As a nation, we are playing a game of chess with Death. We are Ingmar Bergman’s knight, Antonius Block, forestalling white-faced, black-cloaked Death with a dangerous challenge. Lose and we die. Check mate the Grim Reaper, we win.
A reference to Bergman’s film, The Seventh Seal, is a bit over the top, you say? Consider this: We are arguing about whether we should save the lives of our fellow Americans and reduce the suffering of millions who, for reasons not of their own making, do not have access to adequate medical care. There are no economic, medical, or technological barriers. We can do this.
Imagine a toddler splashing happily in one of those colorful, inflatable wading pools. You stand with the child in the calf-deep water. Suddenly, the child topples over and her head disappears under water. She panics and cannot right herself. You could easily save her, at no risk to yourself. Health care reform could be as easy as saving the toddler. We could save millions of lives with an effort so minimal we might not even remember it. And yet….
The awful spectacle of our health care debate is almost more than can be stomached. Death is out on the street, and some among us are pushing their friends and family out the doors. "Take her! Take him! Not me. Not me." This is what America has come to.
And this is why I say we play chess with Death. If we lose this game and let the child drown, the child’s dream, the dream of democracy, dies with her.
Recently I came across a story that perfectly captures the moral worldview that informs, or should inform, the health care movement. The story was told by Antoine De Saint Exupery in his book, Flight to Arras.
It’s 1940 and Saint Exupery, who will in two years write The Little Prince, is a French reconnaissance pilot. The German military subjugation of France is almost complete.
Saint Exupery is assigned a hopeless mission, an insane one because any intelligence he might gather will be unusable by the time he gathers it, as his superiors well know. Here he captures the surreal horror of war’s mortal danger:
Each burst of a machine gun or a rapid-fire cannon shot forth hundreds of these phosphorescent bullets that followed one another like the beads of a rosary. A thousand elastic rosaries strung themselves out towards the plane…The bullets were transformed into lightning. And I flew drowned in a crop of trajectories as golden as stalks of wheat. I flew at the center of a thicket of lance strokes.
Tracers as "golden as stalks of wheat" and bullets "like the beads of a rosary." This is metal death as life and life everlasting, wrenching metaphors from the imagination of a pilot navigating a sky on fire.
Saint Exupery and his crew survived that mission. That night, he retired to the farmhouse where he was billeted. A farmer, his wife and niece are at table. Saint Exupery, only hours from surviving this chess match with Death (he will die on a similar mission in 1944), is invited to join them.
He is at once overcome by a feeling of responsibility, responsibility for the farmer, his family, their village, and the community of France. If ever he was owed a moment to pat and pinch himself in guarantee of sound flesh and selfish identity, this was that moment. But it’s the full, heart-swelling presence of the farmer’s family, the transcendent power of compassion and communion, which commands the attention of his soul.
Behind the silence of these three beings there was an inner abundance that was like the patrimony of a whole village asleep in the night – and like it, threatened. Strange, the intensity with which I felt myself responsible for that invisible patrimony. I went out of the house to walk alone on the highway, and I carried with me a burden that seemed to me tender and in no wise heavy, like a child asleep in my arms.
A burden tender and in no wise heavy. It is the slight weight of the responsibility we bear for one another. Slight, because our very being depends upon it. We grow heavy from shirking, not from bearing the tender burden. It comes from no mandate, no order from authority outside one’s own conscience. You can’t pretend to carry it; you either do, or you don’t.
This is the moral view that should inform our prayers for reform of the American health care system. We may yet save the drowning child and find her asleep in our arms.
Speaking of France’s failure in 1940, Saint Exupery said, "…had we stood for [the] communion of men, we should have saved the world and ourselves. In that task we failed. Each is responsible for all. Each is by himself responsible. Each by himself is responsible for all."
Check mate.
Related posts:
- Health Care Reform: At the Intersection of Pro and Con, a Life
- Lieberman Contradicts Himself, Lies About Deficits, Threatens to Kill Health Care
- Deeds Leading in VA Governor Primary: Heavy Rain Suppresses Turnout
- Ted Kennedy: Health Care “Has Been the Passion of My Life”
- Health Care Reform: Myths vs. Facts





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

that this country is debating — tho with allusions — the continuing suffering and dying of less fortunate citizens is already indicative of something monstrous we have become. pity the gods have fled, pity that the human heart does not flare in a resurgent new birth of compassion and awakening. we are on a march toward a humanity of machination away from love.
Glenn, thanks for lifting my heart on a morning that brings bitter news.
That we are debating might be a sign of the resurgence you speak of, though the angry resistance is, shall we say, not a good sign.
It is AP, so I wonder about the truth of the report. If Obama capitulates to the insurance industry I’m not certain how I will maintain my morale. I’m not certain I could lift another finger on his behalf, and it may well be that I actively seek his ouster. I don’t know.
It is an awful, awful thing that America is now fully owned by a few insurance barons, that profits mean more than life, that a few political harlots can derail what an entire political party seeks.
yep, i’m with you on that possibility, glenn.
St. Exupery is the embodiment of the liberal spirit. We are responsible for one another, and we have to struggle even if the assignment is doomed.
The Myth of Sisyphus will be required reading for the pathetic remnants of liberalism in this country.
alas
Sebelius: Public Health Care Option “Not The Essential Element”
From California, it looks to me as though the deliberate sabotage of the public sphere and the commons we’ve seen here over the last three decades has now mestasized into the body politic.
I want to believe the AP is once again wrong, and I hope that’s the case. If they are correct, I think I’ll have trouble summoning any hope at all for America.
Do we have to read it if we still have our shoulder’s to the rock?
One of the reasons we are losing ground is because we have not made clear the moral view that drives us. We (I don’t mean FDL, I mean Democrats generally) remain defensive, cowed by the insurance industry’s money and a huge failure of nerve.
Democrats have been afraid of their own hearts. So, that’s why I have focused here and elsewhere on the moral ground. This is why health care must be reformed. When viewed in the moral light, those who oppose it or offer “compromise” can be seen for what they are: shriveled, immoral cowards.
It appears to me that Dems are desperate to have Republicans assume joint ownership of the bill. It is a fool’s errand, if reform fails Dems will take the blame. Anyway, even after Republicans (including the ones who disguise themselves as Democrats) have been allowed to gut the package, they will likely vote against it en masse.
The Main Difference between them and us
Well done!
Obama capitulated a long time ago, taking single payer off the table, and ordering it suppressed even from discussion.
the “shriveled, immoral cowards” fill the ranks of Democratic Party politicians, and completely encompass the leadership.
stirring, poetic, heart-tugging writing like your post vastly outshines the diminutive, paltry, faux ‘public option’ that, until recently, was the fig-leaf progressives hoped Obama would retain on his naked sell-out to the corporate oligarchy that owns and operates Washington D.C.
Hopefully the Obamacare travesty will go down, and then we can have some moments with “the moral view that should inform our prayers for reform of the American health care system” and emerge from a bit of reflection and unify behind what works, what covers everyone, and saves money, and, as a fringe benefit, eliminates the parasitic insurance cartel.
Thanks for the complements, however bittersweet the circumstance. This fight is not over. And I hope we will make the morality of this issue much clearer to our own and to others.
“Darcy Burner’s speech closing Netroots was an uplift,” she sighs, slumped in front of the computer screen
there is nothing like naked greed and fear, selfishness and a total lack of empathy to trump a moral view. America has proven itself yet again capable of complete, shameless venality. the motto on the dollar should be changed from “In God We Trust” to “I’ve got mine, you can fuck off and die”.
sorry for the negativity. i wanted to believe that good things were possible. it seems to be simply a cruel phantom. i would love to be wrong.
long view – have you heard of the OODA loop – something military strategists and corporate types use?
http://www.valuebasedmanagemen….._loop.html
stands for Observe, Orient, Decide, Act.
imho, the progressosphere got caught in the ‘Decide and Act’ phases of this health care reform imbroglio without having laid proper foundations in the Observe and Orient phases.
those must be returned to and reexamined, or this whole charade will simply play out repeatedly.
Instead of forcing House Dems to see what the right is doing the teabaggers have run them home crying. We’ll now see a complete capitulation to the finance and insurance industries.
