The counter French revolution

In the eyes of many historians, the French Revolution of 1789 was the trigger for the most powerful ideological agent of change in recent centuries, nationalism.  It spread from Europe reaching Asia in the mid-20^th century and created massive change throughout the world. Before it, people identified with their region, religion or social class.  After it, people gradually began to identify and be loyal to a nation, which included others of different regions, religions or social classes.  In other words, nationalism at its source was an inclusive force. Traditional nationalism aimed to welcome people to its large fold as much as local tensions and geography allowed.

In the last 20 years, nationalism has not disappeared but seemingly taken on an inverse direction: it defines nations by rejecting others, especially their culture and values. Whether as a reaction to countries becoming ethnically heterogenic or the need of politicians to attain and hold on to power, today’s nationalism is extremely xenophobic, rejecting anybody or any value considering alien. Trump openly espouses “America First” and wants to deport the largest immigrant group in the country, regardless of their contribution to the country.  Putin rejects any Western political values and oppresses and discriminates against minorities. Erdogan promotes a Turkish and religious agenda, openly crushing any laic or European-oriented opposition. These are only the most prominent of the new populist leaders. What is significant is not their existence but their popularity.  While for support these and similar leaders is far from 100%, they have all been elected with respectable majorities.  In other words, their restrictive world view reflects that of their voters.  It is an “us against them” world.

While traditional nationalism also divided the world into friends and enemies, these were geographical distinctions created by borders and history.  The enmity between France and Germany or Viet Nam and China are examples.  Still, any person willing to adopt the nationality and accept loyalty to the nation was welcome.  Today, in too many places, if you don’t fit the exclusive definition of the right citizen, whether in terms of race, philosophy or religion, you are a potential fifth column. That point of view, in my eyes, is an attempt to rewind the clock, generally a violent and ultimately ineffective act. 

I believe that the words of the Marseillaise are still relevant:

Allons enfants de la Patrie,
Le jour de gloire est arrivé!
Contre nous de la tyrannie,
L'étendard sanglant est levé, (bis)

Or in English:

Arise, children of the Country,
The day of glory has arrived!
Against us tyranny's
Bloody banner is raised, (repeat)

Executive order

Words can sound good or bad not just in the sense of their auditory quality but also in their associational impact. By the latter I mean the emotional feeling created by that word, or at least one meaning of the word.  Of course, most words are neutral in themselves but life experiences shade the word. For example, a book is stack of papers bound together but a person’s experience may make render the association either positive, a wonderful tranquil experience, or negative, the objects that made my life at school miserable.  In some cases, even without first experience, the mere picturing of the word creates negative impressions. For instance, almost none of us have witnessed an amputation but the image of saw and lots of blood makes the process rather scary and unpleasant.

An interesting example of the associational complexity is the word execute.  For the average person, this word brings up the image of person standing against the wall or sitting in an electric chair, reinforced by repeated images in movies and TV documentaries (Woody Allen’s Love and Death and The Green Mile immediately come to mind). Even the most unsophisticated understand that execution is a once in a lifetime experience of a particularly bad type. Thus, execution has gotten itself a bad name.

Law has reinforced this attitude, at least for some people.  To execute a judgment means to carry it out, as in placing a lien on a bank account or repossessing a car or house.  For the recipient, it is clearly a traumatic experience even if not entirely unexpected at the time. Combined with the word’s first context, execution of a court order sounds like a death sentence.  For that reason, in England and the United States but not France, it is called enforcement. As Hannah Arendt explained in With Eichmann in Jerusalem, it was psychologically much easier to carry out the final settlement than murder.

Curiously, if the context is clear enough and other words are added, execution becomes much more palatable: Sports teams must execute the coach’s plan to succeed; it is the job of the President to execute the law; all persons are entitled to execute their right of attorney.  Most people do not grimace when hearing such phrases since death is far from their thoughts when hearing them.

So, alas, a rose is not always a rose; sometimes it is a thorn bush either due to a bee sting or possibly an allergy to roses. The why of our emotional associations to words is complex but nobody can deny their existence.

Fear of flying

Having just returned from a family visit abroad, I had plenty of time, some 24 hours door to door, to reflect on the modern flying experience. While at one time, apparently, travel was exiting and almost magical, it has become unpleasant, even borderline insufferable.

The anxiety begins even before the trip.  Despite the plethora of options available to order airplane tickets, the sheer number of options in terms of airlines, types of connections, layover times and prices can be very daunting.  I have to admit that while for simple trips I use Expedia, for most trips I call the airline directly so I can compare the difference in price for specific days. It is far more time efficient. Unfortunately, the mere possession of the reservation guarantees no peace of mind. My flight paranoid has been justified on numerous occasions.  I have had flights delayed, cancelled and “disappeared” (never existed according to the airline, from Miami, of course). I have had to sit hours at the airport, been sent home from the airport and, just recently, even had to take a cab to another airport in order to make the connection.

The airport itself has become an obstacle course. Some airlines have self-checking in stands that easily confuse the easily confused. After checking in, US rules require a security process that is not far from a strip search and create long lines as each traveler gets his/her five minutes of unwanted attention. After that obstacle, in many airports, travelers of all ages can begin the long distance sprint.  Many airports, including San Francisco and Frankfurt, have kilometers of halls to pass to reach the golden gate of departure.  I have done it with an irregular heartbeat, a humbling experience.  I can imagine how older and less fit travelers feel.

The reward for having successfully reached the plane is sit in cramped seats like sardines in a can with generally efficient but not exactly friendly stewardesses and stewards, overworked themselves to be fair. Airplane food is rather infamous, justifiably. As for scheduling, officially, a half an hour late is on-time.  Try telling that to your boss. Some airports then play lottery with our luggage. Smart travelers try to avoid checking in luggage not just because of the cost.

Thus, traveling by plane involves stress to the third power.  Once upon a time, people were scared of flying because they were worried that the plane would crash.  The vast majority of Western flyers (not including Russian ones, I imagine) are now more concerned about what kind of physical and mental shape they will arrive at the destination.  That is the current meaning of the title of Erica Jong’s book.