The article did not say "all" elitists are articulate, it merely criticized those who are articulate but who fail to listen honestly (the article's words, not mine). Elitists in my experience fall into the same four quadrants as everybody else: articulate and wise; articulate and unwise; inarticulate and wise; inarticulate and unwise. They also appear on all points of the political spectrum.
disregards the very history and alliances that helped make our country something to be proud of.
I guess the issue is, proud or not, was that history a success? Was tolerance of evil until it attacked a success? Was tolerance of evil after it attacked in small ways a success? I suppose a few conflicts were averted, here and there, at the time (some arguably or undeniably were only postponed to a later, uglier phase). But did it really work? And in a world where it's harder and harder to see it coming, and the stakes of an attack are far greater, can we allow that system to once again fail?
To me, that's where the debate is, and there are valid points on all sides.
EDIT: Sorry, I didn't read Laz' response first, I see I repeated something he said. (Which means maybe I should reconsider it! <g>) |
