The 'as if' style

Brothers and sisters:\nThere's something faintly unbecoming about the way in which argument and disputation are currently being conducted. On any pressing matter of the day, contributors prefer to remain tacit spectators rather than active participants. That is to say, contemptible poseurs and windbags are taking over the debate, with their empty and idle platitudes.\nPerhaps I've merely encountered one too many smug senior professors in Bloomington who mistake fashion for wisdom and who avoid the risk of making their words deeds. But those educators who are not also men and women of action blur the distinction between the clever and the wise.\nFor this reason, Theodore Roosevelt said it was the man in the arena, he who "spends himself for a worthy cause," who deserved the laurels, and not those who embodied Utopian virtue. Our 26th president was not alone in chastising those who wanted to abstain from the great contests of life. Not for nothing did Aristotle shun abstract virtue as a quality practiced solely by those who are asleep.\nBetter by far to cultivate a superior attitude, which, reduced to a phrase, is to live "as if" you can make a difference in your country and world. Never be a spectator of unfairness and injustice. Resist the temptation for yourself -- and others -- to become mere critics and consumers of the politically correct cliche. Do not be content to be subjects, but think for yourself, act on that basis, and earn the title of citizen.\nThis way of life, which is also how many of us plan on making our living, is not only forgotten -- it is now to be actively rejected. To take just the most notorious example, Bill O'Reilly is maligned for being, among other things, a rebel with a cause. He usually makes short work of his targets, who, in turn, are understandably, but pathetically, defensive about their own exposed failures and evils. O'Reilly is not perfect, but he has sacrificed a quiet life in favor of the public good. That kind of service is insufficiently recognized and is most commonly castigated by those who behold nothing of greater importance than themselves.\nWhenever I see tacit spectators draining every molecule of oxygen and emotion from the discussion, I cringe slightly. For those who would not recoil at these passing fancies, I would entreat them to remember the philosopher Heraclitus, who said that man's character is his fate.\nWords pale before deeds. So at the 11th hour, let us drop the stance of the spectator, which long ago laid bare the moral shame of remaining uninvolved. Instead, we should transform the debate over what kind of country we want from a stale contest among rank partisans to a substantial row between those who claim their rights but not their duty to the country that ensures it and those who are fired to the core by the very idea of service. The answer, I think, lies in that overused but elusive word "character." Any takers?