity, right because he says so and has the force to back it up.
And yes, that's called being a bully. And what do bullies do? Precisely what happened to the man from Germany.
Every one of your relationships to man and to nature must be a definite expression of your real, individual life corresponding to the object of your will. -Erich Fromm