Posted on 01/08/2006 5:13:35 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
Even though the war on terror dominates the headlines, the culture war in America is almost as intense. On one side you have traditionalists, people who believe the country was well-founded, does mostly good things, and has become the most powerful nation on earth by adhering to Judeo-Christian principles like generosity, justice, and self-sacrifice.
On the other side of the culture war are the secular-progressives (S-P's) who believe that the USA is fundamentally a flawed country, which has caused considerable misery both within and outside our borders. The S-P's want drastic change and a new direction for America.
The two most intense issues in the culture war right now are how to deal with terrorism and what role spirituality should play in the public arena.
The S-P's want little or no public displays of God or religion. That's what drove the attacks on Christmas images and traditions; knock down the big Christian holiday, and the secularists achieve a big victory.
On the terror front, traditionalists largely want aggressive action to wipe out the "evildoers," and if lraq is the battlefield, then so be it.
Secular-progressives are appalled by the Iraq war and generally believe the USA has no right to act unilaterally to hunt down terrorists or their enablers.
So the stage was set for my recent appearance on the David Letterman show. I am a traditionalist; Mr. Letterman tends to mock traditionalists. And he often does it very well.
Our discussion began with the Christmas controversy. Dave did not see it as a big deal. When I pointed out the absurdity of a library in Memphis, Tennessee OK'ing a manger scene but then telling the woman donating it that she had to remove Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the three Wise Men, Dave said he did not believe the story. And, generally, that was the opinion of the liberal media: There was no Christmas controversy -- the whole thing was fabricated by religious zealots bent on establishing a theocracy.
Dave's skepticism must have come as a surprise to Memphis resident Brandi Chambless, the woman ordered to remove statues of the Holy Family and their visitors from the East. But, hey, the shepherds could stay, staring into an empty stable.
The subject quickly shifted to Iraq, a conflict both Letterman and I believe has been poorly managed. We also found common ground on the terrific performance of the U.S. military.
But then Cindy Sheehan came up. Uh-oh.
Dave, as well as many in the entertainment community, feels that Ms. Sheehan should not be criticized. He believes she is above reproach because her son, Casey, was killed in Iraq.
I do not see it that way, so sparks flew. My contention is that Ms. Sheehan is entitled to grieve and dissent in any way she wants, but her grief is being exploited by far-left elements.
And when Ms. Sheehan told Mark Knoller, a correspondent for CBS radio, that the terrorists in Iraq were "freedom fighters," she insulted thousands of other Americans who lost loved ones in Iraq.
Simply put, terrorists who blow up civilians, women and children are not freedom fighters in any sense. They are murderers, and I called Mr. Letterman on Sheehan's support of them.
I hope you saw the program. It was a rare display of the culture war on television. I told Dave I respected his views and he should respect mine. I enjoyed the joust.
By far more important, is the wake-up call many late-night viewers got. We in America are becoming a deeply divided country along cultural lines. The more we all understand what the issues are, the better. The culture war is real, and now, everybody watched Letterman that evening knows it.
What do you mean? Leftists want EVERYONE to vote, even if they lack a pulse. They push "absolute democracy" at every turn, although they don't think that it applies to military votes.
Precisely.
It is only a matter of time before the more radical side of the right wing gains power and essentially destroys the ACLU and its ilk.
The harder that the atheists, fascists and Communists push to eliminate Traditional America, the more likely that the brutal backlash will occur sooner than later.
Only time will tell.
If that "point of view" is made of lies it should be destroyed.
If that "point of view" endangers my life and the lives of my family, it should be destroyed.
Bill O'Reilly is a self parody guys, in other words he isnt worth siding with no matter what he says. If you cant see that, well you need to get out more, the guy is a living joke. These guys arent leaders or elected officials, they're entertainers trying to be shocking for ratings. His debate with Letterman wasnt a defining moment in a culture war, it was a late night comedy show segment.
"I don't really think that the culture war will ever be won nor do I think that it should. A world with only one viewpoint is not one that I would want to live in."
The essence of a culture is its values. You have culture wars when two cultures with incompatible values come in "contact" with each other. If both cultures insist on their values being the dominant ones, they won't be able to coexist and one or the other will eventually be exterminated, or at least vanquished from the other's sphere of influence.
The culture wars that the US has engaged in invariably involve cultures that do not believe in freedom - thus we fought the nazis, the communists and now the islamists.
We've managed to vanquish the first two, we're working on the third. But like bad weeds, the first two (totalitarianism of the right and left) keep coming back, and, what's most surprising, within our own country. Those on the right take the form of neo-nazis and skin heads. Those of the left have come back in much more subtle and subversive ways and are significantly more virulent. Knowing that they cannot expose their true agenda, since people would then recognize them for what they are, they've camouflaged themselves with labels such as liberals, and when people started to associate that with communism, they then revived an old, forgotten label - progressives - to again hide their true nature.
Their track record is much more impressive than that of the neo nazis. They've managed to take over schools at all levels, control the main propaganda organs (the MSM and hollywood), as well as the environmental movement. They've also set significant roots in neighboring countries like Venezuala, Brazil and Bolivia. And they are taking dead aim at what most of us value most - our freedom. They do so gradually, and in subtle ways, but that is their aim. And they have armies of well-intentioned "useful idiots" (like Lettermen and the rest of hollywood) to fight the battles for them.
Are you really sure you don't want to win this war?
Yes in terms of consequences they are quite similar, but in terms of theory, they come from opposite ends of the spectrum. The communists get power under the pretext of making the proletariats(your average joes) the boss, whereas in the other it's usually a strong man that uses nationalism as its rallying cry to hold on to power.
The results of both is total loss of freedom and brutally repressive totalitarianism.
I considered Italy a better example of facism. After all, part of the name NAZI is Socialist. I won't quibble, though. We are in close agreement.
For those who have not read it here is the Charton Heston "Winning The Cultural War" speech given at Harvard Law School.
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/charltonhestonculturalwar.htm
My God. You sound like a gutless Ohio Rhino. You could run for office and win here in Ohio.
correction -Charlton
Winning doesn't necessarily mean total elimination of opposition. For example, we defeated Germany in WWII, not by destroying every living German, but by destroying enough of their soldiers and equipment that they surrendered. The culture war is no different.
Conservatism can and must win the culture war by dominating enough to stop the enemy's attack. There can and should be differing viewpoints, but when two categorically opposed philosophies are in competition for the top spot, one must dominate. The other must lose decisively.
Letterman is no longer a late night talk show host. He's an editorialist for CBS. Which means he's an editorialist for the liberal news and entertainment network. Which means liberals should be watching. Which means he'll pander his ass off to keep em in tow. Which means things like showing a photoshop of a gay GWB and Abramoff as cowboys hugging last night. Letterman's an asshole. That's all I got.
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.