August 22, 2006

MR CARTER’S NEIGHBORHOOD

Spiegel Interview with Jimmy Carter (Der Spiegel, August 15th, 2006)

SPIEGEL: Mr. Carter, in your new book you write that only the American people can ensure that the US government returns to the country's old moral principles. Are you suggesting that the current US administration of George W. Bush of acting immorally?

Carter: There's no doubt that this administration has made a radical and unpressured departure from the basic policies of all previous administrations including those of both Republican and Democratic presidents.

SPIEGEL: For example?

Carter: Under all of its predecessors there was a commitment to peace instead of preemptive war. Our country always had a policy of not going to war unless our own security was directly threatened and now we have a new policy of going to war on a preemptive basis. Another very serious departure from past policies is the separation of church and state, which I describe in the book. This has been a policy since the time of Thomas Jefferson and my own religious beliefs are compatible with this. The other principle that I described in the book is basic justice. We've never had an administration before that so overtly and clearly and consistently passed tax reform bills that were uniquely targeted to benefit the richest people in our country at the expense or the detriment of the working families of America.[...]

SPIEGEL: One main points of your book is the rather strange coalition between Christian fundamentalists and the Republican Party. How can such a coalition of the pious lead to moral catastrophes like the Iraqi prison scandal in Abu Ghraib and torture in Guantanamo?

Carter: The fundamentalists believe they have a unique relationship with God, and that they and their ideas are God's ideas and God's premises on the particular issue. Therefore, by definition since they are speaking for God anyone who disagrees with them is inherently wrong. And the next step is: Those who disagree with them are inherently inferior, and in extreme cases -- as is the case with some fundamentalists around the world -- it makes your opponents sub-humans, so that their lives are not significant. Another thing is that a fundamentalist can't bring himself or herself to negotiate with people who disagree with them because the negotiating process itself is an indication of implied equality. And so this administration, for instance, has a policy of just refusing to talk to someone who is in strong disagreement with them -- which is also a radical departure from past history. So these are the kinds of things that cause me concern. And, of course, fundamentalists don't believe they can make mistakes, so when we permit the torture of prisoners in Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, it's just impossible for a fundamentalist to admit that a mistake was made.

And here is a short take from Fr. Neuhaus in this month’s First Things, which will be online in about a month.

Former President Jimmy Carter has written another book on American values. He is deeply saddened by the way the “religious right” uses religion for partisan political purposes. In an interview with an Atlanta magazine, he explains his concern: “Carter fittingly used a parable to illustrate the way he’s like to see the political/religious debate unfold. ‘I was teaching a Sunday school class two weeks ago”, he recalls. ‘A girl, she was about 16 years old from Panama City, asked me about the differences between Democrats and Republicans. “I asked her, ‘Are you for peace, or do you want more war?” Then I asked her, “Do you favor government helping the rich, or should it seek to help the poorest members of society? Do you want to preserve the environment, or do you want to destroy it? Do you believe this nation should engage in torture, or should we condemn it? Do you think each child today should start life responsible for $28,000 in debt, or do you think we should be fiscally responsible?” ‘I told her that is she answered all those questions, that she believed in peace, aiding the poor and weak, saving the environment, opposing torture,...then I told her, ‘You should be a Democrat.’

Jimmy Carter is deeply saddened by the way religion is used for partisan political purposes.


Posted by Peter Burnet at August 22, 2006 7:52 PM
Comments

Carter always blamed Reagan for defeating him, thus took away his chance for arriving at a "final solution" for the Middle East. He griped about the missed opportunities a couple of years ago. He's the worst president from whom we've barely survived.

Posted by: ic at August 22, 2006 8:12 PM

People could see thru Carter and where the Nation was going. Not just him but his "blue gene" Government he formed around him.

Iran Embassy take-over showed him incompetent, the Panama Canal, the draft amnesty, and the general liberal slide to nowhere, except out the door of World power.

I was not near as conservative then as now but I know I voted against Carter as much as voting for Reagan.

Posted by: Tom Wall at August 22, 2006 8:58 PM

"Do you believe this nation should engage in torture, or should we condemn it? Do you think each child today should start life responsible for $28,000 in debt, or do you think we should be fiscally responsible?”

Jeez, now we know why Amy Carter was talking about nucelar weapons with Jimmy before his debate with Reagan; she had the damn stuff drilled into her head by her killjoy scold of a father.

Posted by: John at August 22, 2006 11:15 PM

Gee , Mr. Carter - are nuclear weapons really worse for brown women and children?

Posted by: M. Murcek at August 22, 2006 11:25 PM

"Are you for peace, or do you want more war"?
Si vis pacem para bellum -- if you desire peace, prepare for war.
"Do you favor government helping the rich, or should it seek to help the poorest members of society?"
Government should not being favoring anyone -- it should be neutral.
"Do you want to preserve the environment, or do you want to destroy it?"
Who wants to destroy the environment, Jimmy?
"Do you believe this nation should engage in torture, or should we condemn it?"
Do you believe we engage in torture, Jimmy?
'Do you think each child today should start life responsible for $28,000 in debt, or do you think we should be fiscally responsible?"
When have Democrats ever been fiscally responsible?

Posted by: jd watson at August 23, 2006 6:06 AM
« WARMING UP GLACIALLY | Main | RED ON RED: »