home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  Take the Test!
Monday October 6, 2008 
by Christopher Chantrill

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

BLOGS 08

Oct 2008

Sep 2008

Aug 2008

Jul 2008

Jun 2008

May 2008

Apr 2008

Mar 2008

Feb 2008

Jan 2008

BLOGS 07

Dec 2007

Nov 2007

Oct 2007

Sep 2007

Aug 2007

Jul 2007

Jun 2007

May 2007

Apr 2007

Mar 2007

Feb 2007

Jan 2007

BLOGS 06

Dec 2006

Nov 2006

Oct 2006

Sep 2006

Aug 2006

Jul 2006

Jun 2006

May 2006

Apr 2006

Mar 2006

Feb 2006

Jan 2006

BLOGS 05

Dec 2005

Nov 2005

Oct 2005

Sep 2005

Aug 2005

Jul 2005

Jun 2005

May 2005

Apr 2005

Mar 2005

Feb 2005

Jan 2005

BLOGS 04

Dec 2004

print view

The Wages of Appeasement

by Christopher Chantrill
December 12, 2007

|

FOR CONSERVATIVES the story of the recent National Intelligence Estimate is unbelievable. What would possess the analysts in the federal intelligence bureaucracy to issue a finding that Iran has abandoned its military nuclear weapons program?

Given the secrecy that surrounds all government ventures into nuclear weaponry we wonder how anyone can presume to know with “high confidence” whether Iran or any other nation has or has not a nuclear weapons program. And why would anyone so blatantly try to appease a revolutionary regime like the Islamic Republic of Iran?

The answer is simpler than you might think. In the view of the western educated middle class, appeasement works every time it is tried.

There is more. The policy of appeasement, consistently applied by the educated middle class throughout the past century, has proved to be the royal road to political power and influence—for the educated middle class.

First they appeased the struggling working man, arguing that “people have needs.” They built a welfare state and put themselves in charge. Then they moved the American Negro, condemned to second-class citizenship by discrimination and racism, from the southern plantation to the liberal plantation. Then it was traditionally marginalized women and gays.

So it is not surprising that the western educated middle class believes that the way to deal with Muslims in general and Iran in particular is through appeasement.

Appeasement may be the “rational” policy for Iran but it is not appropriate for western critics of the educated middle class. For them the appropriate tactic is ruthless shaming.

You can see how the shaming works by examining the recent problems of two writers, Mark Steyn and Martin Amis.

In October 2006 Maclean’s published an excerpt from Steyn’s America Alone. In response the Canada Islamic Council is filing human rights complaints in Canada arguing that Steyn’s Maclean’s article subjected “Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt.” Now lefty commentators are piling on. Blogger Jim Henley writes “I knew Steyn was a bigot,” and Steyn has to respond.

British author Martin Amis is in similar trouble. In an interview in 2006 after the foiling of a plan to blow up several passenger jets in flight he said:

There’s a definite urge - don’t you have it? - to say, ’The Muslim community will have to suffer until it gets its house in order.’

Lefty professor Terry Eagleton saw an opening and accused Amis of opinions like a “British National Party thug.” Then author Rowan Bennett weighed in:

Amis’s views are symptomatic of a much wider and deeper hostility to Islam and intolerance of otherness.

You can get a full rundown on the Martin Amis flap from the New York Times blog. Martin Amis was last heard of in the Guardian pleading “No, I Am Not A Racist.”

Really, what’s not to like? In order to show support for helpless victims of otherness intolerance you shame the neocon theocrats by putting them through the human rights meat grinder or by calling them racists.

It’s easy to assume that all this NIE nonsense and literary name-calling is pure cynicism. But we should give our liberal friends the benefit of the doubt and allow that they actually believe that their policy of appeasing the enemies of the West is moral and just. There are people who really think that the problem is a deep “hostility to Islam and intolerance of otherness.”

(What about liberals, their deep hostility to Christianity and their intolerance of Christian otherness?)

But wait, you say! Islam is different. Its doctrine of jihad is completely different from the militant working class of 1845 or the African American rioters of 1965. These people want to take over the world!

Maybe so. But you cannot expect your average progressive to abandon a political tactic that has worked so well for over a century on the say-so of a bunch of neocon theocrat bigots.

Our liberal friends want a world free from injustice and otherness; they believe that the right and just thing to do is always to appease the latest group that declares itself a victim.

So we should expect them to oppose the Bush forward strategy for the foreseeable future. They may back off a bit when a Democrat is in the White House. But Republican presidents can expect nothing but trouble.

Facing down the revolutionary thugs and boldly outdaring the dangers of the time is the conservative thing to do. We look at the world and want to make it safe for democratic capitalism. We believe that in a federal budget with two trillion dollars of pensions and social programs there ought to be $0.7 trillion for defense.

What will it take to change the minds of America’s liberal intelligence community? Probably nothing short of electoral disaster.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com.  His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view


Post a comment:

(missing name)

(missing email address)

1000 characters left

 

 TAGS


Chappies

“But I saw a man yesterday who knows a fellow who had it from a chappie that said that Urquhart had been dipping himself a bit recklessly off the deep end.”  —Freddy Arbuthnot
Dorothy L. Sayers, Strong Poison


Hugo on Genius

“Tear down theory, poetic systems… No more rules, no more models… Genius conjures up rather than learns… ” —Victor Hugo
César Graña, Bohemian versus Bourgeois


Education

“We have met with families in which for weeks together, not an article of sustenance but potatoes had been used; yet for every child the hard-earned sum was provided to send them to school.”
E. G. West, Education and the State


Faith & Purpose

“When we began first to preach these things, the people appeared as awakened from the sleep of ages—they seemed to see for the first time that they were responsible beings...”
Finke, Stark, The Churching of America, 1776-1990


Conversion

“When we received Christ,” Phil added, “all of a sudden we now had a rule book to go by, and when we had problems the preacher was right there to give us the answers.”
James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh


Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


China and Christianity

At first, we thought [the power of the West] was because you had more powerful guns than we had. Then we thought it was because you had the best political system. Next we focused on your economic system. But in the past twenty years, we have realized that the heart of your culture is your religion: Christianity.
David Aikman, Jesus in Beijing


Religion, Property, and Family

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


Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity


Society and State

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


Socialism equals Animism

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


mysql close

 

©2007 Christopher Chantrill