April 12, 2004
THE FAITH-BASED PRESIDENCY (via Reductio ad Absurdum):
Fundamentally, Bush Works on Faith (Peter Schweizer and Rochelle Schweizer, April 11, 2004, LA Times)
"George sees this as a religious war," one family member told us. "He doesn't have a PC view of this war. His view is that they are trying to kill the Christians. And we the Christians will strike back with more force and more ferocity than they will ever know." [...]The president's interpretation of Jesus' parables directly influences his moral vision for foreign policy. Rejecting the notion of realpolitik — that cold, hard self-interest should be the sole guide of policy — Bush embraces the idea that the United States has a moral obligation to help those in trouble.
His friend Doug Wead, a former aide to George H.W. Bush, recounted for us a discussion he had with the current president a few years ago on the story of the good Samaritan. Wead was reminding Bush of the story about our moral obligation to help strangers in distress when the president, in typically blunt fashion, asked: What if we got there 20 minutes earlier, when the traveler to Jericho was being attacked. Don't we have an obligation to help him then too? Such thinking not only influenced his decision to liberate Iraq but also fueled his commitment to combat AIDS in Africa. [...]
Even those who don't share Bush's religious convictions should see them as a good thing. His faith compels him to wrestle with ethical questions that less religious men might simply ignore. And his strong faith offers us visible guideposts by which we can evaluate his performance as president. Find me a commander in chief who lacks core convictions rooted in something greater than himself, and you'll have a leader who lacks an identifiable moral compass and will, accordingly, be prone to drift off course. [...]
It is easier to think of the war on terrorism as a struggle over politics or oil. But the reality is that, fundamentally, it is about core beliefs. Just like the arms race was a symptom, and not the cause, of the Cold War, terrorism is a grisly byproduct of virulent Islam's difficulty in coping with a set of Western beliefs. For Bush, those beliefs have both strengthened and tempered his instincts.
Those who think events are being driven by neo-conservatism fail to apprehend the religious nature of George W. Bush's crusade in the Middle East. The neo-cons are just along for the ride. Posted by Orrin Judd at April 12, 2004 4:37 PM
He's half right.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at April 12, 2004 5:26 PMMore specifics, Harry.
As for the theological observation: Right on! I posted about this at my website.
Posted by: Ptah at April 12, 2004 6:50 PMYou do have to love that Harry is stuck on the side of the Crusaders.
Posted by: oj at April 12, 2004 7:26 PMPtah, I've said here before (before you joined, I think) that I believe Bush has a huge blind spot, and it links directly to his faith.
I grew up among people like him, and they have a firm belief that people who profess belief are, at bottom, good; even if they simultaneously believe that their specific belief is a perversion of the Devil.
Contrarywise, people (like me) who profess no belief cannot possibly be good.
As a result, Bush looks for good among "good Muslims" and invites them to the White House and shares bread and salt.
I don't know what it will take for him to cotton on to the fact that the project of that religion is to wipe out his religion (along with any unbelievers along for the ride). When I say he's half right, I mean that strategically he's identified half his enemy.
That's a half more than idiots like Kerry, but it's still only half.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at April 12, 2004 8:05 PMHarry:
Wrong. His faith teaches that even he is sin-filled, that no one is "good."
Although, Islam is certainly a better basis for a society than secularism.
Posted by: oj at April 12, 2004 8:24 PMNot according to this article:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/14_2_when_islam.html
Posted by: Jeff Guinn at April 13, 2004 12:03 PMI don't care what his faith teaches. I'm describing actual behavior.
He is what he is, and very like the people he grew up among.
From the point of view of many readers of this blog, no doubt his readiness to give the benefit of the doubt to any sort of believer in any sort of monotheism is at least acceptable, if not charming. Even I would judge it harmless if he were just a businessman in central Texas.
If you're going to play in the big leagues, though, you need to know a little something about the rules.
His behavior expresses his faith.
Posted by: oj at April 13, 2004 3:28 PMMaybe so, but he doesn't understand the project of Islam and neither do you.
No excuse for that, they've worked hard enough to tell us what it is.
Someone expressed it concisely a while back: the problem with Muslims is they don't know how to be a minority.
I would have said, rather, have no interest, but it amounts to the same thing. The project is to overcome dar-al-Harb (that's you) and without that, it isn't Islam any more.
Can't square that circle.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at April 13, 2004 7:57 PMHarry:
Their project doesn't matter anymore than that of fascism or communism did. We decide what peoples' projects are. That's what it means to be the world's only superpower and the fountainhead of globalization.
Posted by: oj at April 13, 2004 8:26 PMIt was their project long before we were around.
If superpowers determined people's projects, you would not be a Christian, because there wouldn't be any Christians now.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at April 14, 2004 2:58 AMRome was a superpower.
Posted by: oj at April 14, 2004 8:05 AMRome is the superpower I was thinking of. It failed to suppress Christianity, though it tried.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at April 14, 2004 11:26 PMThe Roman superpower spread Christianity across the world.
Posted by: oj at April 15, 2004 8:21 AMFirst it failed to suppress Christianity.
Second, Christianity failed to spread in opposition to the Empire.
Stalemate.
In 313, the two united and prospered -- well, the empire didn't prosper very long, for reasons Gibbon diagnosed, but immediately it benefitted.
Neither the power of God (if he was involved) nor the power of the emperor sufficed to get what it wanted.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at April 16, 2004 2:58 PMAll of Europe was Christianized. The superpower won.
Posted by: oj at April 16, 2004 3:08 PM