Posted on 05/19/2004 2:54:18 AM PDT by Theodore R.
What do we offer the world?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: May 19, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern
"So, how do we advance the cause of female emancipation in the Muslim world?" asks Richard Perle in "An End to Evil." He replies, "We need to remind the women of Islam ceaselessly: Our enemies are the same as theirs; our victory will be theirs as well."
Well, the neoconservative cause "of female emancipation in the Muslim world" was probably set back a bit by the photo shoot of Pfc. Lynndie England and the "Girls Gone Wild" of Abu Ghraib prison.
Indeed, the filmed orgies among U.S. military police outside the cells of Iraqi prisoners, the S&M humiliation of Muslim men, the sexual torment of their women raise a question. Exactly what are the "values" the West has to teach the Islamic world?
"This war ... is about – deeply about – sex," declaims neocon Charles Krauthammer. Militant Islam is "threatened by the West because of our twin doctrines of equality and sexual liberation."
But whose "twin doctrines" is Krauthammer talking about? The sexual liberation he calls our doctrine belongs to a '60s revolution that devout Christians, Jews and Muslims have been resisting for years.
What does Krauthammer mean by sexual liberation? The right of "tweeners" and teenage girls to dress and behave like Britney Spears? Their right to condoms in junior high? Their right to abortion without parental consent?
If conservatives reject the "equality" preached by Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, NARAL and the National Organization for Women, why seek to impose it on the Islamic world? Why not stand beside Islam, and against Hollywood and Hillary?
In June 2002 at West Point, President Bush said, "Moral truth is the same in every culture, in every time and in every place."
But even John Kerry does not agree with George Bush on the morality of homosexual unions and stem-cell research. On such issues, conservative Americans have more in common with devout Muslims than with liberal Democrats.
The president notwithstanding, Americans no longer agree on what is moral truth. For as someone said a few years back, there is a cultural war going on in this country – a religious war. It is about who we are, what we believe and what we stand for as a people.
What some of us view as the moral descent of a great and Godly republic into imperial decadence, neocons see as their big chance to rule the world.
In Georgia, recently, the president declared to great applause: "I can't tell you how proud I am of our commitment to values. ... That commitment to values is going to be an integral part of our foreign policy as we move forward. These aren't American values, these are universal values. Values that speak universal truths."
But what universal values is he talking about? If he intends to impose the values of MTV America on the Muslim world in the name of a "world democratic revolution," he will provoke and incite a war of civilizations America cannot win because Americans do not want to fight it. This may be the neocons' war. It is not our war.
When Bush speaks of freedom as God's gift to humanity, does he mean the First Amendment freedom of Larry Flynt to produce pornography and of Salman Rushdie to publish "The Satanic Verses" – a book considered blasphemous to the Islamic faith? If the Islamic world rejects this notion of freedom, why is it our duty to change their thinking? Why are they wrong?
When the president speaks of freedom, does he mean the First Amendment prohibition against our children reading the Bible and being taught the Ten Commandments in school?
If the president wishes to fight a moral crusade, he should know the enemy is inside the gates. The great moral and cultural threats to our civilization come not from outside America, but from within. We have met the enemy, and he is us. The war for the soul of America is not going to be lost or won in Fallujah.
Unfortunately, Pagan America of 2004 has far less to offer the world in cultural fare than did Christian America of 1954. Many of the movies, books, magazines, TV shows, videos and much of the music we export to the world are as poisonous as the narcotics the Royal Navy forced on the Chinese people in the Opium Wars.
A society that accepts the killing of a third of its babies as women's "emancipation," that considers homosexual marriage to be social progress, that hands out contraceptives to 13-year-old girls at junior high ought to be seeking out a confessional – better yet, an exorcist – rather than striding into a pulpit like Elmer Gantry to lecture mankind on the superiority of "American values."
Yup, seeing racism in racial segregation, how odd.
The first thing that bothers me is that you use "homosexual practices" and "entaglement" in the same sentence.
