|
Volume XIV (2003)
Book Review:
What’s So Great
About America
Owen G. Mordaunt,
Department of
English, University of Nebraska at Omaha
Omaha, NE 68182-0175
D’Souza, Dinesh. What’s So Great
About America. New York, NY: Penguin Books, 2002. 218 pp. $15.00
(paper).
What’s So Great About America is a defense and analysis of America’s
role in the world in the aftermath of 11 September 2001. It is written
from the perspective and insights of an immigrant from a Third World
country, an immigrant who attributes his success to a country that to
him is a model for the world. Obviously the product of much research and
personal reflection, this book is thought-provoking and challenging.
In
the preamble, D’Souza endeavors to put America into historical
perspective by comparing this nation to the ancient Athenians who were a
model for “civilized peoples everywhere.” The Athenians were not only “a
freedom-loving society” but functioned “within the bounds of the law.”
Athens was a commercial civilization whose people had access across
state boundaries and who traded freely with their neighbors. Athenians,
however, were not immune from the attacks of enemies; Pericles
characterized these adversaries as “leaner, hungrier, and hardier.” The
Athenians, therefore, were not only enjoined to consider Athens’
greatness, but also to be willing to make sacrifices “to preserve
Athenian liberty and the Athenian way of life.” America today is in a
similar position, facing enemies, but it must determine the “source of
the conflict” and “the nature of the enemy.”
Chapter 1 focuses on America’s enemies and why they hate this nation.
The author asserts that arguments for and against America “play out” in
his life; moreover, he claims that over the years he has seen “the
greatness of America reflected in” his experience here. He says that he
does not take lightly what critics have to say about this country, but
he categorically states that critics are wrong since “they are missing
something of great significance about Western civilization and about the
American way of life.” His attacks are directed at “terrorists,” “the
European school” represented by the French, “the Asian school,” “the
Islamic school,” “the political Left” in the USA, and the “political
movement called multiculturalism.” Multiculturalists, he claims, are
powerful and are an influence in high school and colleges. They are
opposed to immigrants assimilating to the American mainstream, since by
doing so immigrants would lose their identity and give in to racism.
Chapter 2 is devoted to colonialism and how the West prevailed. The
author denounces current views, particularly multiculturalism, that he
claims teach students to “despise” Western civilization and put it at
the same level as other civilizations. Ethnocentrism, colonialism, and
slavery are concomitant with the history of the West, but the author
downplays the negative characterization applied to them by America’s
critics and suggests that these are not distinctively Western in origin.
At the end of this chapter he makes the assertion that the success of
the West is due to the interaction between science, democracy, and
capitalism. It is capitalism, the author notes, that has “produced the
great wealth and strength and success of Western civilization.”
Therefore, it is wrong to claim that the West grew rich from robbing
Asia, Africa, and Latin America “because the West created its own
wealth, and still does.”
Chapter 3 is about “becoming American and why the American idea is
unique,” and interwoven into this chapter is a reflection of the
author’s reasons for wanting to come to the United States. Being from a
middle-class background, the author was more privileged than those from
poor backgrounds, but his destiny would have been determined more or
less by the traditions of his culture had he not emigrated. He maintains
that America provides great scope and opportunities for immigrants, but
some immigrants cannot handle these freedoms without some ambivalence.
And becoming an American is risky because one is likely to become
alienated from one’s culture. The process of assimilation is what
concerns the author even though he considers it a good thing. He notes
that, “when second-generation Asian-Americans become fully assimilated,
they don’t study as hard and their test scores fall.” He mentions, with
some ambivalence, that he is “quite willing to let his daughter date and
choose the person she wants to marry, as long as the process begins at
the age of thirty.” Notwithstanding, he believes in the “melting pot”
concept and decries the idea of it being considered racist.
Chapter 4 addresses what D’Souza terms the thorny subject of
“reparations” which is directed specifically at African-Americans.
Apparently the author has debated Jesse Jackson and others on this
issue. Blacks, in particular, claim that America is oppressive and
denies freedom and opportunity to minorities because it is racist and
has always been. The author does not dispute the fact that racism does
exist; one can find many instances of it. In debating this issue,
reference is made to the fact that a distinction exists between the
views of “indigenous” people of color (African-Americans and
Native-Americans) and those of immigrants considered people of color.
The author believes that the notion that old immigrants could easily
pass for white is wrong because prejudice and hostility against earlier
generations of Europeans immigrants were far greater than what Asian,
African, and Latin American immigrants experience. Reference is made to
the fact that Black leaders and scholars think that “societal racism is
responsible for the current problems of blacks.” This viewpoint the
author attempts to diffuse by pointing out that Black immigrants are not
prevented by racism from being successful in the United States. They are
in reality following the strategy of Booker T. Washington. Washington
argued that African-Americans faced racism and cultural disadvantage; he
also said that “black crime rates were too high, black savings too low,
[and] blacks did not have enough respect for educational achievement.”
The cultural problems facing Blacks nevertheless needed attention; if
they were not addressed, “they would help racism by giving it an
empirical foundation,” Washington warned. Evidence supporting immigrant
success points to “assimilating to the cultural strategies of success.”
D’Souza notes that:
The immigrants know that racism
today is not systematic, it is episodic, and they are able to find ways
to navigate around its obstacles. Even immigrants who start out at the
very bottom are making rapid gains, surging ahead of African-Americans
and claiming the American dream for themselves. West Indians, for
instance, have established a strong business and professional community,
and have nearly achieved income parity with whites.
And he argues
that this is possible because:
The immigrants don’t spend a lot of
time contemplating the hardships of the past; their gaze is firmly fixed
on the future. They recognize that education and entrepreneurship are
the fastest ladders to success in America. They push their children to
study, so that they will be admitted to Berkeley and MIT, and that they
can pool their resources and set up small businesses, so that they can
make some money and move to the suburbs. There are plenty of hurdles
along the way, but the immigrant is sustained by the hope that he, or
his children, will be able to break the chain of necessity and pursue
the American dream.
This reality
does not detract from the fact that Black Americans have contributed
much to the United States by forcing the country to live up to its
highest principles. Consequently, immigrants
owe a tremendous debt to the black
civil rights movement for opening up doors that would otherwise have
remained closed. All Americans have a lot to learn from
African-Americans about suffering, about dignity, about creativity, and
about charm. But it is also a fact that the black leadership can learn a
lot from the immigrants, especially black immigrants. African-Americans
can move up faster if they focus less on manufacturing representation
and more on building intellectual and economic skills. In this way
blacks can achieve a level of competitive success that is ultimately the
best, and final, refutation of “rumors of inferiority.”
Martin Luther
King is cited for stating that we are responsible for what we do with
our rights, what we do with our lives.
Chapter 5, titled “When Freedom Loses All Her Loveliness,” is concerned
with freedom and its abuses. The author makes reference to the fact that
the most serious accusation against America is that it is immoral.
According to Muslim fundamentalists, the United States and the West,
although materially advanced, are morally depraved. The view that the
West is immoral is supported by the perceptions of critics within the
United States and Europe. The blame for this is generally placed on
technology and capitalism, but according to D’Souza, this is not the
complete story. In the 1960s and 1970s, the United States experienced a
moral revolution, a rebellion against society the author attributes to
the philosopher Rousseau. Prior to Rousseau, no one believed that each
person should follow his or her own unique “moral course, nor did anyone
think of giving the inner self—the voice of nature within us—final
authority in determining that course.” Both Augustine and Rousseau held
that the “counsel of inwardness” was the means to arriving at the truth,
but for Rousseau, self determines goodness. For Augustine, however, “the
inward journey is merely a pathway to the Creator. The inner light is
controlled by an outer source, and that source is God.” In other words,
there is a moral order in the universe and that moral order is distinct
from us. This moral framework, says D’Souza, was taken for granted by
the majority of Americans in the 1950s, but it changed in the 1960s:
For the first time many people,
especially young people, began to find the external rules arbitrary,
senseless, and oppressive. The counterculture did not reject morality;
it was passionately concerned with morality. But it substituted
Rousseau’s conception of the inner compass for the rules of obligation.
Getting in touch with one’s feelings and being true to oneself were now
more important than conforming to the preexisting moral consensus of
society. By embracing the new morality, the children of the 1960s became
incomprehensible to their parents. And as this new generation inherited
the reins of power, its ethos entered the mainstream. As a consequence
of this change, America became a different country.
The author holds
that our freedom and autonomy are valuable “commodities,” but the inner
self needs a “compass” to direct it, and therefore the role of
“conservatives” is to “steer the American ethic of authenticity to is
highest manifestation and to ennoble freedom by showing it the path to
virtue.” Why only conservatives are invoked is somewhat puzzling.
Chapter 6, “America the Beautiful,” explores American “exceptionalism
and American universalism,” characteristics that have come under the
onslaught of America’s enemies. At stake is the United States’ foreign
policy, which the author defends, while, in part, recognizing the fact
that mistakes have been made. Next, in the discussion, is the United
States’ “evident moral superiority” which the author mentions is refuted
by “leftist intellectuals,” here and abroad; by “American
multiculturalists,” and “Islamic fundamentalists.” In denouncing
cultural relativism, a concept attributed to multiculturalists, the
writer attempts to explain what he means by American superiority by
linking it to the right to free speech and people achieving shared
objectives. The notion of the success of American ideas and culture, as
far as the international marketplace is concerned and the fact that most
immigrants from around the world prefer to come to the United States, is
inconsequential to some cultures. In one country, a person’s life can be
controlled by others, while in another, a person’s life can to a great
extent be self-directed. In a free society, however, freedom includes
the option to do what is good or what is evil. This freedom to choose is
what the United States receives blame for. D’Souza says Muslim
fundamentalists “don’t just object to the excesses of American liberty;
they object to liberty itself.” But, in effect, virtue can be chosen
freely whereas compulsion cannot produce virtue.
The
author concludes this chapter by declaring that the American founders
were aware that:
America is a new kind of society
that produces a new kind of human being. That human being—confident,
self-reliant, tolerant, generous, future oriented—is a vast improvement
over the wretched, servile, fatalistic, and intolerant human being that
traditional societies have always produced, and that Islamic societies
produce now. In America, the life we are given is not as important as
the life we make.
In addition, he
makes the claim that:
America is the greatest, freest,
and most decent society in existence. It is an oasis of goodness in a
desert of cynicism and barbarism. This country, once an experiment
unique in the world, is now the last best hope for he world.
This claim is
one that is bound to cause controversy, particularly in light of the
writer’s expressed feelings about nations, personalities, and
institutions he considers critics and enemies of the United States.
This
text is fast-paced, written in readable, lucid, and straightforward
language. It draws on research as well as on the author’s experiences
and reflections. (Notes at the end of the text list research sources
used). D’Souza attempts to define both the character and historical
import of the United States in an engaging and challenging way. This
book is apt to appeal to a broad political readership. Some or much of
the discussion might be controversial to some readers, but it is
worthwhile reading and can contribute to the reinforcement of one’s
negative, positive, or ambivalent attitudes toward the United States of
America. Two possible questions emerge from my analysis of the text.
Does the author present strong and convincing arguments? Is the United
States what the author perceives it to be? Answers to these questions
will of course reflect each reader’s point of view.
Volume XIV |
