Unpatriotic Conservatives

National Review Online ^ | 4/7/03 (advance) | David Frum

[Chancellor Palpatine]

"I respect and admire the French, who have been a far greater nation than we shall ever be, that is, if greatness means anything loftier than money and bombs."
— THOMAS FLEMING, "HARD RIGHT," MARCH 13, 2003

rom the very beginning of the War on Terror, there has been dissent, and as the war has proceeded to Iraq, the dissent has grown more radical and more vociferous. Perhaps that was to be expected. But here is what never could have been: Some of the leading figures in this antiwar movement call themselves "conservatives."

These conservatives are relatively few in number, but their ambitions are large. They aspire to reinvent conservative ideology: to junk the 50-year-old conservative commitment to defend American interests and values throughout the world — the commitment that inspired the founding of this magazine — in favor of a fearful policy of ignoring threats and appeasing enemies.

And they are exerting influence. When Richard Perle appeared on Meet the Press on February 23 of this year, Tim Russert asked him, "Can you assure American viewers . . . that we're in this situation against Saddam Hussein and his removal for American security interests? And what would be the link in terms of Israel?" Perle rebutted the allegation. But what a grand victory for the antiwar conservatives that Russert felt he had to air it.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I think I forgot you somewhere along the way

[TradicalRC]

I love living in the age of irony. You have done the same to the paleos as the liberals did to Bork. Did you read Slouching Toward Gomorah? Bork is no neocon.

[PRND21]

Bump

[TradicalRC]

You're so right: Forced integration is SO superior to Forced segregation. How could I have been so stupid. Racism is, of course, worse than the use of government force on its own citizens. That must be why Hitler who killed 6 million is more evil than "Uncle Joe" Stalin who killed 40-50 million. It's racism stupid.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

Maybe you can tell me which of your fellow paleos were working to get the governments down in the old Confederacy to change the laws on segregation in a voluntary fashion?

Or do you find something inherently wrong in allowing a black man to vote or to allow him to enter into trade with whites if both sides want to?

Don't try to tapdance this one too much - we already know what the answer is.

Its all about the race, which does put paleos on a path to Hitlerian policies. I won't even begin to go into what the likelihood of armed insurrection was in the South had the CRA not been enacted.

[TradicalRC]

None that I know of. But like a good liberal, you approve of a hamfisted Federal government which puts YOU, my friend in a direct line to Hitler and every other totalitarian. As a "paleo" I'm against that. And if you think the civil rights movement was an unmitigated success, I would ask you to think more deeply about it's affect on freedom of association. And please don't resort to the old leftist tactic of playing the race card, I thought authentic conservatives recognized that as an opportunistic political ploy.

[billbears]

Or do you find something inherently wrong in allowing a black man to vote or to allow him to enter into trade with whites if both sides want to?

Surely Chancellor you must have your facts confused. Or perhaps you would care to enlighten us to the laws in the north. Illinois, land of lincoln, bars blacks completely from moving into the state in 1853 (still in effect after the war). Oregon, a union state, in their 1859 constitution bars not only blacks but 'Chinamen' (their word) as well. While in the Capitol state of the Confederacy, the great state of Virginia, over 60,000 free blacks work, own property, and enter contracts. Perhaps we should check further South. South Carolina, Charleston in particular, intermarriage was common, and many white men left their black wives property. I imagine that would explain why 20% of the property in Charleston was owned by blacks

Don't try to tapdance this one too much - we already know what the answer is.

I suggest you take your own advice Chancey. Call the socialists, call whoever you want. These are facts, something I imagine you're quite unfamiliar with.

Its all about the race, which does put paleos on a path to Hitlerian policies.

Hitlerian policies? I wouldn't suggest you look to close at the war criminals Grant and Sherman. Either they hated the Jews (of which the Confederacy had brave Jewish soldiers fight for and our Secretary of State's heritage) or the blacks. But come with the arguments son. Tell us the facts. BTW, see if you can do it without quotes from McPherson(interviewed with the Worldwide Socialist Web Site), Sandburg(wrote for a Socialist newspaper), or Asa Gordon (a racist by anyone's standards)

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I would ask you to think more deeply about it's affect on freedom of association.

Nobody ever said you had to be friends - just that you had to cease your concerted effort to politically and economically repress someone solely because of the color of their skin - and don't lie or parse, it was a concerted effort.

I'll also tell you that it saved the infrastructure of the South, because the way things were going, those disenfranchised blacks would not have been completely unjustified to commit acts of violence against the forces of oppression.

Desegregation was inevitable - it would have happened whether by fair means or foul, and nothing you paleos could do would stop it.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I'm not talking about the Civil War - I'm talking much more recent history. The North and many mid-South states learned from their mistakes in the past, and gained a more moral order. Sadly, you paleos that are incapable of getting that through your thick skulls, and somehow seem to want to say that someone maintains the very same moral-ethical traits as their distant ancestors.

