Libertarians often look to the Founding Fathers as political role models, but would the Founders have actually fit the modern definition of a libertarian? David Frum argues no — and writes that those who attribute this ideology to the Founders are simply ignoring history: “[I]f the libertarian impulse summons us to take action to contain and constrain that government, very well let us take up the task. But we can do that task without duping ourselves with a false history that denies the reality of the past and — ironically — belittles the Founders’ actual achievements by measuring them against standards they would surely have rejected, if they had ever understood them.”
A church in Egypt was bombed during New Year’s Mass, killing 21 and injuring dozens more. Authorities believe the attack was carried out by extremist Muslims who were inspired by al-Qaeda but not necessarily associated with the terror group.
Good news: A new “groundbreaking” research project has found that conservative brains are structured to be “fearful” and “reflexive,” while liberal brains are structured to be “courageous” and “optimistic.” Over at the New York Post, Kyle Smith discovers that this important study has cleared up some confusing discrepancies in his own life: “[Professor] Rees has the answer to why, in my Army career, I kept running into so many conceptual performance artists from San Francisco and Chelsea. Seldom did I do a push-up or clean my M16 without finding myself amid heated debate from the officer class about whether Walter Mondale or Eugene McCarthy was the most inspiring American political leader of our era.”
Government spending can actually help stimulate economic growth, argues George Will. But in order for progress to occur, this spending needs to fund the projects of society’s top scientific innovators and pioneers. “With populism rampant, this is not a propitious moment to defend elites, even scientific ones. Nevertheless, the nation depends on nourishing them and the institutions that sustain them,” writes Will.
Well, this was bound to happen eventually. Leftists at the Guardian are now openly opposing human rights: “[Human-rights groups] promote an absolutist view of human rights permeated by modern western ideas that westerners mistakenly call ‘universal.’ In some cases, their work, far from saving lives, actually causes more death, more repression, more brutality and an absolute weakening of human rights.” Yeah, who are we to oppress the people of Saudi Arabia and Iran with our imperialist idea that women shouldn’t be stoned for adultery?
Five members of Hamas have been charged in a plot to bomb a major Israeli stadium during a soccer game. Authorities say that the attack was meant to be in retaliation for Operation Cast Lead in 2008: “According to a statement from Israel’s security service, the Shin Bet, the two main suspects were identified as Mussa Hamada of East Jerusalem, and Bassem Omri, an Israeli citizen living in Beit Tzafafa. Both are members of Hamas and the ‘Muslim Brothers’ movement in Jerusalem, the Shin Bet said.”
We’ve known all this since 9/11, or even the 2000 Palestinian terror war, haven’t we? The more interesting question concerns resistance to this account fofered here: what is just as new about this new mode of terror is the army of international lawyers, journalists, human rights activists, celebrities, etc., who impose the narrative of Western imperialism vs. (abeit at times misguided) resistance on all these events, however poor the fit. What, for example, would be the response by the transnational progressives to an “international terror force”: how many stories would we see about shredding the constitution, the rise of fascism, the insidious role of defense contractors, a new doctrine of torture and pre-emption, etc., etc.? The real war we must learn how to fight is this essentially civil war of (to reference Antonio Gramsci) “position,” in which we learn how to counter the narratives of the Left point by point. We have made almost no progress on that and what sank the Bush Presidency more than anything else is a failure to recognize that such a civil war (by another name, of course) needed to be waged. I believe that very few conservatives realize it yet.
Point by point? The Left sells ‘utopia’, how do you counter that when there’s one born every minute?
Good question–we should treat it as a real, not rhetorical question and one, I believe, that will be among the most difficult to answer. Start with basics: the basic narrative involves hero and villain, a series of events in which the hero is tested, the villain appears undefeatable, and some resources (either inner resources of courage and capacity or external aid) are discovered that enables the hero to defeat the victim. The heroes of the leftist narratives are the leftists themselves–the journalists bravely “speaking truth to power”; the human rights activists who struggle against the depradations of the powerful; the “oppressed,” who, even if we can’t support everything they do, are ultimately just struggling for their human dignity, etc. These are very powerful narratives, supported by the full panoply of, to put a twist on Marx, the “means of representation.” We need to, first, restore the more traditional notion of the hero as the leader of the community who withstands corruption, resists temptation, and remedies the cowardice of others in saving the community; even more, though, we need to produce narratives in which the heroes are those who are the victims of our so-called “victims”–victims of Islamic terror who are themselves members of “marginalized” groups, for example. An obvious example is someone like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose story is tailor made for Hollywood treatment. Now, who will create, produce and disseminate these narratives?–I must confess I just don’t know. But until someone starts doing so, the Leftist position will remain the default one, deeply rooted in the everyday person’s basic processes of thinking and perception, progressively displacing more traditional and commonsensical processes.
Adam–you’re definitely on to something… but in the 6th line, a typo perhaps–did you intend to write “villain” instead of “victim”?
That something is necessary does not mean it will be done.
My prediction is that the civilized world won’t act, but will increasingly continue to appease the systems which produce these animals. Coupled with demographic bankruptcy, it leftist PC ideology and its unwillingness to fight for its survival it will gradually collapse.
RPM–yes–thanks for catching that
The terrorist progression is a frightening one. As we see them grow, they are attaining the building blocks to a nation. They needed attention first, they now have it as of September 11th. They needed commitment, if a self-sacrificing suicide isn’t proof of that, I don’t know what is, and now they have the military power they need. This could become mroe than just a terrorist organization, we might see a united revolutionary group come out of this, a group that might rival the dreaded power of the Soviet Union. This is not the time for us to be electing soft hearted and diplomacy minded illuminati liberals, but a time for the hard-lining action-minded Republicans of a bygone era.