G.W.'s Happy Agrarian Utopia

August 22, 2001
Konrad Switters

In his statements regarding his preference for rural life over city living, George W. Bush makes a clear statement about his vision and blueprint for prosperity in the United States.

During his month-long hiatus at what he referred to as his "home to the heartland" journey, in his hometown of Crawford, Texas, he spoke candidly with the press. Mr. Bush never says much. But when he speaks his mind freely, when he gets comfortable back home on the ranch away from his speech-writers, it's important to listen carefully and read between the lines.

The press has made much of the amount of time Mr. Bush spends away from Washington, and this type of criticism is both childish and superficial. Even the New York Times [passing the blame onto the Washington Post], wrote:

"The Washington Post has calculated that if Mr. Bush, as scheduled, does not return to Washington before Labor Day, he will have spent 42 percent of his time in office to that point either on vacation or on his way to vacation, counting his weekend visits to Camp David."

That the duration of this most recent vacation was envious to even the most executive of corporate mangers, doesn't mean that it was unnecessary or unneeded. What the media should have been doing instead of criticizing Mr. Bush's vacation agenda is reading between the lines of these precocious statements and understanding the kind of values Mr. Bush supports. In his candid comments to the press, he has helped to reveal something of his philosophy of life; and though his sound bytes are short and littered with trite insincerities, they are heartfelt and honest.

For example, if one looks at the following statement, as reported on August 7, 2001, in The New York Times, there is something to be learned about what Mr. Bush means by American "values", and where they can be found:

>He would prefer that we [the American Public] think of him not so much as being on vacation as on retreat, refreshing his soul "away from Washington, in the heartland of America."; and "celebrating some of the values that strengthen America," <link>

Mr. Bush appreciates the values of "heartland America". The appreciation for the outdoors and hard, honest work. But don't people in big cities on the East [Washington D.C. for example] and West coasts of the United States also appreciate these types of values? Don't they also yearn to refresh their souls? Do all Americans need to take a pilgrimage to the heartland of America to rejuvenate themselves? Are big cities and urban environments devoid of the, "values that strengthen America"? The suggestion seems to be that cities and urban areas are devoid of the sobering affects and medicinal qualities of this "heartland", and that the heartland ranch is the Mecca of family values. Why else would Mr. Bush flee so consistently from a city with as beautiful an urban and architectural landscape as Washington D.C.?

<Maybe this is being to hard on Mr. Bush. Perhaps it is the vacation itself, the sojourn away from the trivialities of everyday life that is refreshing. The "ranch" may then be seen as a metaphor for the mental and physical escape from the oppressive forces in life which seek to crush the soul. Perhaps the human spirit can be refreshed simply by leaving work early one day midweek and heading to the local city park to have a coffee and a cigarette in the late day sun; or maybe not...

Mr. Bush's statements, have made the American public more acutely aware of his position. His recent statements have rendered his anti-urban tendencies far more clearly than can be inferred from his repeated flights from city life in Washington D.C.. Nowhere does Mr. Bush express his preference for wide open spaces more explicitly, than in the following quote, [New York Times] made while addressing a group of farmers:

"We want our families to be on the farms and ranch. After all, farm families represent the best of America. They represent the values that have made this country unique and different - values of love and family, values of respect for nature."

The quote above shows just how hypocritical Mr. Bush can be, and how contrary this statement is to his behavior and policies. "We want our families to be on the farms and ranch." No. He only wants some families on farms - relegating the rest to the status of everlasting peasants suffocating insular little worlds for the "greater-picture" rhetoric of the capitalist gentry; those who esteem his own kind as a beneficent and defacto American royalty; those who tote their guns and their pinched world views and believe wholeheartedly in the unreflected life of power and powerlessness.

"After all, farm families represent the best of America." How brilliant! Kings and farmers! That must be the best kind of America if George W. Bush thinks so.

"They represent the values that have made this country unique and different - values of love and family, values of respect for nature." How is it that the Republicans dare think they can co-opt the language of the poor and the truthful and the natural? They are not unique; they are not different; they do not value love and family above money and power; and they have no respect for the values of nature.

This fact has been rendered with astounding clarity by his consistent stance against the environment under the rhetoric that it costs too much to do the right thing. His rejection of the Kyoto Agreement, his nomination of Donald Schregardus for chief enforcement officer at the Environmental Protection Agency [whose track record shows that in all likelihood, he won't pursue lawsuits against polluting businesses], and his Vice President's voting record against the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act are only three examples of the destructive decisions which follow his masquerade as a champion of the environment.

And yet just because Dick Cheney is from Wyoming and George W. Bush is from Texas the American public has to suffer these "cowboy" images? Could this be more insulting to the values of a cowboy? Associating this spoiled idiot king with their rugged essences? Well maybe -- if cowboys are thought of as American progenitors of genocide [ask the Native American who is what].

The urban enclave of the American city represents a Mecca of intellect and creativity that has no equal. The artists, architects, writers, and scientific minds which inhabit these loci of enlightened thinking are the jury of individuals Mr. Bush is running from when he retreats to Crawford, Texas. He speaks plainly of the comfort of the like-minded people he knows in Texas:

"I'm amongst friends in Texas," he said. "I think the people of Texas know me, they know what I'm like, they know I can make decisions. They know I'm a person who stands on principles. I really don't worry about polls or focus groups. I do what I think is right. And so there's no political heat here."

No political heat. Like the political heat that he has stoked with his nomination of Donald Schregardus. The New York Times reports that, "Senator Schumer said Schregardus isn't supportive of the federal role in the acid rain lawsuits and said the nominee supported a 1996 Ohio law that grants immunity from civil action when utility companies voluntarily report violations of environmental regulations."

Mr. Bush's rhetoric of family values and accountability rings hollow in light of his association with and nomination of an individual who rewards the honesty of law-breaking corporations with immunity. What kind of country would this be, if individuals were extended the same courtesy of forgiveness?

In laying out a preference for rural life over city living, Mr. Bush makes a clear statement about his vision for the prosperity of the United States. His views are both anti-urban and anti-environment.

The ranch and the suburban town are his Mecca. His churches are the strip malls, his town halls are the shopping centers, his civic centers are the roadside warehouses, and his "values" are reflected in the "Starbuckized", mass-produced, one-size-fits-all consumer products sold to the masses by corporate conglomerates who are relieved of all social and ethical responsibilities by a government which uses legislation to puts profits ahead of people.

People everywhere should beware of this president, and his agrarian and suburban utopia.