TOP NAV
BOOK
BLOGS 12
BLOGS 11
BLOGS 10
BLOGS 09
BLOGS 08
BLOGS 07
BLOGS 06
BLOGS 05
BLOGS 04
| Winning by Losing | The Sub-prime Blame Game |
by Christopher Chantrill
March 04, 2007 at 1:42 pm
AMONG THE NUMEROUS issues on which Democrats are hypersensitive to criticism—or as you and I might say, critique—is patriotism. Do not dare question a Democrat’s patriotism, at least not like Vice-President Cheney:
"I think if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we will do is validate the Al Qaeda strategy," the vice president told ABC News. "The Al Qaeda strategy is to break the will of the American people … try to persuade us to throw in the towel and come home, and then they win because we quit."
Speaker Pelosi was having none of that:
"You cannot say as the president of the United States, 'I welcome disagreement in a time of war,' and then have the vice president of the United States go out of the country and mischaracterize a position of the speaker of the House and in a manner that says that person in that position of authority is acting against the national security of our country," Pelosi said.
That is odd, because a real Democrat ought to be proud of dissenting from the president’s policy, like Howard Zinn, who said back in 2002:
While some people think that dissent is unpatriotic, I would argue that dissent is the highest form of patriotism. In fact, if patriotism means being true to the principles for which your country is supposed to stand, then certainly the right to dissent is one of those principles. And if we’re exercising that right to dissent, it’s a patriotic act.
So why didn’t Speaker Pelosi come right out and say it: “I am dissenting from the president’s policy and that is the highest form of patriotism?”
We know why she didn’t. Despite the ingenuity of historian Howard Zinn Democrats aren’t patriots. They don’t like patriots and they don’t believe in patriotism. They quote Dr. Johnson out of context: “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.” They inveigh against “aggressive nationalism,” and its inevitable wars, just as they inveigh against religion and religious wars. They believe in supranational institutions like the European Community and the United Nations.
But Democrats know that Americans are patriotic, certainly Republicans and independent voters. They know that they cannot afford to be seen as unpatriotic. That is why the presidential nominee of the Democratic Party in 2004, Senator John Kerry (D-MA), opened his acceptance speech with a military salute and the words: “I’m John Kerry and I’m reporting for duty.”
The whole thing was as false as a three dollar bill. Democrats hate having to do stuff like that, but they know that they must, for they cannot afford to concede the patriotism thing to the Republicans.
Democrats are wrong about patriotism and the nation state, as they are wrong about many things. The nation state is not something to be ashamed of. It is a remarkable achievement. It is the largest successful attempt at human community that transcends blood kinship.
The stunning achievement of the nation state is to draw the boundaries of trust not with blood but with language, and then to pretend that we are all related by blood. We still use the language of blood kinship when we talk about the nation: mother country, spilling American blood, our American family, patriotism (from the Latin: pater, father).
Not only do Democrats not believe in patriotism, they also don’t believe in dissent. Whatever Howard Zinn may say to his pals at TomPaine.com about dissent being the highest form of patriotism, don’t try to practice dissent any time soon, at least not around Democrats.
Try to suggest that we should reform Social Security and see where it gets you.
Try to suggest that we should give parents the right to send their children to the schools of their choice and see where it gets you.
Try to suggest that maybe the best place for a child is with its married biological mother and father and see where it gets you.
If Democrats don’t believe in patriotism and they don’t believe in dissent, what do they believe in?
Oh yes. Equality.
Now there is a curious thing about equality. You could line up all the people in the world, share out all the goods in the world, and make everyone equal. But the next morning the world would be unequal again. Some of the people would have used their goods to start a business, and others would have blown it on a great big party. It is impossible to obtain human equality without the micromanaging power of government.
And that’s the difference between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans want to use the power of government to control Al Qaeda. Democrats want to use the power of government to control Americans.
Which is more patriotic? You make the call.
Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com. His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.
[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists, she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican
Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism
For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008
Imagining that all order is the result of design, socialists
conclude that order must be improvable by better design of some superior mind.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
[Every] sacrifice is an act of impurity that pays for a prior act of greater impurity... without its participants having to suffer the full consequences incurred by its predecessor. The punishment is commuted in a process that strangely combines and finesses the deep contradiction between justice and mercy.
Frederick Turner, Beauty: The Value of Values
But the only religions that have survived are those which support property and the family.
Thus the outlook for communism, which is both anti-property and anti-family, (and also anti-religion), is not promising.
F.A. Hayek, The Fatal Conceit
[T]he way “to achieve a system of determining admission to the public schools on a nonracial basis,”
Brown II, 349 U. S., at 300–301, is to stop assigning students on a racial basis. The way to stop
discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.
Roberts, C.J., Parents Involved in Community Schools vs. Seattle School District
A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is merely relative, is asking you not to believe him. So dont.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy
Paul Dirac: When I was talking with Lemaître about [the expanding universe] and feeling stimulated
by the grandeur of the picture that he has given us, I told him that
I thought cosmology was the branch of science that lies closest to religion.
However [Georges] Lemaître [Catholic priest, physicist, and
inventor of the Big Bang Theory] did not agree with me. After thinking it over he
suggested psychology as lying closest to religion.
John Farrell, The Creation Myth
Within Pentecostalism the injurious hierarchies of the wider world are abrogated and replaced by a single hierarchy of faith, grace, and the empowerments of the spirit... where groups gather on rafts to take them through the turbulence of the great journey from extensive rural networks to the mega-city and the nuclear family...
David Martin, On Secularization
No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, Letter to Lord Lytton
In 1911... at least nine million of the 12 million covered by national insurance were already members of voluntary sick pay schemes. A similar proportion were also eligible for medical care.
Green, Reinventing Civil Society
mysql close
©2007 Christopher Chantrill