It took the New Zealand Prime Minister all of six days
after a mass shooting incident to announce a ban on certain weapons of mass
destruction. We’re talking about semi-automatic
rifles, bump stocks, even high-capacity
magazines. The Cabinet has already
agreed to rid the country of those scourges.
As soon as the Kiwi Parliament reconvenes in April, their absolute
prohibition will be the law of the land.
New Zealand has endured only a single mass shooting
in the last 20 years, but that one was enough to bring lawmakers together on
behalf of common sense and the sanctity of human life. By contrast, in the past 20 years, we in
America have seen 18 shooting sprees resulting in ten or more deaths and eight
such sprees in the past four years. Yet
here, except for the soon-to-be-implemented ban on bump stocks, the federal
government doesn’t dare touch our guns.
Semi-automatic weapons flood the landscape. High-capacity magazines rack up corpses in
droves. Meanwhile, mentally-fragile residents can buy these insane killing
tools without even needing to submit to a background check. And the leaders of our government? They duck and cover – much like the children
at our schools during one of our increasingly common active shooter situations.
In the United States, whenever there is a mass
shooting, the face of the event quickly becomes the head of the National Rifle
Association – tough, macho, uncompromising, callous ... and victorious on
Capitol Hill. In New Zealand, we are
greeted instead by the face of a woman – equally tough, but also open-minded, empathetic,
and transparent. Prime Minister Jacinda
Ardern is a mere 38 years old. Had she sought to be head of state in America,
we surely would have heard a million reasons why she is unqualified. Too young.
Weak. Wimpy. Unpresidential. Just imagine her grieving in public as she
has done so often in the week after the recent massacre. The opposition party would mock her relentlessly
for being someone foreign adversaries would never fully respect or take
seriously. Instead, Americans would
pine for the days of George W Bush, who after 9/11, expressed the desire to
“find out who did this and kick their ass.”
Ardern isn’t talking about kicking anyone’s ass. She’s simply mourning. And changing laws for the better.
What is it about America and its obsession with
machismo? Is that why we love guns so
much? Is that why we insist on permitting every Tom, Dick
and Harry to own weapons that can take out scores of innocent people in a
single spree? Why can’t we appreciate
the strength behind feminine figures like Jacinda Ardern? Why can’t we appreciate that a lady who is
publicly mourning is far more dignified than a cowboy bent on revenge?
I know I sound jealous of people from places like
New Zealand or Scandinavia, where the values of femininity seem to be given more
respect. The truth is, though, that I’m
a loyal American, one who takes tremendous pride in so many aspects of American
history and culture. And yet I’m also
not deluded. Sometimes, you have to
recognize your own flaws, or those of your country. And when you contemplate what it means to
live in a place that has never elected a woman as head of state, has become the
murder capital of the developed world, inures itself to hateful rhetoric from
the highest levels of Government, and is so fundamentally partisan that it has
trouble coming together even on common sense legislation, you find yourself
saying that Houston, we have a problem.
It understates the point to say that we haven’t been
electing women as President. Lately, we
haven’t even been electing short men.
Jimmy Carter was the last President who was 5’11” or shorter. He was elected 43 years ago, before Ronald
Reagan touted the cowboy ethos and set the country on an economic path of haves
and have nots. Four years after Reagan
was first elected, he ran again – and this time, for the first time in history,
there was a woman on the ticket (albeit in the #2 slot). That ticket came to be known,
unaffectionately, as “Fritz and Tits.”
They won only a single state.
In some respects, we’ve clearly made progress since
1984. In 2016, a woman ran for President
and won the popular vote. Then again,
when it came to the all-important Electoral College, she lost to a political
novice who ran largely on a platform of tribalism and machismo, and who was
caught on tape boasting that as a celebrity, he can grab women “by the pussy.” In some respects, he was perceived as the lout
at the end of the bar. But his opponent
was perceived as an intense, uppity woman – and in much of America, that’s the
greater deal breaker.
Today in America, we have more women in political
office than ever before. Many are in
Congress. Some are even given a chance
to win the Presidency. It’s true that
none who seek the Democratic nomination is polling in the double digits (unlike
two men who would become octogenarians by the end of their first term), yet I suspect
that most of us believe that with the right personality, intelligence,
experience, and policy chops, a woman might actually win the prize. But I also suspect that most of us believe
that the lane to victory is far, far wider for a man. Stated differently, many a male American
political candidate has been made of Teflon when it comes to surviving scandals,
mistakes and limitations, whereas with a woman, it almost goes without saying
that they’re made of Velcro.
That’s the situation here. Perhaps it is different in New Zealand. Perhaps the experience of seeing Jacinda
Ardern unify her country with sympathy, rather than hatred, may remind her
fellow citizens of what a wonderful choice they have made in a Prime
Minister. Fortunately, the world is
becoming a small place. Ardern’s
compassion and courage are nearly as visible here as they are there. We might want to take note of what real
leadership looks like. Now is not the time
to get jealous. But it might be the time
to emulate greatness when we see it.
No comments:
Post a Comment