The Preamble

The Angry Middle: The Fight for the Heart of America

There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be fixed by what is right with America. William Jefferson Clinton

America is fascinated by and defined by outsiders by its extremes. Whether it be lifestyles of the rich and famous or the cartoonish visions of street crime as depicted in popular music, America’s edges are an anthem of hyperbole. What exists inside these edges is an “Angry Middle”. This middle defines most Americans, the American that goes to work, parents, pays taxes and grows old. There is a feeling that “others” are squeezing the American dream, making his or her days longer, more dangerous, and perhaps most importantly making the future less predictable and potentially darker.

The middle that Americans like to compare themselves to is the generation that returned from the battlefields of World War II. Fresh off beating the Depression and Axis, this “Greatest Generation” came back to educational and economic opportunity. Bound by the faith that they had beaten back the darkness and that hard work and dedication would bring them wealth and an eventual retirement. An opportunity previously reserved only for the wealthy of American generations past.

This page attempts to define a road map of the real policy factors that concern this “Angry Middle”. Those Americans of all races, religions, and creeds who are attempting to define the American Dream for themselves and their families. This America lives outside of the ivory tower of American leftists, the boardrooms of Wall Street, and the foyers of fundamentalist churches. This America lives in the suburbs, cities and farms of the United States and is not restricted by any faith or particular political belief. In fact this middle consists of Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Independents, and more bound only by the belief that what was once it’s birthright has begun to vanish.

Why Bolton was a problem.

Uhhh, just postin old stuff, obviously.

Why Bolton is a Problem.

We in the United States have a perception problem. Some may argue that this perception problem is a public relations issue fed by our perceived arrogance in foreign affairs in the Middle East, Europe, and the rest of the world. However, what is in fact the more pressing problem is not one of what those on the outside think of us, but rather how we misunderstand our own role in the world and our history of relating to other nations; what really exists it is a self-perception problem.

Many Americans like to perceive themselves as the victim of the United Nations. We feel assailed by those that we provide for through foreign aid and charity, those who we liberated from tyranny in a past century at the cost of many American lives. While we and the generations before us have sacrificed a great deal for the international community, any perception of cooperation with other countries as being something that weakens America represents a misunderstanding of our history. Indeed, it was in our finest hour as Americans that an alliance of many nations—opposed in certain beliefs but united for a common cause— was able to defeat the evil influence of Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, and expansionist, imperial Japan. It was in fact a united nations that led to triumph in this war. It could even be argued that, had there been a viable international body to temper the rise of fascism during the 1930s, the bloodshed of millions during the Second World War might have been avoided

The nomination of John Bolton forgets this central lesson from our history and continues the promotion of a foreign policy that is aggressively and foolishly unilateral. It propagates a Bush administration belief in a changing world that is dominated by US military and economic power, a world that is not limited by constructive discourse, diplomacy, and international cooperation. After September 11th, there was a grand opportunity for this cooperation in the War on Terror. While this opportunity has been partially realized with the involvement of NATO in security operations in Afghanistan, on the whole it has been thwarted by an administration committed to unilateral and uninformed aggression based on poor intelligence.

The United Nations is not the perfect solution to all of our national security, economic and diplomatic issues. In fact, in many cases as the “big man” on the campus of nations, we will be a target of member countries attempting to increase their own economic and political stakes in a world that has grown increasingly smaller. The potential for corruption in this body, and the fact that it will not always support the policy of the United States over the consensus of hundreds of member nations, cannot be denied. However, to try to bully, belittle, and in fact ignore international diplomacy through the nomination of an ambassador that has assaulted the institution is tantamount to diplomatic suicide.

Our ambassador to the United Nations must represent the national interests of the United States in a world theater that is constantly changing. In order to ensure that we can effectively face an uncertain future, we must recognize the lessons from our diplomatic past. Indeed, we must unite with allies who have a common vision, in order that we may defeat our greatest threats. Surely, John Bolton is not the right choice to help us realize this vision.