Posted on 10/13/2009 5:42:58 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
As I was working on what became the two most recent postings on this site I came across a Charles Krauthammer offering, Decline is a choice: The new liberalism and the end of American ascendancy. In it he offers a cogent critique of the Obama faction's calculated surrender of America's position of leadership in the world. He also suggests an opposing alternative which begins with the notion that we should "accept our role as hegemon" for the simple reason that "we are as benign a hegemon as the world has ever seen." "…resistance to decline," he declares "begins with moral self-confidence.
Mr. Krauthammer accurately summarizes the moral view that undergirds the Obama faction's determination to abdicate America's leadership position.
*snip*
But while proposing that the reassertion of moral self-confidence is the first step toward correcting these destructive policies, Mr. Krauthammer offers no account of the alternative understanding of America's actions and history that provides the basis for it.
*snip*
In the absence of such an account, Mr. Krauthammer's prescription risks being mistaken for nothing more than a proposal that we cling to American ascendancy for its own sake. Perhaps he believes (understandably so, given the real peril involved) that the mere fact that the alternative is so dangerous makes further moral reasoning superfluous. We may seem to be like the ancient Athenians, whose almost inadvertent establishment of an empire in the wake of the Persian Wars appeared to bring them to a point where they faced an inescapable choice: embrace their imperial vocation or see their way of life destroyed.
(Excerpt) Read more at loyaltoliberty.com ...
I’ve been thinking lately, I wonder if Obama really wants to abdicate America’s leadership position? Instead, he wants to recreate it with himself being the historical ‘savior’ (in other words tear it down so you get credit for building it back up.) It isn’t he doesn’t want the US to lead, he just wants the long term history book credit for making it happen. After all, how could they be so blind as to what is happening unless they plan to use it. A king on a burned down house has no kingdom, so even the greatest delusion of grandeur has to have something to stand upon.
Alan Keyes you are an infinitely greater thinker than Charles Krauthammer could ever hope to be. In addition to that, you are a great American and a visionary.
Thank you, sir.
(thanks very, very much for posting, EternalVigilance. OUTSTANDING!)
Dr. Keyes had a headline on a recent article that your post put me in mind of:
By design or incompetence Obama creates Afghanistan quagmire
My honor and privilege to do so.
Afghanistan was one of the items I was thinking of. Recently those code pinkos went there to praise the improvement for women (something both the left and right were screaming about for decades for the Afghan people). I thought, there was no way they would let President Bush get any credit for that. They have to re-frame the entire conflict so Obama can get credit for the victory and being the ‘liberator of oppressed women’.
He needs to find a way to be the ‘great liberator’, the ‘great peacemaker’ etc, etc. How are all the great presidents described? He will position himself to replace all those images.
From Keyes: We may seem to be like the ancient Athenians, whose almost inadvertent establishment of an empire in the wake of the Persian Wars appeared to bring them to a point where they faced an inescapable choice: embrace their imperial vocation or see their way of life destroyed.
I really feel this way. I think to combat global communism, Conservatives will have no choice but to implement some sort of imperialism. The closest nascent model I've heard of is the ruling Polish political party. They all but outright ban communist thought, keep track of known communists, and refuse to allow them to take certain jobs in society or positions in government, in order to prevent them from spreading their lies. This is why Poland stops Gay Pride parades (in addition to a strong Catholic bias) -- they know the vast majority of the "protesters" come from outside of Poland. They aren't really pushing for equality, they are pushing for Socialism/Communism.
The problem, of course, is how do you balance a free and open society with ideas that seek to purposefully destroy that very society?
Keyes: "For what might be called the New Liberalism, the renunciation of power is rooted not in the fear that we are essentially good but subject to the corruptions of power--the old Clintonian view--but rooted in the conviction that America is so intrinsically flawed, so inherently and congenitally sinful that it cannot be trusted with, and does not merit, the possession of overarching world power."
You have to ask where this idea of America and anti-American point of view
comes from and whether it has any basis in actual knowledge. Or is it a just
projection of the alienation and resentments of a disgruntled socialist alienated
from mainstream American culture and America's institutions? It comes not from prudence or intelligent understanding of foreign policy and international affairs but from the anger and irrational resentment of the Leftist in question.
You also have to ask this question: how did this happen? How did America become held hostage by such a radical anti-American point of view? Does this anti-American point of view have any foundation in engagement and contact with reality? Or is it the product of a very confused and maladjusted individual who spent a large portion of his childhood in a non-Christian Third World country, later abandoned by his parents and raised in an insecure domestic and family situation? When a sitting president's foreign policy has no connection with reality that is a situation which demands answers. Moreover, is this the way that most Americans want their country to be represented abroad?
I don’t think so.
Which leads to the question how long will Americans tolerate their country being represented by an anti-American view of the world.
Rush predicted this a long time ago. The progressives want to destroy this country in order to rebuild it in their socialistic utopian vision. Problem is that somewhere in the process, we will be a destroyed country. They the goofball in cheif and his congress won’t be running the country. They will end up being puppets to china or worse the religion of pieces. These people are compeletly ignorant of history and human nature.
Only time will tell.
God willing, they’re about to experience the push-back.
Indeed they are.
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.