home  |  book  |

A Case of the Economic Shivers The Democrats' Drive-by Politics for 2006

print view

Is It Bush We Are Testing to Destruction?

by Christopher Chantrill
June 11, 2006 at 6:16 pm

|

THE GOOD THING about the reelection of President Bush in 2004, according to Matthew Parris this week in the London Times, is that it gave a chance for the neoconservative project to be tested to destruction. He refers to a May 2004 piece in which he wrote:

What the President and his advisers are trying to do will be a colossal failure. But failure takes time to show itself beyond contradiction. The theory that liberal values and a capitalist economic system can be spread across the world by force of arms, and that the United States of America is competent to undertake this task, is the first big idea of the 21st Century. It should be tested to destruction.

Since that colossal failure cannot come soon enough, the international media has not been too enthusiastic about the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi last week. Despite a small victory George W. Bush, his neoconservative cabal, and Middle America just don’t get it.

On the other hand Austin Bay compares the war on terror with the Cold War against the Soviet Union and President Bush to President Truman. He writes:

Harry Truman prepared America for the Cold War -- and at West Point, Mr. Bush compared our time to that of Truman, circa 1950. Mr. Bush noted “Truman laid the foundation for freedom’s victory in the Cold War.” Then he said his own administration is “laying the foundation for victory” in our new long war.

In this new long war, what Norman Podhoretz has called World War IV, the strategy of containment that President Truman formulated in the pivotal NSC-68 of 1950 has been replaced with a new strategy that President Bush calls the “forward strategy of freedom.” Continues Austin Bay:

A “forward strategy of freedom” means fostering development of states where the consent of the governed creates legitimacy and where terrorists are prosecuted, not promoted. This strategy requires nation-building.

So Matthew Parris and Austin Bay are essentially agreed about the Bush strategy. The difference is that Parris experiences the Bush strategy as reckless hubris, a wild gesture of imperial overreach, and Austin Bay experiences it as sober realism, the first step in a long and arduous march.

The Bush forward strategy is merely a return to the default western strategy of the last half millennium. Before the First World War western nations believed that their destiny was to expand the light of reason and trade to the uttermost ends of the world, and they acted upon their beliefs. It was the Bolshevik menace and post colonial guilt, not to mention the exhaustion from two world wars, that forced the resort to containment.

Lee Harris states the western argument in Civilization and Its Enemies. The conflict in which we are engaged, he asserts, is one between the productive western team and the “eternal gang of ruthless men,” or more directly, between the adult men’s team and the teenage boys’ gang. The western team culture is one of service, transparency, trust, and the rule of law to mitigate power. But the eternal gang of ruthless men is a culture of pure power, of mistrust and routine betrayal.

At one pole is the world of global trade and commerce, with business enterprises obtaining finance in one country, design in other, parts from a third, and assembly in a fourth. It is a realm of trust that extends from one end of the global middle class to the other.

But then there is the world of the gang. It is a world of mistrust and betrayal, with thug lefty dictators, thug mullah dictators, thug secular dictators, thug populist military dictators, and just plain thugs like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

When you divide the world into productive teams and ruthless gangs then the analysis of Matthew Parris is absurd. If Bush fails then we just pick ourselves up and start again.

But would the next Democratic president do that? Will she review the forward strategy of freedom after the mess of Iraq and ratify it, as President Eisenhower in 1953 ratified the containment strategy of NSC-68 after the mess of the Korean War? Or will she reverse it? As of today, we do not know, and neither does she.

Let us return close to home. Perhaps the real conflict in the war on terror is not the battle of Iraq but the battles of Toronto, London, Madrid, and Denmark. The home-grown jihadis are not testing President Bush and the neoconservative project but something else. They are probing the west at its weakest point, the soft underbelly of the secular, single, childless welfare state beloved of the scribbling classes. They seem to be testing victimology, multiculturalism, and diversity to destruction.

In that case the only way to beat the jihadist menace would be to abandon the welfare state and repudiate its bribed apologists.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at americanmanifestobook.blogspot.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS


Responsibility

Seeckt: "to make of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier."
MacGregor Knox et. al., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050


Living the Virtues

When recurrently the tradition of the virtues is regenerated, it is always in everyday life, it is always through the engagement by plain persons in a variety of practices, including those of making and sustaining families and households, schools, clinics, and local forms of political community.
Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue


Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self


US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism


Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”


Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph


Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”


Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America


Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


presented by Christopher Chantrill

 •  Contact