[TradicalRC]

I didn't realize that freedom of association had to do with whom one can be friends with. The civil rights amendment has led to FORCED hiring and FORCED restriction of firing of whomever the fed regards as a special class; something old school liberals even found offensive but which liberal neocons like yourself can't seem to get enough of. Do not talk to me about immorality when neocons do not seem to care about the devastating effects caused by a lackadaisical sexuality. Apparently sexually active 12 year olds meet with your approval too. At least Hubert Humphrey would have been somewhat distressed by a concentration of power that would have slapped around its own citizens. You are obviously to the left of him. If we are to be truly free we must be allowed to associate or separate according to our own interests. Creating Leviathan is in no one's interest. The big joke is that you guys consider yourselves conservative at all. O brave new world that has such people in it.

[TradicalRC]

If desegragation would have happened by fair means or foul(BTW, I agree with you on this point) why are you neocons so enamored of the foul? I'll wait whilst you commence to putting on your tap shoes.

[TradicalRC]

Regarding the comment about riots that would have happened in the south (an unprovable statement) how about those riots that happened in the "tolerant" north? There's some recent history. Liberal L.A. land of DiFi and Barb Boxer. Watts. Let me guess, they were too afraid to riot in the south. So much for law and order.

[Luis Gonzalez]

And now, a reality check, brought to you by the friendly folks at getoverit.com.

[billbears]

Thick skulls? Then perhaps we need to discuss the treatment of racism during say, the mid 1970s? Busing in the north? Bells ringing? We didn't have any problems down South? Why did the 'enlightened' peoples of the north have and still continue to have problems with the issue to the point of riots? Come on, Chancellor, I'm just waiting with baited breath to hear 'how bad it is down here'. Unfortunately for you, my state of NC is overrun with yankees and the way I see them treat people not like themselves is deplorable. And the few I've forced myself to speak to don't understand how we are even cordial to 'those' people (yes Chancellor, I've even had yankees refer to different races as 'those' people). Tell us how they're so 'enlightened' up there. Tell us how even 160+ years ago De Tocqueville explained the racism up north to the working relationship between the races down South.

BTW, Chancey, perhaps you can further explain to us how if the governments of the old Confederacy were shaped, in some cases run, by carpetbaggers from the north, how these deplorable conditions existed in the first place. Fact is son, that they brought their laws with them. I know that's a hard case for you to accept but I don't remember Grant teaching any Sunday school classes for people of a different race

[Chancellor Palpatine]

I didn't realize that freedom of association had to do with whom one can be friends with. The civil rights amendment has led to FORCED hiring and FORCED restriction of firing of whomever the fed regards as a special class; something old school liberals even found offensive but which liberal neocons like yourself can't seem to get enough of. Do not talk to me about immorality when neocons do not seem to care about the devastating effects caused by a lackadaisical sexuality. Apparently sexually active 12 year olds meet with your approval too. At least Hubert Humphrey would have been somewhat distressed by a concentration of power that would have slapped around its own citizens. You are obviously to the left of him. If we are to be truly free we must be allowed to associate or separate according to our own interests. Creating Leviathan is in no one's interest. The big joke is that you guys consider yourselves conservative at all. O brave new world that has such people in it.

Wow.

[Catspaw]

O brave new world that has such people in it.

Yada yada yada. One studies The Tempest in what--sophomore or junior year in high school? And, of course, one chooses to quote the most quoted line in the whole play (and used by Huxley), because it means one didn't read the whole play but the Cliff Notes. Just waaaay to pseudo-pretentious for me.

[Chancellor Palpatine]

What I love is the pretension that there is some utilitarian good to be served by deprivation of civil rights based on race, and that a concerted effort to keep people out of the economy based on race is somehow ennobling to all.

[Catspaw]

What I love is the pretension that there is some utilitarian good to be served by deprivation of civil rights based on race, and that a concerted effort to keep people out of the economy based on race is somehow ennobling to all.

So what is is racial preference based on whiteness? Does an albino get more points than a brunette?

Ain't that a hoot.

[Gumption]

Hey, I'm against Empire building. Does that make me an "America-Hater"?

Only an America hater would insist we are empire building.

[billbears]

What I love is the pretension that there is some utilitarian good to be served by deprivation of civil rights based on race, and that a concerted effort to keep people out of the economy based on race is somehow ennobling to all.

Surely you have facts to present that your argument is based on. Wait, what am I thinking? You haven't presented a fact yet!! I present facts and you change the dateline. I present more facts and you change it again. What I love is the pretension of a bunch of neocons that there is some inherent evil in the South that we have deprived those of different races on a concerted effort any different than other parts of the nation. You paint this rosy picture of once you leave the old Confederacy the sun shines brighter, the children are laughing, and people of all faiths and races are living side by side. While that is the way it is in places in the South, you deny this very fact without first hand experience and throw us to the wolves over incidents from 50 years ago based on laws instituted by a northern occupying force. Again though, we weren't the ones having riots in the streets in the mid 1970s over busing now were we?

But I digress. Please present facts of this 'concerted effort to keep people out of the economy based on race' in the South in the past 30 years. As I know you'll be sure to dig one up (right!!), will you bother looking at the incidents in other parts of the nation or place your focus squarely on the South? Hmmmmmm....