« Rachel Corrie's Parents Seek a 16th Minute of Infamy | Main | Majority of Voters Want Vote on Judicial Nominees »

A Tale of Two Ideologies

The New York Times today has a headline that encapsulates the debate the whole planet is having.

Iraqi Assembly Convenes Against Backdrop of Explosions

If you think about it, that iconically sums up the whole geopolitical debate in the post 9/11 era. One ideology supports freedom and democracy, the other ideology just seeks to blow people up and destroy things.

George Bush gets ridiculed as a simpleton for his black and white view of the world. But he saw this years ago. Europe especially, has been slow to understand the two opposing ideologies even as their citizens died.

Slowly, very slowly, a few on the left are starting to understand that Bush has been right all along. Other still don't get it. Michelle Maklin has the story that some on the left (including at least one Democrat Congressman) are still protesting the liberation of Iraq.

As democracy puts down its first fragile roots in the middle east, you have to wonder which ideology these people subscribe to. If it is the former, they have a funny way of showing it.

And if they don't realize there are 2 opposing ideologies, you have to wonder where they've been for the last 4 years.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Tale of Two Ideologies:

» JackLewis.net linked with Moonbat alert

Comments (12)

Although most on the Left w... (Below threshold)
GSR:

Although most on the Left won't admit it, it's incredibly inspiring to a.) see a new democracy begin to take root and b.) to do this with bombs going off in the vicinity. Hell, any "mature" democratic legislature or assembly would bail out at the first sign of a bomb threat, all weak kneed and slobbering. These Iraqi legislators, with targets on thier backs and on the roof they sit under, are showing the world what liberty, freedom and democracy both requires and stands for.

Before passing along a few ... (Below threshold)
Scott H:

Before passing along a few observations, I just want to state my position on the Iraqi war.

I had no problem taking down Saddam Hussein; I have argued that the way we did it was rushed and flawed, causing more problems than we needed to face. I also don't believe there is any connection between the war against islamofascism and the war in Iraq (maybe now, but not 3 years ago). And of the two, islamofacism was always the greater danger. I also feel the war distracted attention and resources from finishing the job in Afghanistan; a place that could have served the job of being a flower bed for democracy as well as Iraq. And I am a registered Republican and libertarian conservative.

With that out of the way I'd like to pass along the following observations for your comment:

1) I feel that there is a much more complex ideology behind the terrorists than just blowing people up and destroying things. And to the extent denying that complex ideology, we weaken our ability to truly engage and defeat it.

2) Bush is not a simpleton for his manichean world view, but he did not see this "years ago". I seem to remember him running for election in 2000 (and Condi stating) that he doesn't do nation-building. I grant his view changed post 9/11, and is still evolving, but it does not appear to me to be a long-held belief.

3)I feel it is way too early to declare Bush having "been right all along". Have his actions stirred the mid-east up? Yes, but he can't take total credit. The death of Arafat, and Sharon's actions also play a key role.

4) It's more than just the left who "still don't get it". The paleo-conservatives (Buchanan at the helm) are just as unhappy as the Charlie Rangells of the world.

Just a few observations.

Scott H

Sure, the one ideology is f... (Below threshold)
UR:

Sure, the one ideology is for democracy. As long as it is a pro-US democracy. Venezuela is a democracy, but why is that a problem for Bush?

Sure, the one ideology i... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Sure, the one ideology is for democracy. As long as it is a pro-US democracy. Venezuela is a democracy, but why is that a problem for Bush?

Because they're dirty socialists who don't play ball with free trade and oil.

Venezuela is a democracy... (Below threshold)

Venezuela is a democracy...

By some definitions, so was Saddam's Iraq.

The paleo-conservatives ... (Below threshold)

The paleo-conservatives (Buchanan at the helm)...

Buchanan isn't any kind of conservative. Get that clear and a whole lot of confusion vanishes.

>> I also don't believe the... (Below threshold)
Paul:

>> I also don't believe there is any connection between the war against islamofascism and the war in Iraq

Then you are missing a whole bunch of reality.

>>1) I feel that there is a much more complex ideology behind the terrorists than just blowing people up and destroying things

You give them too much credit. Their mission is not noble. It is not (in reality) religious. They are thugs.

>>2) Bush is not a simpleton for his manichean world view, but he did not see this "years ago". I seem to remember him running for election in 2000 (and Condi stating) that he doesn't do nation-building.

