From Exceptional to Run-of-the-Mill

I read an article online yesterday morning that brought back memories of conclusions I had come to some years ago. The article is from The Guardian, and was written by an American woman at least ten years younger than me. She grew up in a bubble of an environment; a middle class white town with conservative values and no interest in the outside world, nor much historical and cultural curiosity. I grew up in a slightly more diverse neighborhood, developed liberalized values, was very interested in everything that happened in the world and the country around me, and devoured history books as if they were Harlequin novels and I a lovesick little girl.

In the first years I lived here, everything compared disfavorably with America. I grew up believing America was the best country in the world, and the one with the most freedom. I believed, much like the woman in the article did, that the United States was the epitome of a civilized nation. In fact, I believed that the truth was worshipped in the U.S. and not so much in Spain. An acquaintance here told me not to believe everything the news said here, that the government controlled it as much as possible, especially on the state-run channels. The newer, private ones told a few more grains of truth, perhaps, but stuck to the overall picture touted by the government out of fear of being closed down. 

I retorted that in America the press always told the truth, that ethics in journalism required telling of the truth. "That's what you're supposed to believe," I was told. Over the years, I have learned that neither of us was quite right, nor completely wrong. Journalism has bias. American journalists will always present the facts in such a way as to show Americans that their country is always right. Spanish journalists will present facts to show Spaniards that we are no longer in the dark days of Franco, and that we are as European as if the Pyrenees didn't exist.

Is America the country with the most freedom? That depends on what we call freedom. If freedom means going to hell any which way we choose, then yes. There is nobody to stop you from destroying yourself. If freedom means to be clear of economic worries, then America is even less freer than other countries, though there is no country that can or will guarantee such economic freedom fully. If freedom means to be able to go anywhere you like, America is no longer its masthead. There are numerous travel advisories on travelling to other countries, and North Korea is now off the list. If you want to catch a plane from one state to another now, I've heard you will need some kind of official identification as of January of 2018, such as a passport or something called a RealID driver's license instead of a regular driver's license or state ID.   

Did America export democracy and freedom around the globe? That is what we are taught when we are children, sitting in dusty schools, waiting for the bell to ring to go home to our de facto segregated neighborhoods. But has anyone asked themselves if the local population ever asked for it? Yes, the United States has instigated coups, assassinated leaders, and supported rebels in many different countries, all in the name of bringing democracy to the world and getting rid of tyrants. But is democracy the best form of government for everyone? 

Don't get me wrong. Tyranny, injustice, and fear of the knock on the door is not the best form of government for anyone. But neither is American democracy. In many European countries, we have socialized democracy, though the socialized part is retreating under the pressure of neoliberal politicians. A socialized democracy guarantees its citizens certains rights and services. The services are paid for through our taxes. In a more perfect social democracy, that means that the more you earn, the more you pay. It may not be worthwhile to earn a lot of money nor be rich in such a country. Yet it ensures the same services for everyone. Sometimes the citizens of other countries may be fine with their less-than-American or -European forms of government. It's not for an outsider to decide. However, the United States continues to impose its influence. Is it really to guarantee democracy and freedom? Or is it merely to gain economic and territorial power?  

I was shocked when I first arrived that the Spanish perceived the Americans as arrogant. We were nothing of the sort. But the role in the world that we were taught was America's, is arrogant. I remember that Americans considered their country the policeman of the world. We were taught in history class that nationalism is a type of fascism, and we all can see how that ended up in Europe in the middle of the last century. But everything we are taught to believe in, is a form of nationalism and exceptionalism. Our country is exceptional, therefore our country is best. And that is simply another form of nationalism, or fascism, that of putting our country above all others.

In Spain there are two ways of seeing this country. One is the official way, promoted by every government since 1978. This states that the Transition to monarchic parliamentary democracy after Franco's death was successful, and that the wounds of the Civil War and the dictatorship have been therefore healed. We are now on a par with other European states. Most Spaniards, however, hold a different view. This country has not yet cured those wounds inflicted by the fratercidal hounds of war, into which salt had been rubbed for the next forty years. They have merely been covered with the bandages of democracy while they continue to fester. Most consider that this country will never be on a par with others until all homage to that past has been denied, and the truth examined. To us, being Spanish means many different things, and not necessarily being great, as was touted by Franco and this current government.

Part of the Spanish resentment against American arrogance comes from American support of Franco during the dark years. The moment that shines out in that brotherly relationship is of Manuel Fraga, Minister of Tourism, and various other bigwigs swimming in the sea just off Palomares, where four thermonuclear bombs fell to earth and sea after a mid-air collision between a B-52 and a refuelling plane. It was a representative scene of the symbiosis between two powers with two different objectives. At the time America had long considered itself the light in the darkness, yet it preferred to help out a dictatorship because it just happened to let the Americans use its strategic airspace for its own causes. If the United States was so hellbent on bringing democracy to the world, why did it help a dictatorship that had become a kleptocracy? Because Franco, his family, and his inner circle were leeching Spain of its growing wealth. For the United States at the time, that wasn't a problem. Nor was it a problem that there was no political freedom, even though they touted it around the world.

I have learned living here that "my country, right or wrong," is the worst way to view the world, and my own country. What is patriotism but nationalism? And what is nationalism but a form of fascism? It's time to take our blinkers off and realize there is no one country greater than another. Rather, we are a global community that must learn to help and tolerate each other.