Two Roads Diverged    

By Harry T. Cook 

1/25/13

Harry T. Cook

Two roads diverged are the first three words of Robert Frost's poem "The Road Not Taken." The last 14 are I took the one less traveled by, / And that has made all the difference.

I know Archibald MacLeish told us that "a poem should not mean but be." However, I shall say what I think this poem suggests about the future of America. It suggests that we as a nation have come to a fork in the road, which, of course, the inimitable Yogi Berra would have us take.

So which way?

We can take the direction advocated by President Obama in his recent inaugural address. Said he:

+A great nation must care for the vulnerable, and protect its people from life's worst hazards and misfortune.

+Our country cannot succeed when a shrinking few do very well and a growing many barely make it.

+Every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity.

There was more, but the gist of it is obvious. Barack Obama wants to lead the nation that twice elected him to its highest office down the road Franklin Delano Roosevelt mapped out 80 years ago. President Obama knows that some of the rot that undermined our national life in the early 1930s is creeping back into our social and economic structure and that only government at its best can eradicate it.

Many a commentator has called the President's second inaugural "liberal." I suppose that means Ronald Reagan's words from his first inaugural address -- Government is not a solution to our problem. Government is the problem -- are to be considered "conservative." We see how well that has worked. Reagan was speaking of regulations that had been put in place by government of, by and for the people to protect them from, among other things, risky bank procedures that some 20 years after he left office damned near brought the nation's economy to ruin.

So we stand at the divergence of two roads -- one less traveled by over the past three decades since Reagan denounced the efficacy of the government of which he had labored so long and so hard to lead. Damnedest thing.

Not three days after President Obama made clear his intent to take the other road that, in Frost's words, wanted wear, the governor of Kansas inaugurated a new regime by announcing the gradual elimination of the state's income tax, which would take nearly $1 billion out of the state's budget in the coming fiscal year. To help reclaim some of that revenue, Gov. Brownback would eliminate the deduction for mortgage interest (Screw the middle class!) and increase the sales tax (Screw the poor!).

And why? To make the state more business-friendly so that opportunities for profits and stock values could be assured. That will sound familiar to Michigan residents whose governor and a cooperative legislature recently increased taxes of pensioners while dramatically reducing them for corporations to make the state more accommodating of business. As the fellow said, "The business of America is business."

Certainly it is. But the business of America is also to take care of its poor, its ill-educated, ill-fed, ill-clad and homeless -- many of whom, mired in one or more of those conditions, are there through no fault of their own. Reagan used to poke fun at "welfare queens." Maybe his spirit is now justifiably tormented in the way that Charles Dickens' ghosts of times past were tormented as they saw from the other side the havoc their greed had wrought on the lives of the poor in their own day. Mankind was my business, Jacob Marley cried when it was too late to make it so.

President Obama has told us that it is not too late for us to make it so. He has charted a way in the accumulated political undergrowth of more than three decades through which the nation can find its way again to the road that, in Frost's words, has made all the difference. It will remain for America to walk down it and leave the other one untaken.

That's what the man said, viz. that we have to do it together. He certainly can't do it by himself, and he can only cajole or shame Congress into following him. We so-called ordinary Americans have got to figure out ways and means to make that happen. That's our public vocation at least for the next four years.

Hail to the Chief!

re essay of 1/17/13 Guns in America        

Susan Hibbins Carroll, Pleasant Ridge, MI:

Wonderful essays. But I don't want the U.S. to go the way of Guatemala. Our son went there with a youth camp that promotes world peace (!) and cultural understanding, and they naturally/automatically had an armed guard at the camp entrance (as they had at most stores and other public places). Sounds like what the NRA is proposing. I can't imagine living that way!

Dick Schrader, Jacksonville, FL:

The National Rifle Association may not be in compliance with the IRS Code. Specifically, the 501 (C)(3) organizations that are tax-exempt are forbidden to engage in politics and have to limit their lobbying to a nonpartisan approach. It would seem that the IRS could pull the NRA's tax-exempt status and go after the organization for back taxes, and it members who took their dues to the NRA as a charitable deduction. Of course, the statue of limitations would apply.

Nicholas Molinari, Brick, NJ:

On behalf of voiceless victims of gun violence numbering in the hundreds of thousands, I appeal to the hearts of the actual members of the NRA. You are reasonable and responsible citizens who acknowledge that gun massacres are out of hand, regrettably related to ease of access to military-style weapons and massive magazines by anybody and everybody. You also realize that rational decisions are called for, if we (you and all Americans) can lay claim to being a civilized society. Please voice your opposition to your leadership's intractable, juvenile and repulsive stance. They blindly serve as shills for the gun and ammunition manufacturers, camouflaged as guardians of the Second Amendment that will not be harmed by restricting "universal carry of weapons of mass destruction." Pray it never happen, but it seems inevitable that a disgruntled member will show up fully armed at a future NRA convention and produce another massacre!

