The "progressive" movement, call it liberal, politically correct, whatever you will, and its adherents in and out of academe, have totally lost the plot. They have subordinated rational thought to ideology and reaped the inevitable consequences. The post-colonial revision of history, based on a number of valid and in fact essential perceptions, has been deformed, distorted, and bloated into a parody of reality, and those it dominates have adopted flagellation as the default response to any challenge. Lunacy prevails.
Opposing this lunacy we have all too many neo-neanderthals who seem convinced that the rest of the word is inhabited by whining sissies without the discipline to earn a living or the balls to impose their will in a fair fight. Whether the issue is economic development or direct conflict, the knee-jerk response is "get tough". Ignorance is made a virtue; there is but one "right" way, and that is all that needs to be understood.
Nice lineup of the polar extremes. But if you think about it, each side is preaching a moral righteousness, both of itself and in answer to the other side. The "neanderthals" are preaching Western Civilization against Barbarism (an argument inherited directly from the Roman Empire); the liberals (who have the European elites in their camp) are preaching Marxist-tinged liberal guilt: War bad. Colonialism bad. Orientalialism, Racism bad. Third world self-expression, self-determination good.
As to why each side is preaching moralism and not just self-defense or self-interest, let me crib a good line from a movie I liked, The Thirteenth Warrior, "Wars are won in the will. Strike at the will." In order to have the will to fight a war, we of Europe and America (yes I do think that Western Civ. exists, despite Gandhi's quip that it "would be a very good idea") need to feel that the cause is just. September 11th was reason enough for Afghanistan, but since Saddam Hussein is not attacking us right this moment, more is needed for Iraq. |
