Wednesday, August 17, 2005

Why, why, why are leftists so determined to ensure I never vote for another Democrat?

Lileks:
The hard left in America needs to realize a bald, cruel fact: Anyone who sees no
moral distinction between Israel and the mullahs of Iran, or sees the U.S.
attempt to set up a constitutional republic in Iraq as equivalent to the Syrian
occupation of Lebanon, suffers from incurable moral cretinism. The more the
fervent anti-war base embraces these ideas, the more they ensure that no one
will trust the left with national security. Ever.

When the left embraces people like Cindy Sheehan, it makes it very hard to be a centrist.

(h/t Glenn)

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow; you are convinced by Lilek's perpetual argument; "everybody's doing it; why you pickin' on me?" That is the actual moral relativism. It takes moral clarity to be able to believe that all torture, for whatever purpose, is wrong. It takes cowardly moral relativism to believe that torture is justified by the ends it produces. I enjoy some of the comments you make on other blogs, but can't you see that Lileks engages in nothing more than cowardly relativism and strawmen? Yes, the democracy in Israel is more representative than that of Iran. The democracy of Iran is more representative than the Chinese political system. The Israeli system is, quite frankly, better than ours; purportional representation allows for a much better alignment between voter and representative. Still, it is simply wrong for Israel to bomb civilian areas in Palestine; it is wrong for Israel to build settlements in Palestine; it is wrong for Israel to torture suspected criminals; and it is wrong for Israel to place its wall on land that doesn't belong to it (according to the World Court). Israel doesn't get a pass on these issues because it's better than Iran. That's the coward's way out. To simply stop at the point where a country is better than Iran is lazy, feckless, and frankly it seems to contradict the "can do" attitude that the US right wing perpetually extolls in defense of capatalism. No; you can fight terrorism and remain STRONLY aligned with respect for human rights, due process, and innocent civilians. The path of righteousness will cost more, and it will require a lot of initiative, sweat, work, and thought. I didn't know that the American right was scared of those things.

12:13 PM  
Blogger TallDave said...

Guh? That wasn't Lileks' argument at all. He saying if you don't see the real moral difference between Israel and Iran, then you're either ignorant or a moral cretin. That doesn't mean Israel is perfect or Iran is the epitomy of evil. But one is qualitatively different than the other.

So which is it for you? Honestly, I hope it's ignorance.

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

His purpose for writing the piece was to attack Cindy Sheehan, or at least to attack her supporters. He completely dodged the issue of er visit; whether President Bush can articulate a reason for invading Iraq that hasn't been completely debunked. He has written many articles justifying Israel's disgusting disrespect for the human rights of Palestinians, and was only adding that silly section as a meager reinforcement of those articles. Attacking Cindy Sheehan for her views is pitiful; we can deal with those views another time. As for "seeing a difference between Israel and Iran," I thought that I indicated that 1) reality is more complicated than simple binary assesments of good and evil; and 2) that in certain areas (e.g. respect for homosexuals, system of governance) Israel stands above Iran. Are you asserting that by stating that Israel has a bad record on himan rights I am automatically equivocating? That's incorrect. However, if you share Lileks views, you should probably know this: the left puts pressure on Israel because it is responsive to pressure. That is, Israelis (though not necessarily their government) generally care about respecting the human rights of minorities, and generally care about what the world thinks of them. That's why we apply the pressure. Lileks is trying to respond to that by urging Israelis not to care about others' opinions by asserting that those opinions come from anti-semitics. That's disingenuous.

9:39 AM  
Blogger TallDave said...

His purpose for writing the piece was to attack Cindy Sheehan

No, just the nutty things she said.

whether President Bush can articulate a reason for invading Iraq that hasn't been completely debunked.

I wasn't aware of any that had been "debunked," though some people have certainly been putting a lot of misguided effort into doing so. Saddam was not complying with WMD requirements, supported terror, oppressed his people, broke the case-fire agreement... I could go on.

Are you asserting that by stating that Israel has a bad record on himan rights I am automatically equivocating?

No, I'm asserting anyone that doesn't recognize that Iran, Syria, Saddam, etc, have a much worse record is either ignorant or a moral cretin, as James puts it.

2:14 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home