John
Adams:
Mark me, Franklin... if we give in on this issue, posterity will
never forgive us.
Dr.
Benjamin Franklin:
That's probably true, but we won't hear a thing, we'll be long gone.
-1776
Lately,
I've been hearing the phrase “the wrong side of history.” Often
it's in the context of “Politician X is on the wrong side of
history” or “the people who voted for Y are on the wrong side of
history.” I find this a very curious saying 1) for its rhetorical
power and 2) for its inanity
Announcing
that history is on your side is a popular device. It makes your
point sound epic, beyond the scope of the here and now. Ronald
Reagan famously said that “freedom and democracy will leave Marxism
and Leninism on the ash heap of history.” This is ironic, since
Marxist revolutionary Leon Trotsky said of his enemies that they go
where they “belong from now on – in the dustbin of history.”
Apparently history needs a large janitorial staff to wipe up all the
dust and ash.
And
there is a lot of dust and ash and obfuscation. When I invoke
history I touch on the entire story of mankind. Human history is a
story. And in every good story there are heroes and villains. Not
everything is black and white, but we know who we root for in a good
story. And history is the great story of us and how we got to this
moment. When I talk about history's wrong side, I invoke the
powerful images of all those we have deemed as universal sinners, so
much so that their names are maledictions: Benedict Arnold, Hitler,
Judas, Attila, Torquemada, John Wilkes Booth, etc. These were men
who made horrible choices and brought either great evil to the world
or intended to bring greater evils than they were able to accomplish.
And sadly, there were those who attended them and followed them.
They too have their names linked to their evil. They are the Samuel
Mudds. This is the clear, dramatic meaning of what it is to be on
the wrong side of history.
But
when I invoke history into a present issue, I not only look to the
past but also to the future. The vast expanse of humanity's
unwritten pages lay naked before us. History has always turned on
the decisions of those in the present. Do I want those in the years
that follow to look back on this present moment and pinpoint the
choice I made that put me on the wrong side of the our future heroes?
I am called upon to think of the generations hence that will either
look on me as one of the brave pioneers or the callow antagonists of
my age.
Calling
on us to keep history in mind is a powerful way to stir the hearts of
men.
And
it is also total crap.
First
of all, a lot of our judgments of those in the past are based not
only on data, but our own cultural circumstances. Now I am not
saying that you cannot look back in history and make judgments. What
I'm saying is that the judgments we do make are often colored by our
present culture. While this may be an obvious point, I would look to
a historical event like the Crusades.
The
popularity of the Crusades goes in and out of fashion. Read the
works of those a hundred years ago like Beloc or Chesterton and the
Crusades were the great campaign to save Western Civilization. Read
today, some would argue that the Crusades were a genocidal campaign
aimed to annihilate non-white culture. Tancred and Pope Urban were
on the right side of history 100 years ago, but they are on the wrong
side now. They didn't change their minds. They're dead. But
society changed. And we somehow assume that our current culture or
something like it will view history the same way.
Second,
what really is the appeal to not being on the wrong side of history
but an ad
ignominium.
This is the logical fallacy that uses an appeal to shame in the
place of an argument. We are meant to feel shame at the thought of
how the history books of the future will treat us because of our
behavior. That sounds epic and momentous. But what that all really
boils down to is: “NOOOOO! THEY'RE ALL GONNA LAUGH AT YOU!
THEY'RE ALL GONNA LAUGH AT YOU!” People, most of whom you haven't
even met nor will ever meet, in the future might form a negative
opinion about you and this is suppose to determine the rightness or
wrongness of your actions? Take out the part about the people being
from the future and can use the exact same argument for giving in to
current public opinion. “Don't vote for X because most people
don't are against it.” Why do we assume more wisdom of the future
people rather than the ones who are with us here and now? This only
makes sense if we know that the people to come will be our betters.
But this leads to my third and final point.
No
man knows the future.
The
people who come after us could be our moral superiors and judge our
actions with a keener eye. Or they could moral degenerates who marry
their sex robots (I know that people in the present are working on
them now, so I assume they will have those in future). The point is
that we don't know. We have no idea what will happen to us in the
next 24 hours, let alone the amorphous “future history.” We do
the best with what we have, but what we do not have is a crystal ball
to give us a roadmap to progress. I do not know if my vote for or
against candidate X or issue Y will put me on the right or wrong side
of history. Only God knows.
And
I mean that last part literally. The only One Who knows the future
is the One Who is already there. God is at the beginning, the
middle, and the end of history. He reveals to us the little that we
know of what is to come. And we believe Him because He is in the
future, looking at it now. He is the only rational source for
grounding any beliefs about the future.
But
notice that God does not gear us towards looking to our future days
as much as He has us look at our present. Someone once asked Blessed
Mother Teresa of Calcutta if she knew she would be as successful as
she was in her ministry because God was on her side. She said, “God
doesn't call us to be successful; He calls us to be faithful.”
Success or failure is ultimately not in my hands. The Apostles did
not concern themselves with whether or not they were on the wrong
side of history. They didn't want to be on the wrong side of God.
God has reached into the human experience and given us a path of how
to live faithfully. We must live life here and now according to His
commandments and His example of love on the cross. We must live our
lives for God, who is the author of the great story of human life.
And
in the end, we do not want to be on the wrong side of His Story.
At least the people of the future whom you refer to as degenerates are actually marrying their mechanical helpmates.
ReplyDeleteUnless they are prevented from doing so by the close-minded who refuse to recognize human-cyborg relations.
ReplyDeleteYour response indicates the type of thinking that is on the wrong side of history.
DeleteWe can look to current culture to inform us of what is to come (see: AI or Chobits). Because obviously it is an accurate representation of the future.=)
ReplyDelete