George Graham Vest Speech - Tribute to Dogs

George Graham Vest - Tribute to Dogs (c. 1855) after winning a case against a man
who killed a dog
Gentlemen of the Jury: The best friend a man has in the world may turn against him
and become his enemy. His son or daughter that he has reared with loving care may
prove ungrateful. Those who are nearest and dearest to us, those whom we trust with
our happiness and our good name may become traitors to their faith. The money that a
man has, he may lose. It flies away from him, perhaps when he needs it most. A man's
reputation may be sacrificed in a moment of ill-considered action. The people who are
prone to fall on their knees to do us honor when success is with us, may be the first to
throw the stone of malice when failure settles its cloud upon our heads.
The one absolutely unselfish friend that man can have in this selfish world, the one
that never deserts him, the one that never proves ungrateful or treacherous is his dog.
A man's dog stands by him in prosperity and in poverty, in health and in sickness. He
will sleep on the cold ground, where the wintry winds blow and the snow drives
fiercely, if only he may be near his master's side. He will kiss the hand that has no
food to offer. He will lick the wounds and sores that come in encounters with the
roughness of the world. He guards the sleep of his pauper master as if he were a
prince. When all other friends desert, he remains. When riches take wings, and
reputation falls to pieces, he is as constant in his love as the sun in its journey through
the
heavens.
If fortune drives the master forth, an outcast in the world, friendless and homeless, the
faithful dog asks no higher privilege than that of accompanying him, to guard him
against danger, to fight against his enemies. And when the last scene of all comes, and
death takes his master in its embrace and his body is laid away in the cold ground, no
matter if all other friends pursue their way, there by the graveside will the noble dog
be found, his head between his paws, his eyes sad, but open in alert watchfulness,
faithful
and
true
even
in
death.
George Graham Vest - c. 1855

Emma Goldman Speech - What Is Patriotism

Emma
San
1908
Men

Goldman

"What
is
Francisco,
and

Patriotism?"

speech
CA
Women:

What is patriotism? Is it love of one's birthplace, the place of childhood's recollections

and hopes, dreams and aspirations? Is it the place where, in childlike naivet, we
would watch the passing clouds, and wonder why we, too, could not float so swiftly?
The place where we would count the milliard glittering stars, terror-stricken lest each
one "an eye should be," piercing the very depths of our little souls? Is it the place
where we would listen to the music of the birds and long to have wings to fly, even as
they, to distant lands? Or is it the place where we would sit on Mother's knee,
enraptured by tales of great deeds and conquests? In short, is it love for the spot, every
inch representing dear and precious recollections of a happy, joyous and playful
childhood?
If that were patriotism, few American men of today would be called upon to be
patriotic, since the place of play has been turned into factory, mill, and mine, while
deepening sounds of machinery have replaced the music of the birds. No longer can
we hear the tales of great deeds, for the stories our mothers tell today are but those of
sorrow,
tears
and
grief.
What, then, is patriotism? "Patriotism, sir, is the last resort of scoundrels," said Dr.
Samuel Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-patriot of our time, defines patriotism
as the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that
requires better equipment in the exercise of man-killing than the making of such
necessities as shoes, clothing, and houses; a trade that guarantees better returns and
greater
glory
than
that
of
the
honest
workingman.
Indeed, conceit, arrogance and egotism are the essentials of patriotism. Let me
illustrate. Patriotism assumes that our globe is divided into little spots, each one
surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born on some
particular spot consider themselves nobler, better, grander, more intelligent than those
living beings inhabiting any other spot. It is, therefore, the duty of everyone living on
that chosen spot to fight, kill and die in the attempt to impose his superiority upon all
the
others.
The inhabitants of the other spots reason in like manner, of course, with the result that
from early infancy the mind of the child is provided with blood-curdling stories about
the Germans, the French, the Italians, Russians, etc. When the child has reached
manhood he is thoroughly saturated with the belief that he is chosen by the Lord
himself to defend his country against the attack or invasion of any foreigner. It is for
that purpose that we are clamoring for a greater army and navy, more battleships and
ammunition.
An army and navy represent the people's toys. To make them more attractive and
acceptable, hundreds and thousands of dollars are being spent for the display of toys.
That was the purpose of the American government in equipping a fleet and sending it
along the Pacific coast, that every American citizen should be made to feel the pride
and
glory
of
the
United
States.
The city of San Francisco spent one hundred thousand dollars for the entertainment
of the fleet; Los Angeles, sixty thousand; Seattle and Tacoma, about one hundred
thousand. Yes, two hundred and sixty thousand dollars were spent on fireworks,

