United or untied?

In a brief video last Saturday, former president George W. Bush called on Americans to “rise as one” to combat the insidious coronavirus that is leading to the destruction of almost everything we value as a nation. How can any loyal citizen of the United States of America find fault with a call to unite (or, for that matter, bemoan the absence of interference in a trial)? Some people have, apparently. Puzzling, that. How could it possibly be problematic if, as the video suggests, we “remember how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat” and so work together for victory? What’s wrong with the idea that “empathy and simple kindness are essential, powerful tools of national recovery”? In the face of this thoughtful plea for a united effort to do all in our power to forestall untimely death and disease, does it not seem curious that this message is not uniformly welcomed and embraced? Could it be that a call for unity coming from an influential and powerful voice (a former president) simply goes against the grain of a pervasive strategy aimed to “divide and conquer”? Are we really becoming the “Untied” States of America?

Unsigned

Columbus

Peter Imes writes: The Dispatch has long-maintained a policy of running only signed letters to the editor. We generally believe a name on a letter holds the writer accountable for their words, and those signed letters carry more weight. In the current political and social environment, I believe individuals have valid heightened concerns about facing repercussions for the things they say. We will continue to lean toward requiring names on letters, but in an effort to ensure diverse views are shared here, we may from time to time run thoughtful unsigned letters.

The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.