THE SUMTER ITEM N.G. Osteen 1843-1936 The Watchman and Southron
FRIDAY, MAY 27, 2016 H.G. Osteen 1870-1955 Founder, The Item
H.D. Osteen 1904-1987 The Item
|
A11
Margaret W. Osteen 1908-1996 The Item Hubert D. Osteen Jr. Chairman & Editor-in-Chief Graham Osteen Co-President Kyle Osteen Co-President Jack Osteen Editor and Publisher Larry Miller CEO Rick Carpenter Managing Editor
20 N. Magnolia St., Sumter, South Carolina 29150 • Founded October 15, 1894
COMMENTARY
Is history cyclical or directional?
H
ow do you distinguish a foreign policy “idealist” from a “realist,” an optimist from a pessimist? Ask one question: Do you believe in the arrow of history? Or to put it another way, do you think history is cyclical or directional? Are we condemned to do the same Charles Krauthammer thing over and over, generation after generation — or is there hope for some enduring progress in the world order? For realists, generally conservative, history is an endless cycle of clashing power politics. The same patterns repeat. Only the names and places change. The best we can do in our own time is to defend ourselves, managing instability and avoiding catastrophe. But expect nothing permanent, no essential alteration in the course of human affairs. The idealists think otherwise. They think that the international system can eventually evolve out of its Hobbesian state of nature into something more humane and hopeful. What is usually overlooked is that this hopefulness for achieving a higher plane of global comity comes in two flavors — one liberal, one conservative. The liberal variety (as practiced, for example, by the Bill Clinton administration) thinks that the creation of a dense web of treaties, agreements, transnational institutions and international organizations (such as the U.N., NGOs, the World Trade Organization) can give substance to a cohesive community of nations that would, in time, ensure order and stability. The conservative view (often called neoconservative and dominant in the George W. Bush years) is that the better way to ensure order and stability is not through international institutions, which are flimsy and generally powerless, but through the spread of democracy. Because, in the end, democracies are inherently more inclined to live in peace. Liberal internationalists count on globalization, neoconservatives on democratization to get us to the sunny uplands of international harmony. But what unites them is the belief that such uplands exist and are achievable. Both believe in the perfectibility, if not of man, then of the international system. Both believe in the arrow of history. For realists, this is a comforting delusion that gives high purpose to international exertions where none exists. Sovereign nations remain in incessant pursuit of power and selfinterest. The pursuit can be carried out more or less wisely.
But nothing fundamentally changes. Barack Obama is a classic case study in foreign policy idealism. Indeed, one of his favorite quotations is about the arrow of history: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” He has spent nearly eight years trying to advance that arc of justice. Hence his initial “apology tour,” that burst of confessional soul-searching abroad about America and its sins, from slavery to the loss of our moral compass after 9/11. Friday’s trip to Hiroshima completes the arc. Unfortunately, with “justice” did not come peace. The policies that followed — appeasing Vladimir Putin, the Iranian mullahs, the butchers of Tiananmen Square and lately the Castros — have advanced neither justice nor peace. On the contrary. The consequent withdrawal of American power, that agent of injustice or at least arrogant overreach, has yielded nothing but geopolitical chaos and immense human suffering. (See Syria.) But now an interesting twist. Two terms as president may not have disabused Obama of his arc-of-justice idealism (see above: Hiroshima visit), but they have forced upon him at least one policy of hardheaded, indeed hardhearted, realism. On his Vietnam trip this week, Obama accepted the reality of an abusive dictatorship while announcing a warming of relations and the lifting of the U.S. arms embargo, thereby enlisting Vietnam as a full partner in the containment of China. This follows the partial return of the U.S. military to the Philippines, another element of the containment strategy. Indeed, the Trans-Pacific Partnership itself is less about economics than geopolitics, creating a Pacific Rim cordon around China. There’s no idealism in containment. It is raw, soulless realpolitik. No moral arc. No uplifting historical arrow. In fact, it is the same thing all over again, a recapitulation of Truman’s containment of Russia in the late 1940s. Obama is doing the same now with China. He thus leaves a double legacy. His arc-of-justice aspirations, whatever their intention, leave behind tragic geopolitical and human wreckage. Yet this belated acquiescence to realpolitik, laying the foundations for a new containment, will be an essential asset in addressing this century’s coming central challenge, the rise of China. I don’t know — no one knows — if history has an arrow. Which is why a dose of coldhearted realism is always welcome. Especially from Obama. Charles Krauthammer’s email address is letters@charleskrauthammer.com. © 2016, The Washington Post Writers Group
EDITORIAL ROUNDUP Recent editorials from South Carolina newspapers:
The Aiken Standard May 20
STATE SAVINGS HITS LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES The closing of the Lower Savannah Pre-Release Center in Aiken couldn’t have come at a more inopportune time for local governments. The closure could be costly for the CSRA, according to officials with the County, City of Aiken and City of North Augusta. South Carolina Department of Corrections announced in April plans to close the Wire Road facility in early June. Aiken County Administrator Clay Killian, Aiken Assistant City Manager Stuart Bedenbaugh and North Augusta City Manager Todd Glover said they were all hand-delivered a memo regarding its closing at the time of the announcement. The three said it was the first time they learned the facility would close. The institutional staff, made up of 29 officers and 10 non-uniformed employees, will relocate primarily to Trenton Correctional Institution to “provide more resources in critical areas and create a more desirable officer to inmate ratio ensuring institutional safety,” the release stated. Where it hurts the area municipalities is the loss of inmates as a work resource as there are no plans to replace the prison facility. The bad timing leaves the City, County and North Augusta scrambling to cover the sudden workforce loss in the middle of budget season. Killian said the County budgets about $75,000 a year to pay 15 to 20 inmates $15 a day to work, performing janitorial services of animal control, litter pickup for solid waste and maintenance for county vehicles. Aiken County Council learned recently it could cost more than $1 million to replace the labor lost because of the closing of the Lower Savannah Pre-Release Center. Bedenbaugh said the City of Aiken utilizes about 32 in-
mates a day to assist with solid waste collection and to help with maintenance of the parkways and grounds. He estimates it could have an effect of a couple hundred thousand dollars a year for the City. The City of North Augusta relies heavily on the labor for its materials recovery facility, which is used for recycling, Glover said. North Augusta can have upward of 15 inmates performing a variety of work, typically in solid waste, he said. It would cost about $180,000 to replace the inmate labor. All inmates are paid $15 a day for the services, making it difficult to hire the same amount of bodies at minimum wage to replace the ones they’re losing. Killian said one of the closest 1A facilities to Aiken is in Columbia and transportation would not balance the cost of using those inmates and noted having inmates in Aiken is beneficial. “The state is saving a lot of money, but it’s going to cost the locals not having them. It’s a big benefit to have them in the community,” Killian said. “Everybody wants less government until it hurts them.” Whatever savings the State realizes with this closure has been passed on to local municipalities left scrambling that do not have an inmate facility in close proximity. But as for the lack of advance notice, there is no excuse for that.
The Herald-Journal of Spartanburg May 22
BILL WOULD ENFORCE PUBLIC ACCESS You have a right to know what your governments are doing. It matters to you how they make decisions that affect your life. It matters how they spend your money. State law is meant to protect your ability to monitor your local governments and school boards, but that law is weak and unenforceable. Lawmakers are working on addressing that problem, revising the law to make sure that you can access the information to which you are entitled and to limit the ability of
governments to keep their activities and spending secret. City and county governments and school districts are required by law to give you public information when you ask for it and to conduct business in public meetings. The state Freedom of Information Act requires this. But local governments have been violating the spirit and even the letter of the law for years. Local governments have charged members of the public outrageous fees for copies of documents and other information, far more than it costs to look up and reproduce the information. Public bodies have met in secret to discuss matters that the law requires them to discuss in public. They have done so because there is no reasonable method to enforce the law. If you ask the county for a copy of an email, and the county demands hundreds of dollars for the copy, your only recourse is to undergo the expense and time of suing the county. If your town council goes behind closed doors to discuss how it will spend your tax money, the only way you can force those discussions to be held in public is to sue the town. Few people or organizations have the resources to bring litigation against local governments that violate the law, and these governments know that. So they feel secure in violating the law, meeting behind closed doors, withholding public information. A bill working its way through the General Assembly would address this problem. It would create an administrator who could hear disputes about public information. If a local government denies you information, you could appeal to this administrator and he or she could force the local government to give you the information. On the other hand, if you were pestering a school board with frivolous, timeconsuming requests, the administrator could rule for the school board. The bill would create an enforcement mechanism for the Freedom of Information Act that wouldn’t force citizens to take on the costs of litigation to defend their rights.
LETTER TO THE EDITOR ARTICLE MAY HAVE MISSED MARK, BUT IT WAS STILL APPRECIATED Thank you for the Associated Press story “Elderly book talks once known as death panels” on May 24. I do not think that the referenced doctor conferences are the panels that were considered “death panels” by those earlier the political campaigns. Those death panels, I believe, were panels that decided what, if any, treatment was to be given to individuals in certain categories of care, like the elderly. That being said, however, even more important than discussing end-
of-life decisions with one’s doctor (the doctor you will have in the hospital will rarely be the same one as in the office), it is important to discuss with one’s family and attorney. Health care powers of attorney, which carry out end-of-life decisions, are a major element of a person’s estate plan. Often the opinions a person has regarding end-of-life decisions are not well formed — understandable since this subject is not pleasant. It is crucial for our churches to bring moral substance and perspective to these issues.
The moral and ethical rules had been consistent across the spectrum of faith belief until recently. That ethical standard is still a good one: Extraordinary medical care is not required to be accepted by the patient. The crucial questions for end-of-life decisions are when do you not want the treatment and, if you cannot speak for yourself, who decides when the treatment will be given or not? In almost every instance, I recommend a trusted family member who knows the person’s ethics and religious beliefs to be the advocate and in-
termediary between the person and the medical community. Bottom line, everyone must have a health care power of attorney to appoint an agent carry out their wishes, if they cannot speak for themselves. That agent must know the person’s wishes. The wishes of the person need to be informed by their faith and/or ethical beliefs in order to give context to such significant and often irreversible decisions. J CABOT SETH, ESQ. Attorney at Law Sumter