theater parties, and revelries, at a time when men, women, and children through the
breadth and length of the country were starving in the streets; when thousands of
unemployed
were
ready
to
sell
their
labor
at
any
price.
What could not have been accomplished with such an enormous sum? But instead of
bread and shelter, the children of those cities were taken to see the fleet, that it may
remain, as one newspaper said, "a lasting memory for the child." A wonderful thing to
remember, is it not? The implements of civilized slaughter. If the mind of the child is
poisoned with such memories, what hope is there for a true realization of human
brotherhood?
We Americans claim to be a peace-loving people. We hate bloodshed; we are opposed
to violence. Yet we go into spasms of joy over the possibility of projecting dynamite
bombs from flying machines upon helpless citizens. We are ready to hang,
electrocute, or lynch anyone, who, from economic necessity, will risk his own life in
the attempt upon that of some industrial magnate. Yet our hearts swell with pride at
the thought that America is becoming the most powerful nation on earth, and that she
will eventually plant her iron foot on the necks of all other nations.
Such

is

the

logic

of

patriotism.

Thinking men and women the world over are beginning to realize that patriotism is
too narrow and limited a conception to meet the necessities of our time. The
centralization of power has brought into being an international feeling of solidarity
among the oppressed nations of the world; a solidarity which represents a greater
harmony of interests between the workingman of America and his brothers abroad
than between the American miner and his exploiting compatriot; a solidarity which
fears not foreign invasion, because it is bringing all the workers to the point when
they will say to their masters, "Go and do your own killing. We have done it long
enough
for
you."
The proletariat of Europe has realized the great force of that solidarity and has, as a
result, inaugurated a war against patriotism and its bloody specter, militarism.
Thousands of men fill the prisons of France, Germany, Russia and the Scandinavian
countries
because
they dared
to defy the
ancient
superstition.
America will have to follow suit. The spirit of militarism has already permeated all
walks of life. Indeed, I am convinced that militarism is a greater danger here than
anywhere else, because of the many bribes capitalism holds out to those whom it
wishes
to
destroy.
The beginning has already been made in the schools. Children are trained in military
tactics, the glory of military achievements extolled in the curriculum, and the youthful
mind perverted to suit the government. Further, the youth of the country is appealed to
in glaring posters to join the Army and the Navy. "A fine chance to see the world!"
cries the governmental huckster. Thus innocent boys are morally shanghaied into
patriotism, and the military Moloch strides conquering through the nation.
When we have undermined the patriotic lie, we shall have cleared the path for the

great structure where all shall be united into a universal brotherhood -- a truly free
society.

