My December 7 blog on turkeys and bald eagles received some exceptionally useful insight on the birds—and their characteristics, from one of my readers, a lover of the wild turkey. Franklin, as I wrote, sorted economic philosophy between the turkey and the eagle.
Franklin’s economic point was that though the eagle was classy looking, it made its living by feeding on the helpless. I related my grandson’s observation that the eagle was a mean bird who stole fish from the gulls in flight. One especially knowledgeable commentator and hunter, Chris Blazer of Montana, pointed out, in agreement, that the eagle was “frequently a scavenger.”
Franklin argued, incontrast, that the turkey was symbolic of just one instance of the issues of freedom. He believed that people who work hard and play by the rules should have a fair shot at prosperity, and rejected the notion that self-indulgence and genetics should be rewarded.
He was especially attracted to the wild turkey and proposed the turkey for the national bird, but my description, Mr. Blazer pointed out so well, was quite a bit shy of the mark. I described the turkey with an “easily distracted mind and artificially swelled breast.” Through the lens of the barnyard, the turkey is a hard worker, disciplined, a follower of the rules, and quite willing to give hell to anyone who tries to make trouble. Mr. Blazer pointed out that my description had little relationship to the wild turkey and the strength of Ben Franklin’s analogy. With Blazer’s input, Franklin’s point is far stronger.
Mr. Blazer happens to be a hunter—and a fan of the wild turkey. He revealed my confusion (and ignorance) between the wild and the domesticated birds. As I wrote, “the domestic turkey is easily distracted and puffed up." But, "the wild turkey (in stark contrast) is a wily bird that eludes predators and hunters readily, manages to thrive in a wide variety of environments and, while not aggressive, defends itself and its own when provoked.” Franklin’s analogy has a lot more strength, insight and contemporary relevance than I first noted.
As the writer so eloquently put it, “we could be a very different nation if we had followed his advice.”