Barack Obama’s Tanner lecture
Over 31 years ago, on July 1, 1978, Obert Clark Tanner gave what was to be the very first Tanner Lecture on Human Values at Clare Hall, Cambridge University. Now listed on the Tanner web site there are nearly 200 lectures, nearly all of which are available for download in Adobe Reader format.
These lectures were (and still are) delivered at one of ten different University locations in the United States and England by mostly Western but well-known and respected world-wide thinkers and scholars, on every imaginable subject drawn either from the humanities and/or the sciences, or both together.
Why mention this? Because the widely varying beliefs among Americans, not to mention the peoples of the world, about exactly what are the human values that are most important and should be the most protected by the nations’ governments, including our own, are too often opposed to one another, and much too often clash frighteningly with one another.
A case in point is the current debate, or rather clash, over health care. What should be our government’s responsibility in this regard? This straightforward and disarmingly simple question arouses the raw nerve stemming from underlying value differences among us.
In particular, between those who say that health care should not be the government’s responsibility and those who say that government’s primary responsibility is to help those who cannot help themselves.
But again, why the mention of the Tanner lectures? Because we have a president who approaches a social problem much as those who approach the subjects of their lectures. And like them he speaks, much as he spoke the other day to the joint session of Congress, from a solid grounding in knowledge of the subject, including its history, and moves us along with him to reasonable conclusions.
In contrast we have a Congress, those listeners at the joint session the other night, made up by and large of only partially educated men and women, made up of those who speak much more from their fears and prejudices than from a much ignored and neglected faculty of reason, having learned that demagoguery is still the most effective way of being reelected to office.
No more than their constituents are they interested in analyzing the nature of a problem and then adopting the most reasonable solution. Their dislike of their president may stem even more from their dislike of his use of reason than the color of his skin.
The members of Congress for the most part probably didn’t even hear the President’s concluding words. For here with childlike simplicity of expression he brought the whole debate about health care down to the perennial question of the proper role of government in our lives.
This should be the talk of the nation. But instead we’re talking about Joe Wilson who could no more understand the substance of President’s words than he could follow the subject matter of a Tanner Lecture. A clash of beings as large as any in the world today. The country, for all its admirable exceptionalness.can’t seem to rid itself of the Joe Wilsons seated among its elected officials.
Here are the President’s words (without the “God Bless” which has no part in a Tanner lecture):
That large-heartedness, that concern and regard for the plight of others is not a partisan feeling. It’s not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character.
Our ability to stand in other people’s shoes. A recognition that we are all in this together, that when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand. A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play. And an acknowledgement that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.
This has always been the history of our progress.
In 1935, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it.
In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down.
They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.
You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom.
But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, the vulnerable can be exploited.
And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter — that at that point we don’t merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.
That was true then. It remains true today.
I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road, to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.
But that is not what this moment calls for.
That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it’s hard.
… I still believe that we can act when it’s hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things and that here and now we will meet history’s test, because that’s who we are. That is our calling. That is our character.Barack