A Battle for Trust

By Randy

David |Philippine

Daily

Inquirer

When we find ourselves having to make decisions in the face of so much confusion, we rely
on trust to find our way and keep going. Trust simplifies what is complex. It dwells in the
familiar, in the expectations that people have about their world and about the other people
around them. Unlike hope, trust is precarious. It is withdrawn when things turn out differently.
Last Mondays State of the Nation Address, President Aquinos fifth, was all about trust.
Throughout his 90-minute speech, the President offered reasons why Filipinos can continue
to trust in him and in his promise to transform the nation for the better. He said he has not
forgotten that, four years ago, they made him president purely on the basis of a trust that
flowed from the recognition of his parents intrinsic patriotism and goodness. He assured
them that he would never do anything to betray his parents memory.
P-Noy knows that trust is fragile, that it takes but little to break it. Perhaps more than anyone
else, he is also aware that whatever political power he wields today largely rests on the moral
capital he inherited from his parents. If this gift of grace is lost, nothing can bring it back, and
none of his achievements as president will matter. To me, this explains whyin the wake of
the Supreme Court decision declaring his budget reform initiatives unconstitutional and
challenging him to prove good faithhe has waged a relentless battle to keep the peoples
trust, even at the risk of appearing to disrespect a coequal branch of government.
Some commentators had advised P-Noy to drop the DAP (Disbursement Acceleration
Program), move on, stop criticizing the Courts decision, and assume the stance of a
statesman when he faced the nation to deliver his fifth Sona. They must think that he heeded
their counsel when what they saw and heard last Monday was a somber President reciting his
accomplishments and showing some vulnerability.
We could fixate on the formthe tears and alland miss the substance of what was being
communicated here. Indeed, unlike his two belligerent speeches attacking the Courts
decision, there was no explicit attempt to explain or defend the DAP in Mondays Sona. But
references to it were all over the placeall the achievements the President chose to highlight
in this Sona were funded from savings that were harvested through the DAP.
As a cluster of budget reform measures, the DAP is too complex for the average citizen to
comprehend. Even more so are the legal issues it raises. But its impact on peoples lives is
not. That is the reason for the video clips of testimonials from ordinary people. Of course,
these were selective, as all Sonas are. The point is that it would be a mistake to read P-Noys
fifth Sona as a retreat from the previous occasions in which he staunchly defended the DAP.

Could
File not found

not

load

plugins:

To drop the DAP and move on could easily be interpreted as conceding not just the
unconstitutionality of the executive order creating it but also the possibility that bad faith
informed it from the start. P-Noy could accept the former, but would never grant the latter.
The first is a judgment of law; the second involves a judgment of character. Neither would he
allow his budget secretary, Butch Abad, to resign and take the flak for the DAP. That would
be like saying he did not know what his men were doing or what he was signing.
I can understand it. He who stands by what he has allowed to be known about himself,
whether consciously or unconsciously, is worthy of trust. That is a line from Niklas Luhmann,

whose classic book on trust and power is unparalleled to this day. The President is fighting to
keep the peoples trust, and so, for him, even the slightest hint that an illegal act had been
knowingly committed by him or by any of his people on his instructions would be fatal to his
claim to the peoples trust.
In so many ways, last Mondays Sona reverses the tide of distrust that has come in the wake
of the confusing pronouncements about the DAP. More than ever, P-Noy needs the peoples
continuing trust to be able to complete and secure the program of governance reform he has
begun. He knows he cannot demand trust; the people themselves must offer it. The last
thing he would want is to be kicked about as a lame-duck president, a reluctant figure who
was thrust by circumstances into the presidency and found unworthy. That is how the most
strident of his critics want to paint him. Interestingly enough, they have not been able to dent
the one thing he values mosthis personal integrity.
And it is this that he now holds up as an ultimate shield against those who doubt him when
reason itself seems unable to serve the purpose. This maneuver is not without its risks. Like
trustworthiness, integrity is not something one claims for oneself. You cant say Im honest
without somehow, in the process, devaluing the claim itself. But, this fifth Sona managed to
deliver its messageI would say, far more effectively than the forgettable Im not a thief
speech the President gave in connection with the same issue.
A lot of it is due to P-Noys own communicative instincts. Even as he seemed momentarily
flooded by a surge of memories and feelings at one point during the Sona, he quickly
recovered his bearing and reined in his emotions. Thus, a rare display of presidential
weariness turned instantly into a show of strength and resolve. Many observers will probably
long remember this particular Sona for that brief moment of personal vulnerability. But, we
should as well recognize it for the arduous work it set out to accomplishthe urgent recovery
of the peoples trust.