On the other side of this “chess game” are people who would either have little understanding of what Saint Exupery wrote or scoff at it as naive. The latter is the mentality that we fight against, a view that hard decisions of life and death are made by hard people who, although saddened, must make them for the good of humanity. It is an incredibly hubristic worldview that places them at the center of the universe as the decision makers for all. Their utter hypocrisy comes from the fact that they do what they do not for the benefit of some future humanity but for the very immediate monetary gain they will receive.
Follow the money. It is never about ideology — never. It is always about money.
It was in the cards all along. The difference between Big Insurance and Big Pharma patronage of the GOP vs the Dems is only a matter of degree.
I like this.
Preach it, Brother Smith. You are so right about that. I haven’t heard many speeches from the heart since the other side started defining the public conversations.
It is disheartening to me that we let the least educated and least informed citizens carry our debate forward, in debased and inflammatory language, so that the real conversations don’t get to happen.
I heard Bernard-Henry Levy interviewed a few years ago by a local public radio host. Levy was talking about how Americans prefer our myths to reality – witness the fury of Lynn Cheney over a history pamphlet put out by the government printing office that described the reality our manifest destiny instead of a sanitized version – in everything from our museums to our news. Conventional wisdom is the pinnacle of our knowledge. Ouch.
It didn’t used to be like this. Can we go home again?
Glenn, no matter how disturbing your posts, I am uplifted every Sunday.
cheers to that, then.
but there is tough medicine in the Observe and Orient phases, imho.
from the military strategist pov, 4th generation actors have much faster OODA loops than their 2nd and 3rd generation opponents – they can refine and retry and then run another Decide and Act phase.
hopefully, the hard lessons from the current debacle will be Observed, and will result in some changes in Orientation, resulting in trying some different decisions, and putting infrastructure in place for more effective Actions. Mike Stark and his video camera have had effectiveness, James whip-count system of course, what else?
Mommybrain, I can’t tell you how much your kind complements mean to me. Sometimes the emotional honesty required for these essays is, uh, daunting and a bit scary. Not that they’re confessional or anything. It’s a challenge to find the place that’s not simply incongruent with our craven political spin and practices while elevating the conversation. So thank you very much.
As a Democrat I told everyone here months ago that there would be no public option and that FDL with their bluster and intimidation attempts against members of congress and Obama would backfire. The lesson to be learned is that we do not live in a far left country and that this foolishness has guaranteed this country a GOP majority in 2010 and Mitt Romney or Huckabee as President in 2012.
I told you so. Good job.
Happy day to you as well.
Sounds to me like you are implying that Obama/mainstream Dems are “punishing” progressives/left. Nothing could be further from the truth. And your chicken little attitude towards 2010 and 2012 is boring and a waste of 1’s and 0’s.
We grow heavy from shirking, not from bearing the tender burden.
.. .this is not a simple truth, nor is anything else simple in the debate about the kind of people we are .. whether we are generous of spirit or require everyone to pull his weight and many judges to discern who needs how much and on and effing on … those of us who feel the heaviness with the lies piling up are no doubt the ones that believe in the basic goodness of the human spirit … and the fact that he did, indeed, take single payer off the table was the first 100-pound weight on the heart of this believer… i am not naive of the lies required for winning the political prize, nor am i blind to the truth about greed and power … but there is a balance that you hope for, as a believer, that the winner with the best lies is at least better than your worst fears, if not basically as good as he appears to be… otherwise, you start looking again at some other country to live in … or pray for good old-fashioned anarchy and start this one over again.
If you don’t think a disaster awaits Dems in 2010 you are not paying attention.
Obama and the Democrats never gave a shit about progressives and have embraced a Republican agenda that is a recipe for failure because it already has failed massively. But somehow this is progressives’ fault? And since when is advocating practical affordable solutions that work considered “far left”? Certainly Obama’s tendency à la George Bush to opt for the worst choice available does explain why our country continues to circle the drain.
Hugh you make my point sir. That you think Obama embraces a Republican agenda shows just how far outside the mainstream of political thought you are. You will never understand that this is a moderate/conservative leaning country. Do some traveling between the coasts, they are as American as you.
Cheer up everyone. The moral thing to do is to listen to all sides of the issue (like my mama taught me, and to which I often rolled my eyes.) We will have health care reform. It might not look exactly like I like it, but it will be way better than the status quo.
