Hypocrisy That Undermines Civilization

Real Clear Politics ^ | June 19, 2007 | Victor Davis Hanson

[gpapa]

There is only a thin veneer that separates civilization from man's innate barbarity. Some 2,500 years ago the historian Thucydides once warned us about the irony of revolutionaries and insurrectionists destroying this fragile patina of culture, as if they themselves might be exempt from ever wanting it back again.

[Asclepius]

This should be an anti-immigration bill talking point:

In response, Mexico's policy toward illegal immigrants on its southern border is as brutal as America's is humane. Violators are often summarily deported--if they are not first robbed by Mexican officials or beaten and killed by criminal gangs. Mexicans may lecture Americans about our purported sins in trying to secure our border, but they don't seem to care what their own government does to Guatemalans. Again, the irony arises that a government that has abandoned the rule of international law suddenly is worried that another country may be doing to it what it does to others.

[ModelBreaker]

There is a reason why Democrats and Republicans don't shoot each other in the streets of Washington, or why blue-state America does not mine red-state highways.

I like VDH a lot. But he's an optimist. We are tiptoeing up to the "absurd" example he gives above and he's still patting america on the back for being so different.

[Cacique]

btt

[Tolik]

Victor Davis Hanson:

...What lies behind this abject hypocrisy of first undermining civilization and then demanding that it reappear in the hour of need?

Double standards depend on demanding from United States and Europe a sort of impossible perfection. When such utopianism is not--and never can be--met, cheap accusations of racism, colonialism, and imperialism follow. Such posturing is intended to con the West into feeling guilty, and, with such self-loathing, granting political concessions, relaxing immigration, or handing over more foreign aid. Left unsaid is that such critics of the West will always ignore their own hypocrisy, and, when convenient, destroy civilized norms while expecting someone else to restore them when needed.

What, then, to do? Stop feeling guilty, apologizing, and trying to rationalize barbarity. Instead insist on the same uniform standards of humane behavior from our critics that they now demand from us.

Finally, remember that there is a reason why millions flood into Europe from the Middle East and to America from Mexico--and not vice versa. There is a reason why Democrats and Republicans don't shoot each other in the streets of Washington, or why blue-state America does not mine red-state highways. And there is a reason why a Shiite mosque in Detroit is safer in the land of the Great Satan than it would be in Muslim Saudi Arabia. It's called civilization--a precious and fragile commodity that is missed even by its destroyers the minute they've done away with it.

 

Nailed It! Moral Clarity BUMP ! This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page. You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.

Victor Davis Hanson Ping !         Let me know if you want in or out. Links:    FR Index of his articles:  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson                 His website: http://victorhanson.com/                 NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp                 Pajamasmedia:   http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

Even the worst terrorist apparently wants his wife and kids to be safe

Except for the ones who send out their wife and kids to blow themselves up in a crowd of Jewish women and children.

[gubamyster]

ping

[TruthConquers]

Please put me on your ping list!!! Thank you.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

When once a republic is corrupted,
there is no possibility of remedying
any of the growing evils but by removing
the corruption and restoring its lost principles;
every other correction is either useless or a new evil.

Author: Montesquieu,

[metesky]

Clarity, thy name is Hanson.

[A message]

There is a reason why Democrats and Republicans don't shoot each other in the streets of Washington, or why blue-state America does not mine red-state highways. And there is a reason why a Shiite mosque in Detroit is safer in the land of the Great Satan than it would be in Muslim Saudi Arabia.

This is in a nutshell is why we removed a regime in Afghanistan that harbored those evil enough to mastermind flying planes into buildings. Why we removed a regime in Iraq that used chemical weapons on its own population.

This is why what we are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan is a civilized response and the right thing to do.

Were we not civilized the response to the evil in the middle east would be to kill all their men and enslave their women and children.

But we are civilized in the West so we negotiate with Iran and give aid to Fatah.

God spare our civilization.

[Lorianne]

US citizens should have the same exact “rights” in Mexico as Mexicans have in the U.S. Any treaty or deal or policy we make with the Mexicans should INSIST on that basic point or NO GO. Period.

You want amnesty for 12+ million? Fine. An equal number of US citizens get automatic Mexican citizenship, the right to vote, own property, demand government handouts, etc. in Mexico.

[happygrl]

Double standards depend on demanding from United States and Europe a sort of impossible perfection. When such utopianism is not--and never can be--met, cheap accusations of racism, colonialism, and imperialism follow. Such posturing is intended to con the West into feeling guilty, and, with such self-loathing, granting political concessions, relaxing immigration, or handing over more foreign aid. Left unsaid is that such critics of the West will always ignore their own hypocrisy, and, when convenient, destroy civilized norms while expecting someone else to restore them when needed.

Shelby Steele has written about this.

[GOPJ]

What, then, to do? Stop feeling guilty, apologizing, and trying to rationalize barbarity. Instead insist on the same uniform standards of humane behavior from our critics that they now demand from us. Finally, remember that there is a reason why millions flood into Europe from the Middle East and to America from Mexico--and not vice versa. There is a reason why Democrats and Republicans don't shoot each other in the streets of Washington, or why blue-state America does not mine red-state highways. And there is a reason why a Shiite mosque in Detroit is safer in the land of the Great Satan than it would be in Muslim Saudi Arabia

Big turths! Thanks Tolik, this is a keeper.

