Quotes from Profiles in Courage
These are some of the things I underlined while reading Profiles in Courage. The first three are from the introduction, written by Bobby Kennedy, and all the rest are quotes from JFK himself except where otherwise noted.
If there is a lesson from the lives of men John Kennedy depicts in this book, if there is a lesson from his life and from his death, it is that in this world of ours none of us can afford to be lookers-on, the critics standing on the sidelines.
At the time of the Cuban missile crisis last year, we discussed the possibility of war, a nuclear exchange, and talked about being killed -- the latter at that time seemed so unimportant, almost frivolous. The one matter which really was of concern to him and truly had meaning and made that time much more fearful than it would otherwise have been was the specter of the death of the children of this country and around the world -- the young people who had no part and knew nothing of the confrontation, but whose lives would be snuffed out like everyone else’s. They would never have been given a chance to make a decision, to vote in an election, to run for office, to lead a revolution, to determine their own destinies.
We, our generation, had. And the great tragedy was that if we erred, we erred not just for ourselves, our futures, our homes, our country, but for the lives, futures, homes and countries of those who never had been given an opportunity to play a role, to vote ‘aye’ or ‘nay,’ to make themselves felt.
What happens to the country, to the world, depends on what we do with what others have left us.
These, then are some of the pressures which confront a man of conscience. He cannot ignore the pressure of groups, his constituents, his party, the comradeship of his colleagues, the needs of his family, his own pride in office, the necessity for compromise and the importance of remaining in office. He must judge for himself which path to choose, which step will most help or hinder the ideals to which he is committed. He realizes that once he began to weigh each issue in terms of his chances for reelection, once he begins to compromise away his principles on one issue after another for fear that to do otherwise would halt his career and prevent future fights for principle, then he has lost the very freedom of conscience which justifies his continuance in office. But to decide at which point and on which issue he will risk his career is a difficult and soul-searching decision.
Only the strength and progress and peaceful change that come from independent judgment and individual ideas -- and even from the unorthodox and the eccentric -- can enable us to surpass that foreign ideology that fears free thought more than it fears hydrogen bombs.
It was a time of change -- in the Senate, in the concept of our government, in the growth of the two-party system, in the spread of democracy to the farm and the frontier and in the United States of America. Men who were flexible, men who could move with or ride over the changing currents of public opinion, men who sought their glory in the dignity of the Senate rather than its legislative accomplishments -- these were the men for such times. But young John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts was not such a man.
[John Quincy Adams'] somber sense of responsibility toward his Creator he carried into every phase of his daily life. He believed that man was made in the image of God, and thus he believed him equal to the extraordinary demands of self-government. The Puritan loved liberty and he loved the law; he had a genius for determining the precise point where the rights of the state and the rights of individuals could be reconciled.
Great crises produce great men, and great deeds of courage.
“The liberty of this country and its great interests will never be secure if its public men become mere menials to do the biddings of their constituents instead of being representatives in the true sense of the word, looking to the lasting prosperity and future interests of the whole country.” -Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar
“It happens very often that one tries to do something and fails. He feels discouraged, and yet he may discover years afterward that the very effort he made was the reason why somebody else took it up and succeeded. I really believe that whatever use I have been to progressive civilization has been accomplished in the things I failed to do than in the things I actually did do.” -George Norris
There is no official ‘list’ of politically courageous Senators, and it has not been my intention to suggest one. On the contrary, by retelling some of the most outstanding and dramatic stories of political courage in the Senate, I have attempted to indicate that this is a quality which may be found in any Senator, in any political party and in any era. Many more examples could have been mentioned as illustrative of similar conduct under similar circumstances.
A party can live only by growing. Intolerance of ideas brings its death.
Acts of political courage have not, of course, been confined to the floor of the United States Senate. They have been performed with equal valor and vigor by Congressmen, Presidents, Governors, and even private citizens with political ambitions.
"No man’s ambition has a right to stand in the way of performing a simple act of justice." -Peter Altgeld
Of course, the acts of courage described in this book would be more inspiring and would shine more with the traditional luster of hero-worship if we assumed that each man forgot wholly about himself in his dedication to higher principles. But it may be that President John Adams, surely as disinterested as well as wise a public servant as we ever had, came much nearer to the truth when he wrote in his Defense of the Constitution of the United States: ‘It is not true, in fact, that any people ever existed who love the public better than themselves.’
If this be true, what then caused the statesmen mentioned in the preceding pages to act as they did? It was not because they ‘loved the public better than themselves.’ On the contrary it was precisely because they did love themselves -- because each one's need to maintain his own respect for himself was more important to him than his popularity with others -- because his desire to win or maintain a reputation for integrity and courage was stronger than his desire to maintain his office -- because his conscience, his personal standard of ethics, his integrity or morality, call it what you will -- was stronger than the pressures of public disapproval -- because his faith that his course was the best one, and would ultimately be vindicated, outweighed his fear of public reprisal
It is when the politician loves neither the public good nor himself, or when his love for himself is limited and is satisfied by the trappings of office, that the public interest is badly served. And it is when his regard for himself is so high that his own self-respect demands he follow the path of courage and conscience that all benefit.
We can improve our democratic processes, we can enlighten our understanding of its problems, and we can increase our respect for those men of integrity who find it necessary, from time to time, to act contrary to public opinion. But we cannot solve the problems of legislative independence and responsibility by abolishing or curtailing democracy.
The true democracy, living and growing and inspiring, puts its faith in the people -- faith that the people will not simply elect men who will represent their views ably and faithfully, but also elect men who will exercise their conscientious judgement -- faith that the people will not condemn those whose devotion to principle leads to unpopular courses, but will reward courage, respect honor and ultimately recognize right.
