<$BlogRSDUrl$>                                                                                                                                                                   
The Third Estate
What Is The Third Estate?
 Everything
What Has It Been Until Now In The Political Order?
Nothing
What Does It Want To Be?
Something

Conservatives Against Freedom

Thursday, May 25, 2006
Wretchard at Belmont Club doesn't come out and say that we should exterminate Muslims and suspend 1st amendment rights for liberals. He doesn't have to.

What he does say is that opposition to Bush's version of the War on Terror is illegitimate - according to him only the hard right is taking the conflict seriously. He also says that dissent is permissible only when external threats aren't severe. When they are, any internal debate becomes off-limits. Tell me who's defending freedom again?

I'm not going to dwell on Wretchard's sophistic slanders - such as that the left (which he epitomizes with Noam Chomsky) wants to destroy western civilization, or that we're Marxists, or that islamic fundamentalists are marxists too (which he has to assert or realize that his movement and theirs are closely akin). I could point out all the smears and fallacies, but that would be rude.

What I think is worthy of comment is how Wretchard and his ilk seem to think Bush & Co. have been effective at combatting islamic terrorism. Tell me again how consolidating the Muslim world against us or bogging down our military in a doomed attempt at regional hegemony (which will only magnify resistance) will enhance our security? Where is Osama again? How often does torture generate good intelligence? How are we supposed to function without any allies? Why is border security against powerless Mexicans more important than border security against nukes in suitcases? As far as I can tell, the Bush approach to fighting islamic fundamentalism has been a complete disaster.

It's also important to point how how quickly our right-wing friends are to abandon even the most basic constitutional liberties - such as the right of free speech - when they think it might be convenient to do so, and how eager they are to imply that their fellow-citizens are traitors or useful fools for traitors. Sorry guys, but if you have EVIDENCE that there is sedition, then prove it. Otherwise shut the fuck up. If you can't stand up to a little criticism, what does that say about the merits of your position?

I would feel sorry for the likes of Wretchard if it wasn't so obvious that he enjoyed the kool-aid. And if there weren't quite so many like him.
Posted by Arbitrista @ 7:09 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home

:: permalink