Carol Daniels, Ft. Myers, FL:

As I read the essays on guns and love, I began thinking about the Wild West of song and story, and of course, the venerable old movies and TV shows of the pre-Vietnam years. And John Wayne, Gary Cooper, Clint Eastwood and so many others loom large when I remember them. The west of the 19th century was wild, but those movies were about taming bits of it so that the trails, and then railroads and land claims would be moderately safe. There was a purpose to the storylines. The last "shoot-em-up" I saw, semi-voluntarily, was a "Rambo" shown on a coast-to-coast flight in the '70s. I couldn't believe the levels of gratuitous and dramatic violence that had crept in. I do believe that the film industry, in its development, is a metaphor for a whole series of culture issues. Technology develops and allows more vivid filming. Gary Cooper didn't curse, but the current actors do. And we get involved in the storyline and forget it is just that -- a story. We know the power of stories. We use it well in books and sermons and around a campfire. So why are we surprised when the power of the "good story" morphs into video game stories that allow mayhem to reign? And why are we surprised to have the action turn real and deadly in Colorado? And a troubled person on the cusp of adulthood grabs guns from his home because they are so easily available. Have we become so inured to all this that we will not say no to excess access to murder machines in the process of defending our duck and deer rifles? Have we become so polarized that "they" have morphed into "the enemy" instead of simply the other guy. 

Don Miller, Stevenson, WA:

Unending cliffhangers were exciting entertainment for Saturday matinees at the old movie house, but today they portend destruction for a nation at war with itself. America has dealt with divisive issues before, with slavery and other forms of inequality topping the list. In the past, however, there has always been an imperfect but dependable moral compass to hector the nation into a humanitarian solution. That was the Protestant witness, manifesting itself through what were known as the mainline denominations, reinforced by reform-minded Jews, Unitarians and Quakers. They were not always right (think Prohibition), but their efforts were sincere and progressive. Where are they now? Since the mid-1960s American Protestantism and its allies have been in accelerating decline, no longer up to intervention in the crises which now threaten to reduce the United States to another Great Britain, a former world power with only bittersweet memories of past glories and a failed attempt at democracy. Millions of Americans have deserted their historic faiths to embrace sects and movements that, often in Jesus' name, serve up a witches' brew of greed, paranoia and unmitigated bigotry. Our politicians, like our corporate moguls, behave like a mob of ravenous vultures, fighting over the few remaining pieces of rotting carrion. If only they can amass enough cash, they reason, they can wait out the impending global carnage in a castle within a gated community on some distant island -- until the air conditioning fails or hungry pirates overwhelm their security systems. The Christian religion has had its ups and downs over the centuries, and it is certainly deep into one of its downs. If you are a practicing Protestant, and if your minister is not now regularly mounting his pulpit to condemn an American plutocracy which suborns our officials and ignores the poor, or the criminalization of women by hypocritical males, or a macho gun lobby which cares more about protecting their own misconstruction of the Second Amendment than protecting the lives of innocent children, then it is time you spoke up. That equivocating minister of yours is neither a pastor nor a prophet. He or she is a dispirited Pharisee who has given up on the gospel. Tell him so on your way out of church this Sunday. You might also casually mention that he has been putting on some weight.

John W. Unger, Bellaire, MI:

I actually own a few guns, but I haven't seen them in years and I wouldn't know where to look to find them. Years ago I had a client who threatened me and I thought it prudent to obtain a permit to carry. The first day, I took it to the office, and at the end of the day took it home. The second day I left for work and began to laugh. I realized that I left home at about the same time, took the same road, and generally exposed my vulnerability every single day. In other words, if someone really wanted me dead, and was a reasonably good marksman, I was dead. I put the gun in my desk where it stayed until I retired. I think perhaps the issue of gun control is best left to the membership of the NRA. It would go like this: No one can possess a firearm unless licensed by the NRA. If a gun mishap occurs, the victim can sue the NRA membership, jointly and severally, (no corporate shield here). The dangerous, omnipotent "government" would simply demur. If the NRA folks had to assume responsibility for the guns they so revere, would their position change? Hmmm.

D.A Belrose, Independence, MO:

First, let me thank you for your insightful essays, your latest book and lectionary helps. (Mind you, it takes little effort to praise what one agrees with). My response to 1/17/13 Essay, "Guns in America" and the adjoining essays are a resounding, AMEN!! As a retired executive minister and (Canadian) permanent resident of the U.S. (for the past 19 years) I have frequently been reticent to criticize my host country.

Kenyan Bixby, Troy, MI:

Nice words, too bad too few are listening. Just saw a poll (Yahoo) where 59% of 500,000+ responders said Obama imposed too many restrictions on guns. Years ago, on the TV show "West Wing," a character said the way to stop the NRA was to have several million advocates of gun control join the NRA and then vote to put them out of business. Nice idea, except I would guess a "new NRA" would be created the next day. The insanity in this country is beyond my comprehension, whether it's guns, the fiscal cliff (damn the media for their cutesy labels), or the general apathy to peace and social and economic justice.

Fred Fenton, Concord, CA:

For me, what is missing in the national discussion of gun violence is racism. Thousands upon thousands of children in America are killed with guns. Most of them are black and brown kids. The media ignores the mounting tragedy. But when a group of white children, or even one white child is shot in a community, it is front-page news.

Charles White, Plymouth, MI: