Carpe Diem Nation. By David Brooks. New York Times, February 11, 2013.
Brooks:
Europeans
who settled America gave their lives a slingshot shape. They pulled back so
they could shoot forward. They volunteered to live in harsh conditions today so
their descendants could live well for centuries. The pioneers who traveled West
did the same thing. So has each generation of immigrants — sacrificing the
present for the sake of the future.
This
slingshot manner of life led to one of those true national clichés: that
America is the nation of futurity, that Americans organize their lives around
romantic visions of what is to be.
In
1775, Sam Adams confidently predicted that the scraggly little colonies would
one day be the world’s most powerful nation. In 1800, Noah Webster projected
that the U.S. would someday have 300 million citizens, and that a country that
big should have its own dictionary.
In
his novel, “Giants in the Earth,” Ole Rolvaag has a pioneering farmer give a
visitor a tour of his land. The farmer describes his beautiful home and his
large buildings. The visitor confesses that he can’t see them. That’s because
they haven’t been built yet, the farmer acknowledges, but they already exist as
reality in his mind.
This
future-oriented mentality had practical effects. For decades, government
invested heavily in long-range projects like railroads and canals.
Today,
Americans have inverted this way of thinking. Instead of sacrificing the
present for the sake of the future, Americans now sacrifice the future for the
sake of the present.
. . . . . . . . . .
Why
have Americans lost their devotion to the future? Part of the answer must be
cultural. The Great Depression and World War II forced Americans to live with
16 straight years of scarcity. In the years after the war, people decided
they’d had enough. There was what one historian called a “renunciation of
renunciation.” We’ve now had a few generations raised with this consumption
mind-set. There’s less of a sense that life is a partnership among the dead,
the living and the unborn, with obligations to those to come.
The
political debate, though, is largely oblivious to this mental shift.
Republicans and Democrats are so busy arguing about the merits of government
versus business that they are blind to the problem that afflicts them both.
In
his State of the Union address Tuesday night, President Obama is apparently
planning to give us yet another salvo in that left-right war, as he did in his
second Inaugural Address. One of his aides, in a fit of hubris, told Politico
that the president will be offering Republicans a golden bridge to ease their
retreat.
But
it would be great if Obama gave an imaginative speech that reframed things as
present versus future.
If
the president were to propose an agenda for the future, he’d double spending on
the National Institutes of Health. He’d approve the Keystone XL pipeline. He’d
cut corporate tax rates while adding a progressive consumption tax. He’d take
money from Social Security and build Harlem Children’s Zone-type projects
across the nation. He’d means test Medicare and use the money to revive state
universities and pay down debt.
Would
Americans buy that agenda? Maybe. Americans are neglecting the future, but I
bet they’re still in love with it.
