83. "Barbarian"

We're listening in on Jimmy Carter's advisers as they debate his response to the imprisoning of American diplomats in Iran:

No, no, I really don't want him to use the word "barbaric." There's too much he can get charged with — you know, "colonial arrogance," "Eurocentric condescension," all that. And my God, this is a Middle Eastern country, and Muslim! Academics will be all over him for "orientalism," that old cover for imperialism. No, no word that says, "You have an inferior culture."

Yes, but he's got to have some word that puts those people in their place. And accurately. An accurate put-down name, that's what we need. Accurate enough to justify our going in there and doing something. Otherwise he looks weak. And the nation does too. Already we're being called "a bumbling, helpless super-power." And he's being called a "wimp."

Yeah, "wimp." And for what? For being civilized. For observing the customs — hell, "sharing the culture" — of civilized nations. Civilized nations don't attack each other’s diplomats, they protect them. No matter how "just" their cause.

All right, you've got your word. "Barbarous nations" attack emissaries and envoys and messengers carrying white flags. But keep it to yourself.

OK, I'll shut up. But first I'll ask you, "What would you call the President of a nation who responded to the imprisoning of his diplomats by imprisoning the diplomats of the offending nation?"

I'd call him a barbarian, sure. He's become the tribal chief who kept his messengers safe by knocking off ten messengers of any tribe that bothered them. It would be a reversion.

But it would spring his diplomats. If it didn't he, if he were Carter, could fill his jails with Iranians. There are a lot of them here, a lot more than there are Americans in Iran. He could start knocking them off one by one. He'd get his hostages back and nobody would call him a "wimp" — or us a "helpless super-power."

No, they'd just call him — I know you set me up for this — a "barbarian." And the nation "barbaric." And that would be an accurate call. You've got your put-down word.

Which Carter won't use against the Iranians. I've got the speech ready: "Iran's taking of hostages was a barbaric action which we can counter only by becoming barbarians ourselves. I won't do that, I won't do what they're doing, they know I won't, and there you have the source of their strength — and our weakness." I don't want Carter to knock off Iranians; I just want him to use a good, strong, accurate word. But he won't do it.

Well, there's the guy we work for. He'd rather be put down as a "wimp" than as a "barbarian."

Or than as an imperialist who calls other people "barbarians."