"I Am Not A World Citizen!" N. Gingrich: The Arrogance Principle

Republicans are casting about, looking for a spokesperson who can unite and enliven their party. As the key speaker at a party rally this week, Newt Gingrich rose to the challenge and offered a new phrase in hopes of catching the spirit of America in troubled times. He asserted firmly, “I am not a world citizen!” Some may think such a retort is the shining hallmark of true American pride. But transparently it was a partisan response to President Obama’s efforts to set a new direction for our international relationships. President Obama’s travels to Arab countries have stirred up the indignation of the conservative right by announcing a new direction for our relations abroad. People like Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Dick Cheney, who are super sensitive about image and respect, think the new President is groveling. They announce that this approach invites the terrorists to trick us into crippling concessions. They feel the President‘s pandering makes our great nation appear naïve. Shame on this Muslim lover who spites our glorious history of might and power and goes around apologizing for our former alleged mistakes. As Rodney Dangerfield, the comedian who “never got no respect,” might say it, “I’m an American, and don’t you forget it!” Gingrich said it more soberly with his “not a world citizen” remark, but I think our founding ancestors would have hoped for better than haughty self-pride from their descendants to whom they passed the torch of democracy. Defiant narcissism is not what our early leaders were about. Yes, they stood up to an overbearing Parliament and fought against the king’s troops, but their pride welled from the buzz that comes from the power felt in cooperative action and the thrill of new responsibilities as they signed on to an innovative democratic experiment. One smug commentator I read insisted that America has won the right to be arrogant. With our causes always honorable, we have earned the right to swagger. After all, he might have said, we did not “win the West” by apologizing to the Indians. A leader, he intoned, does not apologize without losing the advantage necessary for success. The way to put terrorist wanna-be’s in their place is to show them who is in charge. I have a different take on this. Arrogance is not a positive quality, and certainly not enviable. By promoting arrogance, Republicans, of course, are rejecting diplomacy. In contrast, our founding father, George Washington, handled our first international crisis by arranging, in 1796, a treaty with Muslim terrorists (pirates off the Barbary Coast). John Adams then followed suit, settling the XYZ affair by sending a peace commission to France, thereby quieting his nemesis, Alexander Hamilton, who was clamoring for war. Those who choose diplomacy ahead of war recognize that arrogance has no place at the diplomatic table. An arrogant diplomat is an oxymoron. But putting aside arguments over strategy, arrogance is not something to be proud of anyway. A person displaying arrogance should be brought down before he drags the rest of us into the lonely drink with him. If Americans are arrogant, of course we should apologize. Three reasons: 1. First, arrogance is self-defeating; it isolates the bearer, shutting off avenues of cooperation that could make the difference between success or failure of one’s endeavors. 2. Second, arrogance fuels antagonism unnecessarily; it creates enemies and encourages ill will, which puts everyone in a fighting mode, which is a juvenile response to problems. 3. Third, arrogance is not a Christian attitude. Jesus would have none of it. And as the apostle Paul said, if eating meat offends his brother, he will refrain from eating meat. Obama will be judged by how well he maneuvers us in the stormy waters of international conflicts, not on how intimidating he is as a wild western cowboy. Actually, apologies clear the table for the exercise of more mature strategies. Apologies that work can be a sign of strength. They put the enemy off-guard, and confuse him. The better image from our frontier days is “circled wagons,” which on the international stage means “surrounding” or “encasing” the enemy. By temperament, terrorists have no answer for this attractive, friends-winning attitude.