Glenn, I understand completely. If it’s true, we will have to find someplace the liars and thugs. You know, they are actually proud that lies and intimidation won. Why? It is simply because they are so good at it.
I may yet still play with Obama’s team.
Getting run over by a mob of thugs, hooligans and liars just annoys me.
@pshorridge #34 – we may get a system out of all this that is better (or even “way better”) that the status quo, but we also may not. With single-payer conceded and a public option (let alone a strong public option) possibly conceded, what’s left that changes the game in a meaningful way?
@Glenn – this is a touching, sad post. In the terms you’ve laid out, I think one key obstacle is that many who oppose serious reform (single-payer or strong public option) do not see the same Death stalking the streets as you/we do. They don’t see Donne’s Death that diminishes all, but rather the Bible’s Angel of Death, who comes to exterminate the out-group, the human game-pieces on the other side, who are worthy of death simply because fate/luck/chance/God has made it so.
And how does one deal with this version of Death? One cowers inside one’s house after having painted an “L” for Libertarian on the doorjamb in someone else’s blood. One pretends that one has no connection to the people who will die overnight. One writes stories explaining how they had it coming – or at least how one’s own hands are clean. One stands on principle and chants “I’ve got mine, Jack” against the darkness outside, to drown out the wailing of parents whose children are dying.
I watched Meet the Press this morning. Rachel was very good, but I was quite disappointed when Charlie Rangel spoke. I didn’t feel like he was effective. The Dems need to bring their A game each and every single time they confront Republican false framing. When it coming to framing, Democrats are still playing checkers. I don’t think they even understand why framing is so important or else they’d be focused like a laser on doing a good job of it.
So, how about listening to George Lakoff about framing health reform?
http://www.brianfalldin.com/20…..alth-care/
A video of Lakoff’s entire presentation is here:
http://fora.tv/2009/08/03/Poli…..ullprogram
We simply cannot afford to make these mistakes any longer. It’s costing lives.
- Tom
Let’s keep the faith. Your comments are thoughtful and honest. I’ll be with you at the barricades if it comes to that!
That was one very smart mother you had there!
We have to reach into the hearts of those who don’t yet see. There are some at the moral extremes, but most people are not completely estranged from communion and recognition of others. They hide it from themselves. We have to activate that knowledge, however buried it might be. Someone mentions Lakoff below. This is another way of saying what he says about framing. We need to use language that will activate the compassion side of folk. That side is there.
Yea, you are right. I shouldn’t let annoyance affect my judgment, but sometimes I can’t help it….
Glenn, Thanks for a beautifully written post and comment. I really like this one:
And I would only modify it by saying that we must add banksters, energy tycoons, and military contractors to your list of owners.
It’s not just the AP. WaPo reporters like Ann Kornblut. MSNBC commentators like Chuck Todd, and Sheryl Stolberg in the Ny Times, as well. It’spractical only a rising very chorus of protest from progressives across the country and in Congress will save a public option now. This is the result of progressives remaining relatively passive when the ridiculously weak HR 3200 and Senate HELP bills appeared, and even more the result of pushing for HR 676 from Day one of the new Congress.
Redfish, You’re joking of course. Only more of what Jane dishes out will ever make progressives relevant to this Administration.
redfish, I agree that Dems may be facing defeat in 2010; but if they are defeated it will be because they’ve sold out to the corporatists again, and demonstrated once more that they don’t care about people. The Democratic Party hasn’t been the party of the people now since Jimmy Carter made his turn towards the economic elite in the 1970s. Not many Democrats are old enough to remember the party of FDR, Harry, JFK, and LBJ. But if we expect to win again on a continuing basis, we have to show people that we are that party once again.
sporkovat, OODA Loops are good, but the combination of DECs and KLCs are better.
I agree. This certainly happened to Move-on.
Right. I think Democrats have been afraid of their own hearts since Nixon smashed McGovern in 1972. I think that’s when the Democrats began to cultivate the image of moderation that led to the nomination of Jimmy Carter and to the compromises the Democrats made with Reagan and Bush in the 1980s and 1990s, and with Clinton in the 1990s. Slowly mainstream Democrats became moe right-wing than Nelson Rockefeller and the moderate Republicans of the 1960s.