Three Cheers For Mediocre Presidents

It's amusing how media types always speculate about a president's legacy. Like any one really cares. We are the most historically ignorant nation in the world. Just ask your average high school kid what came first, the Middle Ages or the Renaissance. You'll likely hear a variant of this: "The what? Huh? I hate history. I can never remember dates." Having been a history major myself at one time, I can personally attest to the abuse you take from your countrymen for being a devotee of the human past. Telling a girl you were majoring in history was only marginally better than telling her you had herpes. So why all the fuss about a legacy? No one really ever pays attention anyway. Presidents themselves typically don't know jack about history, and the ones who do aren't more wise or prudent, just more dangerous. Take Woodrow Wilson, for example. He had a Ph.D in history and political science, but he was also one of the most interventionist presidents we've ever had. He put troops all over the place, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, even Russia. We have him to thank for America's participation in World War I, which tipped the scales against Germany for good, leading to that nation's defeat, the Treaty of Versailles, Adolph Hitler, and lots of other fun stuff besides. Obligatory disclaimer: I'm not blaming America for Hitler. Of course not. I'm just suggesting that if Wilson hadn't caught a hair up his ass to go make the world safe for democracy, Germany quite possibly would have won that war, and the twentieth century would have been much, much different. No World War II. The Soviet Union probably would have died in its dish. And generations of Americans would have been spared all those hagiographies about the saints of WWII, like Tom Brokaw's The Greatest Generation. Trees had to die for that, you know.

Oh yeah, and my grandmother's uncle wouldn't have been gassed to death in 1918 (there weren't any shrines to Woodrow on her mantle, no way).

Now, quick, what is Millard Fillmore's historical legacy? Chester A. Arthur's? Name the top three achievements of the Benjamin Harrison Administration. I read about this stuff all the time and I couldn't tell you. I wasn't even sure if Millard was spelled Millerd or not. I had to look that one up. Yes, I was that bored.

Now, what was Polk's legacy? Truman's? Either of the Roosevelt's? It's a lot easier, isn't it. Why? That's easy, too: body counts.

We never remember the peacemakers. Nor do we remember the fat, corrupt hacks with funny sideburns and watch fobs who sat in the president's chair in between great wars and depressions. We only remember the ones who created the most corpses. Put another way, we forget the presidents we probably would have preferred living under, and honor those who presided over, um, less than optimal conditions. That seems like a pretty clear incentive for presidents to make war, doesn't it? And you can you bet that Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and obersturmfurhur Rumsfeld made that point crystal clear to Little Boots when they were plotting to invade Iraq and steal its oil. Can't you easily picture them huddled over W, cooing in his ear about how only war presidents can be great presidents?

It's as if a chef couldn't get a Michelin Star unless a hundred people died from botulism after eating at his restaurant.

Of course, Fillmore, Arthur and Harrison made a few corpses too, but they were Indian corpses, which we also like to forget. But that's another story entirely.

So I suggest we start forgetting the gun-wielding missionaries, crusading democracy lovers, and sundry other "great" presidents. Let's raise our glass to the mediocrities who didn't care about their place in history, but went peacefully strolling into obscurity instead. They are, after all, the ones who most closely resemble the people they govern.