Reader question:
Please explain “right side of history” in this sentence: Gay proponents claim to be on the right side of history.
My comments:
Supporters of gay rights believe they’re doing the right thing.
That is, if history be the judge.
In other words, they think posterity will judge their current position favorably. Simply put, they think future generations will take their side.
As humans, we move by taking steps forward instead of backward. Likewise, we tend to believe that history is advancing in the same direction – forward instead of backward.
Metaphorically speaking that means human societies are becoming more enlightened and less benighted, more peaceful and less violent, more democratic and less authoritarian and, in terms of dealing with gay and other people who are different from us in some way or other, more tolerant and less bigoted.
Societies worldwide, in short, are becoming more civilized and less barbaric.
Hence, if you do something to advance matters in this direction, then you’re on the right side of history. What you do may be controversial at this point in time, but in the long run, history will be on your side. Future generations will give you their approval.
We humans move backward, of course when we are in face of danger or something. We sometimes take two steps forward, one step back. History, too, often takes a zigzagging route, sometimes moving backwards before turning forward again. Generally speaking, though, we humans move in the right direction, i.e. from darkness to light.
That is relieving, isn’t it?
It is relieving if you care to think long term.
For time being, in the heat of the moment, we do sometimes find it doubtful whether something is on the right side history or wrong. Read the following examples to make a judgment for yourself, or, if you will, leave it to history:
1. Historians continue to debate the impact that individuals can have on their time period. In looking at the period 1985-1989, specifically the overlapping of Reagan’s second term with the rise to power of Gorbachev, and the almost immediate easing of tensions between the Soviet Union and the United States, the reasons for the subsequent end of the Cold War have varied from Reagan's consistent economic pressure that allegedly bankrupted the Soviet Union to Gorbachev’s internal reforms that allowed for private ownership and governmental transparency. Many have argued that Reagan single-handedly won the Cold War. Others that Gorbachev deserves all the credit.
But those arguments, though important to the story of the end of the Cold War, leave out, I think, the most important factor in bringing the cold war to an end. Instead of Reagan’s economic pressure and massive defense spending that bankrupted the Soviet Union, or Gorbachev's internal reforms that westernized the Soviet Union, the private and mostly top-secret correspondence between Reagan and Gorbachev forced the two leaders to continue to talk, debate, argue, disagree, but also offer proposals even when they thought no agreement would be possible. Both Reagan and Gorbachev recognized that change was coming, and both wanted to be on the right side of history. But they needed to find a way to overcome forty years of Cold War ideology. They needed to find a way to trust each other. It was this trust, established through twelve detailed and frank letters that provided the basis for their first meeting in Geneva, in November 1985, just eight months after Gorbachev came to power. And 15 more letters that provided the basis for their next meeting, in Reykjavik, not even a year later. Though the Geneva and Reykjavik meetings failed to produce any arms control agreements, or really agreements on anything, their shared belief that they needed to continue to do everything in their power to prevent a nuclear war kept them talking, and kept them writing.
- Recently Released Letters Between Reagan and Gorbachev Shed Light on the End of the Cold War, HuffingtonPost.com, February 27, 2013.
2. There’s a photo in the lobby of the building where I work that I pass every day, and I never thought much about it. But then, one morning, a small detail caught my eye.
The photo shows bow-tied bandleader Lawrence Welk and singer Mildred Stanley posing with a sign that says: “Keep us out of war. Be neutral.”
The photo was taken Sept. 11, 1939, days after the Nazis had ignited World War II by marching into Poland. Less than a year earlier, Adolf Hitler’s followers had burned hundreds of synagogues, killed nearly 100 Jews and sent 30,000 to concentration camps during two days of terror that became known as Kristallnacht — the night of broken glass. The intent of the advancing Nazi regime, therefore, couldn't have been much of a mystery.
But there were Welk and his vocalist, smiles on their faces at the Edgewater Beach Hotel, as they labored against the notion of involvement in a conflict that had already sucked in France and England. They wanted to be ‘neutral” in the face of Hitler. Let that sink in for a moment.
It might sound odd now, but it wasn’t an unpopular sentiment at the time. The nation was still fatigued by World War I, which had ended two decades earlier with more than 100,000 American deaths. Another entanglement on the other side of the Atlantic was understandably unpalatable.
But all these years later, that photo looks, at best, hopelessly naive. There’s no telling what this world would look like had fascism been left to spread through Europe, but it probably wouldn’t be a place where democracy and freedom remain the ideal (even if both are often elusive). Plenty of people, including President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, had already surmised as much by 1939.
Through the lens of history, we can therefore conclude that Welk, Stanley and their isolationist brethren lacked foresight. They were, as it is said, on the “wrong side of history.” And it is said often.
- History ultimately judges right and wrong, by Josh Noel, ChicagoTribune.com, May 27, 2017.
3. It’s crunch time for the fight against global warming.
And, despite ongoing conflict and uncertainty at the U.N. climate change summit here in Paris, optimism is still running high.
“It’s time to come to an agreement,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, who is presiding over this process, said in a meeting late Thursday night.
“We must do this, and we can do this,” he added. “I think, dear friends, that we will make it.”
…
“If you want to be on the right side of history on climate change you need to stand for some basic principles,” said Jake Schmidt, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “They’re trying to show other countries that there’s a significant group that wants to be in this camp.”
- COP21: ‘It’s time to come to an agreement’, CNN.com, December 11, 2017.
About the author:
Zhang Xin is Trainer at chinadaily.com.cn. He has been with China Daily since 1988, when he graduated from Beijing Foreign Studies University. Write him at: zhangxin@chinadaily.com.cn, or raise a question for potential use in a future column.
美文赏析:决定振作,生活就会焕然一新
美国自由女神像原来不是绿色的?
绑带鞋为何能掀起夏日狂潮?
国内英语资讯:Xis Moscow visit witnesses stronger China-Russia ties
疫苗贴让你轻松搞定
研究:英国女性椭圆身材最多 沙漏身材最完美 你属于哪种?
章莹颖案嫌犯将出庭受审 罪名成立或被判死刑
四川省资阳市2016-2017学年高二下学期期末考试英语试卷
Dealing with exam stress 应对并克服考试压力的方法
史上最高气温出现,53度……伊朗人很无奈
国内英语资讯:Xi arrives in Moscow for state visit to Russia
国内英语资讯:State Council officials pledge allegiance to constitution
房产投资首选城市出炉 上海北京深圳位列前三
国内英语资讯:Xi, Putin pin hopes on NGOs, media, business for closer ties
国内英语资讯:Xi arrives in Berlin for state visit to Germany
快乐,健康的人早上必做7件事
除了发胖、长痘 再给你五个戒掉宵夜的理由
No picnic 并非易事
欧洲最棒的中世纪古城是哪?
2017中国社交媒体影响报告出炉 中老年入场90后逃离
哪10件事最值得你花时间去做
顺丰获颁中国首张无人机空域许可证
中国股市高频交易退潮
让留学生成瘾的“笑气”到底是啥?
H&M这件T恤告诉我们,英语不好真要命
肯德基往太空发射了一个汉堡
新电脑病毒扑面而来,Petya到底是什么?
四川省资阳市2016-2017学年高一下学期期末考试英语试卷
研究:上夜班会造成DNA损伤并引发癌症
国内英语资讯:China, Russia pledge to play role of ballast stone for world peace
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |