A Reason to Believe

Neither Israel nor the West at large can long resist radical Islam without some sustaining faith of its own, a faith it will not find unless it makes up its mind to look for it.” — Essayist Richard Fernandez of The Belmont Club looks at the religious aspect of the Terrorist War and finds a critical difference in the nature and intensity of the faiths now in conflict around the world.

The battles in Lebanon against the Hezbollah have been described as Israel’s first non-Arab war. Andrew Sullivan calls it a religious war, driven by ” the divine mandate that the Islamists believe they are following … where the Jews must be destroyed as a people and as

a sovereign state in order for the Apocalypse to occur.” But for Sullivan, it’s not just Nasrallah’s particular brand of religious motivation that is suspect, but religion in general. On the subject of the Apocalypse Sullivan writes ” Pat Robertson and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are in complete agreement”, the sole difference being that Robertson is merely ” a corrupt kook” while ” Ahmadinejad has some serious weaponry and a state under his control.” Thus Sullivan sees only a difference in degree and not of essence.

Perhaps, but with the Jihad advancing under a religious banner and all religions doubtful, under what banner should those who oppose it fight? Bernard-Henri Lévy who Sullivan links to, describes the wavering standard of Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz, as he fights the Hezbollah.

And this sign is the Israeli government’s choice of Amir Peretz as defense minister: a former activist for Peace Now, long committed to the cause of sharing the land with the Palestinians, Peretz was head of the trade union Histadrut and was in principle much better prepared to organize strikes than to wage war. “I didn’t sleep a wink all night,” he tells me, very pale, his eyes red, in the little office in Tel Aviv where he welcomes me…. “I haven’t slept because I spent all night waiting for news of a unit of our boys who were caught in an ambush yesterday afternoon in Lebanese territory.” Then a young aide-de-camp who also looks like a union activist holds out to him a field telephone. Without a word, his eyes lowered, his big mustache trembling with ill-contained emotion, Peretz receives the news he has been dreading. He looks up at us and says: “Don’t spread the news right away, please, since the families don’t know yet — but three of them died, and we still haven’t heard about the fourth one. It’s terrible.…”

My own guess is that neither Israel nor the West at large can long resist radical Islam without some sustaining faith of its own, a faith it will not find unless it makes up its mind to look for it. Men will fight on for as long as there is something left to fight for and not otherwise. Despair comes when we are finally convinced that even our hopes are futile.

I’m responding to this work as if you wrote it, if not, no matter. --- I enjoyed this work very much. It conjured more than a few sensations of “Damn Straight!” and “Hell Yeah!” While I believe it added value to the discourse, I must admit, the story still feels like it’s missing something. It’s as if this work is removing layers of silt and ash that covers an antique but resilient American ideology. You’ve revealed the shape of the treasure but not its shine. In this piece you are doing the hard work of a philosopher – ideologue. The first thought that came to mind after reading it – forensic archeologist.

Please, allow me to assist in uncovering the shine! First – I think this work gives too much credence to Anne Coulter’s perception of the Godless Liberal. She touched on something there but it reads as if she wrote that out of angst. This work is more pure… more calculative – it doesn’t need a nemesis to exist and therefore has a moral compass of its own.

Your work , if I fully understand it, offers nationalism as the primary component of Western faith. I think that’s a step in the right direction. But there’s more to Westerners, particularly Americans, than a narcissistic respect and admiration for ourselves. I assert that: he who is proud of being proud can not remain proud for long. Beyond nationalism, I think Americans, certainly not all Westerners, are wildly independent. I estimate that that uniquely American character fits because Americans are currently awash in natural resources. Americans, unlike Europeans, have room to grow.

American culture, which happens to be my culture, is high octane precisely because we live in a land of plenty. We can afford independence and that affluence has created a unique social environment. Consider adding this to your analysis. Independence breeds faith in ones self. That faith has taken generations to foster and is not easily shaken. This is the faith that fuels my country. That’s real power. Ask yourself; is there really any other kind of creative power? Any monkey can destroy… it takes a person with a free mind and faith in itself to achieve success. This is what drives humankind to unexplored dimensions of reality. It may sound nice, but there is nothing nice about the process. Freedom can be as volatile and destructive as a volcano. There have been a number of false starts and misdirections.

In sifting through the relics of American ideological hiccups I’ve come to understand something that I think is very important. We shouldn’t be disappointed by all of the wasted arguments and wrong turns. The prize comes by fighting as much as it does through winning fights. Yes, it may appear national potential is wasted, but in fact potential is gained. The act of arguing accumulates in Americans faith in themselves and the capacity to trounce the West’s enemies.

Great post...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.