FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Reading James Baldwin on the 4th of July

Every Fourth of July, Americans are treated to more than enough exceptionalist exuberance and blind reverence of the framers and signers of the Declaration of Independence. We will hear plenty about the courage of the revolutionaries, the eloquence of Jefferson, and amazing resilience of our “city on a hill.”

Every Fourth of July, my mind does not tend to dwell for too long on the virtues of figures like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson. Men such as these deserve credit for their statesmanship and credit they shall get. But my mind tends to drift toward later patriots like Frederick Douglass, who so eloquently revealed the hypocrisy of the United States in his 1852 speech, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” In this classic jeremiad, Douglass treated his audience to a rhetorical fireworks show as he challenged them to live up to the “saving principles” of the Declaration of Independence.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about another American patriot, who we rarely, if ever, talk about when we discuss our country’s greatest champions of freedom: the African-American essayist, novelist, playwright, and activist James Baldwin. It may seem odd to invoke Baldwin on a day such as the Fourth of July. After all, Baldwin was an artist who often maintained a critical distance from conventional politics. But when I think about the Fourth of July, I ponder the meaning of patriotism, and, I believe, James Baldwin was a great patriot.

“Any honest examination of the national life,” Baldwin wrote in 1959, “proves how far we are from the standard of human freedom with which we began.” Baldwin did not specify firenexttiewhat he had in mind when he referred to this “standard,” but I want to suggest that he had in mind the principles enunciated in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights; that among these are the rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Baldwin was under no illusions about the men who framed these words or what those men intended to do with these words. He recognized that these words were not intended to apply to most people and he believed that the men who wrote them had motives that were more “commercial” than “moral.”

And yet, Baldwin found something compelling enough about these principles that he thought they might be useful to us in the present. “The recovery of this standard,” he continued, “demands of everyone who loves this country a hard look at himself, for the greatest achievements must begin somewhere, and they always begin with the person.” Baldwin’s call for a “recovery of this standard” is nothing like the sort of “recovery” of the Declaration that will be urged at Tea Party rallies this weekend. Indeed, it is just the opposite. Baldwin wants us to recover this high standard of human freedom so that we will subject ourselves, and our country, to vigorous criticism. “If we are not capable of this examination,” Baldwin concluded, “we may yet become one of the most distinguished and monumental failures in the history of nations.”

We need not imagine what sort of angry response this would provoke from conservatives because Baldwin inspired many such responses during his own lifetime. The conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr., for example, called Baldwin an “America-hater” who was hell bent on “throwing over” American “civilization.” Buckley could not have been more wrong.

What Buckley did not understand about Baldwin’s critique was that it was not rooted in hatred, but in love. “Societies never know it,” Baldwin wrote in 1962, but “the war of an artist with his society is a lover’s war, and he does, at his best, what lovers do, which is to reveal the beloved to himself, and with that revelation, make freedom real.” It is precisely because “I love America more than any other country in the world,” Baldwin once declared, “and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually.”

Baldwin’s recovery of the principles of the Declaration of Independence, and his recasting of these principles as tools for self-examination, provide us with an important lesson about the meaning of freedom. Baldwin said that although freedom is often reduced to a slogan that can be shouted from podiums, it is actually “a complex, difficult – and private – thing.” Freedom, Baldwin argued, is far more than a mere political ideal. “If we can liken life, for a moment, to a furnace,” he wrote, “then freedom is the fire which burns away illusion.” The “great American illusion,” he wrote in 1961, is that we always have been and always will be the envy of the world.

This Fourth of July, let’s practice patriotism James Baldwin-style. Let’s reflect on the meaning of freedom more deeply than we usually do and let’s subject the country we love to the perpetual criticism she deserves. Only then will we live up to that high standard of human freedom with which this nation began.

 

More articles by:

Nicholas Buccola is Chair and Associate Professor of Political Science at Linfield College. His new book, The Essential Douglass, will be published by Hackett in March.

Weekend Edition
December 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
A Tale of Two Cities
Bruce E. Levine
The Ketamine Chorus: NYT Trumpets New Anti-Suicide Drug
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fathers and Sons, Bushes and Bin Ladens
Kathy Deacon
Coffee, Social Stratification and the Retail Sector in a Small Maritime Village
Nick Pemberton
Praise For America’s Second Leading Intellectual
Patrick Cockburn
The Yemeni Dead: Six Times Higher Than Previously Reported
Nick Alexandrov
George H. W. Bush: Another Eulogy
Brian Cloughley
Principles and Morality Versus Cash and Profit? No Contest
Michael Duggin
Climate Change and the Limits of Reason
Victor Grossman
Sighs of Relief in Germany
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Robert Fantina
What Does Beto Have Against the Palestinians?
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Sartre, Said, Chomsky and the Meaning of the Public Intellectual
Robert Fisk
The Parasitic Relationship Between Power and the American Media
Stephen Cooper
When Will Journalism Grapple With the Ethics of Interviewing Mentally Ill Arrestees?
Jill Richardson
A War on Science, Morals and Law
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Evaggelos Vallianatos
It’s Not Easy Being Greek
Nomi Prins 
The Inequality Gap on a Planet Growing More Extreme
John W. Whitehead
Know Your Rights or You Will Lose Them
David Swanson
The Abolition of War Requires New Thoughts, Words, and Actions
J.P. Linstroth
Primates Are Us
Bill Willers
The War Against Cash
Jonah Raskin
Doris Lessing: What’s There to Celebrate?
Ralph Nader
Are the New Congressional Progressives Real? Use These Yardsticks to Find Out
Binoy Kampmark
William Blum: Anti-Imperial Advocate
Medea Benjamin – Alice Slater
Green New Deal Advocates Should Address Militarism
John Feffer
Review: Season 2 of Trump Presidency
Frank Clemente
The GOP Tax Bill is Creating Jobs…But Not in the United States
Rich Whitney
General Motors’ Factories Should Not Be Closed. They Should Be Turned Over to the Workers
Christopher Brauchli
Deported for Christmas
Kerri Kennedy
This Holiday Season, I’m Standing With Migrants
Mel Gurtov
Weaponizing Humanitarian Aid
Thomas Knapp
Lame Duck Shutdown Theater Time: Pride Goeth Before a Wall?
George Wuerthner
The Thrill Bike Threat to the Elkhorn Mountains
Nyla Ali Khan
A Woman’s Selfhood and Her Ability to Act in the Public Domain: Resilience of Nadia Murad
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
On the Killing of an Ash Tree
Graham Peebles
Britain’s Homeless Crisis
Louis Proyect
America: a Breeding Ground for Maladjustment
Steve Carlson
A Hell of a Time
Dan Corjescu
America and The Last Ship
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up: the 25 Best Books of 2018
December 13, 2018
John Davis
What World Do We Seek?
Subhankar Banerjee
Biological Annihilation: a Planet in Loss Mode
Lawrence Davidson
What the Attack on Marc Lamont Hill Tells Us
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail