Monday, December 06, 2004

More Responses to a "Fighting Faith"

Responses to Peter Beinhart’s article continue you to appear.

Big Wig (a.k.a) Silflay Hraka posts an excellent response:

True liberals would have spent their time prior to the invasion recruiting Peace Corps-like volunteers for post-war Iraq rather than human shields for a brutal dictatorship. True liberals now would be demanding that the US do everything in its
power--including militarily--to support the extension of basic human rights to countries other than Iraq and Afghanistan.
.

Dr. Emile at the Chronicle (an interesting, thoughtful, and entertaining multi-person discussion blog) is less enthusiastic about Beinhart’s New Liberalism:

Beinart's not wrong that liberals ought to oppose Al Qaeda, that's a no brainer. But he is wrong, by my lights, to think that "liberal passion" is required to win the struggle against Al Qaeda. It is not; this is a rhetoric of mobilization that doesn't fit any circumstances except total war.

I have to disagree with the good doctor – liberal passion is exactly what is needed. If we we believe in such ideas as democracy, free speech, women’s rights and that all people deserve these rights, liberals should be at the forefront of the fight against Islamic fascism. The best long term solution to Islamic terrorism is to establish democracy in the Middle East. This may require some military action, but there are positive steps that liberals should take to help establish democracy before the military is ever needed, and that they can take during or after action to help ensure democracy. For more on this see an earlier post. Democray in the world is an idea both liberals and conservaties should be passionate about, but if liberals continue toward neo-isolationism they will have effectively abandoned democracy and conceeded the good fight to others.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home