But to answer the rest of your question, I agree with Pat's approach on immigration. But his comments that we need to keep brown people out because they won't assimilate as well as white people make him a person that is very hard to stand beside.
I disagree on NAFTA.
Moral issues? Yes.
Isolationism? No.
Segregation, Jews, etc.? I very strongly disagree with Buchanan.
Even David Duke, the Klansman that Pat supported, had a few positions I agreed with. But I could never support the man.
One problem...none of those governments SUPPORTS such terrs, and they actively try to stop them. They've also had quite a bit of success since the heyday of those groups back in the '80s.
Yeah.
What's the military's NEW date for withdrawing the troops from Iraq? Hint: it's not June. It's not September. It's now March, 2005, earliest.
Battle of Kursk involving several thousands of German and Russian tanks and airplanes lasted several day and spanned number of miles.
"At the Kursk battle Germans lost almost twice as many men in a week as Americans lost in the three years of the Vietnam War. After Kursk, Wehrmacht was not able to launch another major offence." It took place well before D-Day.
See my post 392.
Capitalism is anti-American? Are you sure you didn't wander in from the DUmpster?
2. Neo-wilsonian globalist post-Trotskyite interventionism, rejection of patriotism.
We've got savages who insist on a fight. We can fight them there, or we can fight them here.
When and if the situation reverts to rational people with disagreements over resources, policy, etc, non-interventionism will make more sense.
3. Secular hedonistic permisive libertinism. Godlessness.
That falls outside the range of issues that can be addressed by politics.
4. Pseudo-messianic hubris, self-righteousness and lack of self-restraint.
I'm glad you agree that the government needs to be kept out of the realm of consensual personal conduct. All of it's pseudo-messianic, hubristic, self-righteous, and self-indulgent attempts to shape the New American Man have been dismal failures.
Thanks. The thing is, how many folks would NORMALLY vote our way, but don't because they feel that conservatives are inherently theorcratic/authoritarian/bigoted?
The most famous example: Howard Stern. He likes lower taxes, he's realitvely pro-gun, he backs the war on terror. But he's pulling for Kerry because he feels the FCC is singling him out with the encouragement of the "culture warriors" who never liked him in the first place.
He's got a lot of listeners in a state called Ohio, which, last time I checked, was running PRETTY close (Dales and Coop could give you the poll numbers). That makes it a lot harder for folks like us.
Marshall and MLK did the right thing. BTW, I personally participated in the Milwaukee-area racial equality demonstrations, along with a LOT of other black and white people.
"NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts."
Mesmells ozone....
Don't take too much credit for your "clarification."
You only reposted after a kind-hearted freeper begged you to modify your statement so the rest of the Buchananists would not get tarred with your racist words.
If you actually ever READ what PJB wrote on immigration, his concern with LEGAL immigration is that at this time it could be restricted a bit.
He is further concerned that LEGAL immigration favor those peoples who share the Judaeo-Christian heritage, as was the case, by and large, until around 1960.
Where do the terrorists come from?
I gave you the answers.
The support for current-day terrorists comes from Saudi Arabia, Red China, Iran, and North Korea.
Agreed that none of them are "democracies."
OTOH, so what? There are about 100 nations which are not democracies AND which do not support terrorists.
I want victory in this war.
Based on this column, it is obvious Pat Buchanan has taken the same "blame America" line that I could get from ANSWER or any other left-wing group.
What PJB said was not simply that government-enforced segregation existed. What PJB said was that this state of affairs was perfectly reasonable and that there was no reason to have changed it.
I daresay that, though some semantic calisthenics that make Bill Clinton look like Noah Webster, you will deny this. However, it's quite evident to the rest of us.
Keep marking out to your "hero".
Bought your PJB-logo kaffiyah yet? Only $19.99. Get yours now! Comes with free explosives belt. Nails and broken glass not included.
You make me SICK!
Which side were you on?
And did you carry a sign that said, "Segregation is no big deal"?
Whatever you say. PJB and I are racists. PJB hates America. The sky is yellow and green.
I doubt that...he simply loves himself far more.
Nice try.
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.