[Billthedrill]

Huge topic - it goes to the very core of the dichotomy that has become labeled (in American politics at least) as conservatism versus progressivism. The revolutionary doesn't really fit inside this continuum but may re-enter it at practically any point, some as radical progressives, some as dyed-in-the-wool conservatives. What controls this is an appreciation for the existing functions of the society the revolutionary wishes to ignore or replace.

Societies are complex systems and exhibit complex system behavior, that is, tiny changes in one area can have enormous effects in areas that seem quite unrelated. Edmund Burke pointed this out with respect to laws and customs in place for a very long time that appear no longer relevant but whose removal causes consequences that are entirely unexpected. Common to conservatism is a skepticism about the casual removal of such apparently unnecessary historical practices, in an effort to avoid that sort of unexpected consequence. This caution can be overdone, and the result is a cluttered and static society.

Common to progressivism is an eagerness to make such changes with far less regard to unintended consequences and in pursuit of a society with less clutter, less "injustice" to use an overworked and not entirely accurate term. This also can be (and is) overdone, and the result is instability and a potential cessation of comfortable or necessary societal functions. Some level of this is acceptable and more is less so, and that threshold tends to move with respect to the individual's own reliance on those functions. A young person and an old one will have differing views on such things as ambulance service, for example. This dependence on these functions tends to explain the broad pattern of greater conservatism in the elderly.

This is a perfectly healthy dynamic and its presence is evidence not of the inadequacies of a society but of its overall health.

Into this mix comes the revolutionary. To him or her there is either nothing in the current society that is worthy of retention or more typically there is little at risk to the worthy aspects by the inception of a revolutionary program. Adherents to the latter notion are more naive, and more typical. It is they who are surprised when the deliberate destabilization of a society results in the ambulances not running to carry the wounded. Those were taken for granted.

Other, more basic aspects of society are taken for granted as well, specifically its ability to generate the wealth that the revolutionary wishes to redistribute in a more equitable fashion. This is the reason socialists must grasp for alternate explanations (usually external enemies) when the economies they've taken over are sucked dry.

A second type of revolutionary desires a societal breakdown and is willing to accept the consequences in favor of personal power with only a very vague idea of what to do with it. These are darker revolutions that devolve into either tribal chaos or a police state, examples of both of which abound. Heavily class-based revolutions follow this pattern from Zimbabwe to Cambodia.

There is a third type of revolutionary that has been described as apocalyptic - here it is not only society that is to be broken down but life itself; that is, the upshot of death is not to be avoided but is a consummation devoutly to be wished. The hardcore Islamist falls under this category. The most practical remedy for this particular sort of revolutionary is to help him attain the death he wishes on others.

True revolutionary sentiment is not, therefore, an extreme form of progressivism but is altogether outside the normal political continuum. More progressives seem to exhibit the symptoms because the processes within the two resemble one another, but there are a few "conservatives" who are drawn to upheaval as well in pursuit of a society that may or may not ever actually have been.

What is common to these revolutionaries is a vision of a future society and a lack of a practical plan to get from the status quo to there. Violence is not a plan, it is the absence of a plan and an expression of frustration that the real world does not sufficiently resemble their fantasy one. This sort of fiction does not feed on facts but on flights of imagination, accusation, and criticism. It is the hallmark not of oppression, but of an indulgent and luxurious society.

[oldbrowser]

What, then, to do? Stop feeling guilty, apologizing, and trying to rationalize barbarity. Instead insist on the same uniform standards of humane behavior from our critics that they now demand from us.

This attitude that we are somehow better than others and must hold ourselves to a higher standard is our egotistical weakness and our enemies know it.

We can't make others live up to our standards, but we can legitimately use the standards of others when dealing with them.

[FierceDraka]

Were we not civilized the response to the evil in the middle east would be to kill all their men and enslave their women and children.

Oh, snap! Guess that makes me a barbarian, then.

But we are civilized in the West so we negotiate with Iran and give aid to Fatah.

Sure, I'd negotiate with Iran. Why not? "Surrender, or see your 3000 year old civilization reduced to radioactive ashes. Your choice."

And I'd give aid to Fatah, too - in the form of making martyrs of them all and sending them straight to Paradise and their 72 virgins. According to their logic, I'd be doing them a favor.

Who the hell wants 72 virgins, anyway?? Anyone who has had to chaparone a pack of middle school girls knows what I'm talking about. "The screeching! For gods' sake, make it stop!"

[hosepipe]

NAH!,... Civil War is the most direct and efficient answer..

[FierceDraka]

This attitude that we are somehow better than others and must hold ourselves to a higher standard is our egotistical weakness and our enemies know it.

Indeed. Thou doth speak the truth.

Me, I try my best to be a saint to my friends and family.

But to my enemies, I'm an ill-tempered, hateful, spiteful, implacable beast.