If there is a lesson from the lives of men John Kennedy depicts in this book, if there is a lesson from his life and from his death, it is that in this world of ours none of us can afford to be lookers-on, the critics standing on the sidelines.
At the time of the Cuban missile crisis last year, we discussed the possibility of war, a nuclear exchange, and talked about being killed -- the latter at that time seemed so unimportant, almost frivolous. The one matter which really was of concern to him and truly had meaning and made that time much more fearful than it would otherwise have been was the specter of the death of the children of this country and around the world -- the young people who had no part and knew nothing of the confrontation, but whose lives would be snuffed out like everyone else’s. They would never have been given a chance to make a decision, to vote in an election, to run for office, to lead a revolution, to determine their own destinies.
We, our generation, had. And the great tragedy was that if we erred, we erred not just for ourselves, our futures, our homes, our country, but for the lives, futures, homes and countries of those who never had been given an opportunity to play a role, to vote ‘aye’ or ‘nay,’ to make themselves felt.
What happens to the country, to the world, depends on what we do with what others have left us.
These, then are some of the pressures which confront a man of conscience. He cannot ignore the pressure of groups, his constituents, his party, the comradeship of his colleagues, the needs of his family, his own pride in office, the necessity for compromise and the importance of remaining in office. He must judge for himself which path to choose, which step will most help or hinder the ideals to which he is committed. He realizes that once he began to weigh each issue in terms of his chances for reelection, once he begins to compromise away his principles on one issue after another for fear that to do otherwise would halt his career and prevent future fights for principle, then he has lost the very freedom of conscience which justifies his continuance in office. But to decide at which point and on which issue he will risk his career is a difficult and soul-searching decision.
Only the strength and progress and peaceful change that come from independent judgment and individual ideas -- and even from the unorthodox and the eccentric -- can enable us to surpass that foreign ideology that fears free thought more than it fears hydrogen bombs.
It was a time of change -- in the Senate, in the concept of our government, in the growth of the two-party system, in the spread of democracy to the farm and the frontier and in the United States of America. Men who were flexible, men who could move with or ride over the changing currents of public opinion, men who sought their glory in the dignity of the Senate rather than its legislative accomplishments -- these were the men for such times. But young John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts was not such a man.
[John Quincy Adams'] somber sense of responsibility toward his Creator he carried into every phase of his daily life. He believed that man was made in the image of God, and thus he believed him equal to the extraordinary demands of self-government. The Puritan loved liberty and he loved the law; he had a genius for determining the precise point where the rights of the state and the rights of individuals could be reconciled.
Great crises produce great men, and great deeds of courage.
“The liberty of this country and its great interests will never be secure if its public men become mere menials to do the biddings of their constituents instead of being representatives in the true sense of the word, looking to the lasting prosperity and future interests of the whole country.” -Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar
“It happens very often that one tries to do something and fails. He feels discouraged, and yet he may discover years afterward that the very effort he made was the reason why somebody else took it up and succeeded. I really believe that whatever use I have been to progressive civilization has been accomplished in the things I failed to do than in the things I actually did do.” -George Norris
There is no official ‘list’ of politically courageous Senators, and it has not been my intention to suggest one. On the contrary, by retelling some of the most outstanding and dramatic stories of political courage in the Senate, I have attempted to indicate that this is a quality which may be found in any Senator, in any political party and in any era. Many more examples could have been mentioned as illustrative of similar conduct under similar circumstances.
A party can live only by growing. Intolerance of ideas brings its death.
Acts of political courage have not, of course, been confined to the floor of the United States Senate. They have been performed with equal valor and vigor by Congressmen, Presidents, Governors, and even private citizens with political ambitions.
"No man’s ambition has a right to stand in the way of performing a simple act of justice." -Peter Altgeld
Of course, the acts of courage described in this book would be more inspiring and would shine more with the traditional luster of hero-worship if we assumed that each man forgot wholly about himself in his dedication to higher principles. But it may be that President John Adams, surely as disinterested as well as wise a public servant as we ever had, came much nearer to the truth when he wrote in his Defense of the Constitution of the United States: ‘It is not true, in fact, that any people ever existed who love the public better than themselves.’
If this be true, what then caused the statesmen mentioned in the preceding pages to act as they did? It was not because they ‘loved the public better than themselves.’ On the contrary it was precisely because they did love themselves -- because each one's need to maintain his own respect for himself was more important to him than his popularity with others -- because his desire to win or maintain a reputation for integrity and courage was stronger than his desire to maintain his office -- because his conscience, his personal standard of ethics, his integrity or morality, call it what you will -- was stronger than the pressures of public disapproval -- because his faith that his course was the best one, and would ultimately be vindicated, outweighed his fear of public reprisal
It is when the politician loves neither the public good nor himself, or when his love for himself is limited and is satisfied by the trappings of office, that the public interest is badly served. And it is when his regard for himself is so high that his own self-respect demands he follow the path of courage and conscience that all benefit.
We can improve our democratic processes, we can enlighten our understanding of its problems, and we can increase our respect for those men of integrity who find it necessary, from time to time, to act contrary to public opinion. But we cannot solve the problems of legislative independence and responsibility by abolishing or curtailing democracy.
The true democracy, living and growing and inspiring, puts its faith in the people -- faith that the people will not simply elect men who will represent their views ably and faithfully, but also elect men who will exercise their conscientious judgement -- faith that the people will not condemn those whose devotion to principle leads to unpopular courses, but will reward courage, respect honor and ultimately recognize right.
Comments
Post a Comment