Restoring American Civilization: a Conundrum Trending Toward Cynicism
We've heard quite a few politicians declare lately that what they're about is “restoring American civilization.” I've had a difficult time figuring out exactly what they mean. “Civilization” pertains specifically to cities, and since most cities that have grown up on this continent since colonization have been based on models from Europe, I can only assume that advocates of restoring American civilization must be referring to the great cities of the Mississippian culture which flourished in the Southeast and Midwest some thousand years ago. The massive mounds on which they placed their cities have yielded indications of a complex society supporting hundreds of thousands, with trade routes running all the way from Mexico to the Great Lakes.
If that's what advocates of restoring American civilization mean, then I'm all for it, though I'd be squeamish about the human sacrifice part, at least at first. I mean, open sacrifice takes some getting used to when you've grown up with it happening overseas beneath a hail of bombs or quietly in the streets and homeless shelters and hospital emergency rooms as is our current custom. Besides, other than the few bits and pieces the ground has given up, we know very little about the Mississippian way of life, and it seems a scanty trace to go on when doing the complicated business of restoring a whole civilization.
Even more damning, archaeologists suspect that the Mississippian culture collapsed because it was fueled mostly by corn, and therefore it couldn't sustain itself after a year or so of drought. Surely we, with all our sophistication, would have nothing to learn from a culture that relied too heavily on a single resource.
But perhaps I'm wrong about what those who advocate for restoring American civilization mean. Perhaps they mean the great cities of the United States at its 20th Century peak. These industrial giants certainly were impressive: steel mills and factories, elaborate systems of electric-powered public transportation, convenient housing. They were also the crucible of great social movements that led to the liberation of women, reasonable wages and working hours, safe working conditions, and modern sanitation techniques. But to hear the same people who advocate restoring American civilization scream about how terrible are regulations and trade unions and workers' rights makes me think that this, too, is not the civilization they mean.
I suppose we're left with the great Pueblo culture of the American Southwest. Here again, though, we had a culture based on corn and prone to collapse in the face of drought. Besides, the Pueblos were in caves, and at our current population of more than 300 million we'd be hard pressed to find cave space for everybody.
Having ruled out the available options, I am still not sure what civilization those who say we should restore the American one are referencing. Perhaps I'm taking it too literally. Maybe it's a rhetorical move; they leave the term “civilization” sufficiently vague to allow themselves the opportunity to insert whatever issue they are advocating or to exclude whatever issue they're currently against. This would be kind of like how the terms “real America” and “family values” have been used before. But to think that way would be to practice that least American of our shared values: cynicism. And who could ever accuse our restorers of American civilization of that?