That was 9/10. I clearly stated this was after 9/11. He got it the next day. Whole countries of people are just now figuring it out. It might not be too much an exaggeration to say that foreign policy wise, what happened before 9/11 never happened. And yes, 2001 to 2005 qualifies as "years ago."

>>3) I feel it is way too early to declare Bush having "been right all along"... he can't take total credit. The death of Arafat, ...

I DID NOT say he was responsible for everything that happened good in the middle east. Only that he got it all along. And yes... Defined as 9/12/01 onward, he was right all along.

>>4) It's more than just the left who "still don't get it". The paleo-conservatives (Buchanan at the helm) are just as unhappy as the Charlie Rangells of the world.

Is Buchanan a xxxxx-conseravative??? To me, the only way the words Buchanan and conservative should be used in the same sentence is with the word "former" in front.

Buchanan is a self-serving irrelevant has-been. Not unlike Charlie Rangell.

Buchanan was a fruitloop ba... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

Buchanan was a fruitloop back when he was still in the GOP, since then he has only gotten loopier.

Also, I think what is going on now in Lebanon and other countries is exactly why going into Iraq is connected to the war on Islamofacism.

It is a fact that democracies generally do not kill their own citizens and they rarely go to war with each other, and at least in the US most of our nuts and fruitloops end up marginalized without much power or prestiege.

Democracy taking hold in Iraq is proving to give other arab and predominately Islamic nations the hope that they too can have real democracy.

So deposing saddam has been a good thing, and it is proving to be a catalyst to bringing a real desire for democracy to the region. If you want to deny that, then please scroll down, you will find several posts about what is going on in Lebanon right now.

- Right mantis ... they jus... (Below threshold)

- Right mantis ... they just murder people by the scores who get in their way.... It must be getting tougher and tougher with each day. as things improve in the ME, to find yourelf still rooting for the murdering thugs...

- I find the term "dirty socialists" offensive.... I prefer "mind dead ideolog socialists" myself.....

Heh. Yeah, "dirty socialist... (Below threshold)

Heh. Yeah, "dirty socialists" is an insult to dirty people everywhere.

Consider the alternatives o... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Consider the alternatives of the U.S. not having invaded Iraq, of everything in the ME remaining as it was prior to the U.S. launching military might inorder to depose SHussein, among other things:

More millions of money given to the U.N. for yet more "discussions" and "analysis" of the ME situation(s), France continuing on unabated and perhaps unidentified in their financial arrangements with SHussein, among others...and almost certainly more terrorist attacks upon U.S. soil by an emblazoned movement seeking same...

That's just for starters. I cannot imagine what a pit our world would be in, much less our country itself, had President Bush not taken the steps that he has, where the ME is concerned.

Paul, your comments point o... (Below threshold)
Scott H:

Paul, your comments point out a very real difference of opinion within the conservative movement.

1) Iraq and the war on islamofascism...you say I missed a whole bunch of reality. While that's a not too clever cheap shot, I feel it is more accurate to say that we viewed the same reality and reached different conclusions. For me the war against islamofascism is about identifying and defeating Al Queda and those groups seeking to re-establish a totalitarian fundamentalist-islamic empire. Iraq was about deposing a very evil bastard dictator. From my perspective, the Taliban and the Mullahs in Iran are part of the islamofascist movement. Hussein, along with Kim Jong Il are evil dictators who deserve to be deposed.

2) The islamofascists do have a complete ideology that requires a complex strategy and approach to defeat it, just as the Soviets did. That said, there are thugs, like Hussein and Jong Il, who exist for their own glory and gratification. My concern is that by lumping all these together we misunderstand how to most effectively deal with the threats they pose. For instance, you can invade and overthrow a Hussein or Jong Il. But defeating the islamofascists requries winning hearts and minds. It is a twilight struggle...and Bush deserves credit for understanding this.

3) As for when Bush understood this, well we simply disagree on when he realized it. I feel that it has been a more recent conversion than you, and was influenced a lot by Natan Sheransky's book.

4) Why the antipathy for Buchanan? He represents a very significant group within the modern conservative movement. I know National Review banished him, and the Bushies have hated him since he challenged '41. But the last time I checked, the Republican party and conservative movement was about a lot more than being the Bush family's Amen chorus. They have Fox News, and apparently you, to do that job.

Take care

Scott




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy