December 16, 2003

CRUSADERS VS. TRANSNATIONALISTS:

Dreams and Glory: In his foreign policy speech in Beverly Hills, Howard Dean
tried to seem serious and pragmatic but came across clueless. (David Brooks, 12/16/03, NY Times)

George Bush fundamentally sees the war on terror as a moral and ideological confrontation between the forces of democracy and the forces of tyranny. Howard Dean fundamentally sees the war on terror as a law and order issue. At the end of his press conference, Bush uttered a most un-Deanlike sentiment:

"I believe, firmly believe — and you've heard me say this a lot, and I say it a lot because I truly believe it — that freedom is the almighty God's gift to every person — every man and woman who lives in this world. That's what I believe. And the arrest of Saddam Hussein changed the equation in Iraq. Justice was being delivered to a man who defied that gift from the Almighty to the people of Iraq."

Bush believes that God has endowed all human beings with certain inalienable rights, the most important of which is liberty. Every time he is called upon to utter an unrehearsed thought, he speaks of the war on terror as a conflict between those who seek to advance liberty to realize justice, and those who oppose the advance of liberty: radical Islamists who fear religious liberty, dictators who fear political liberty and reactionaries who fear liberty for women.

Furthermore, Bush believes the U.S. has a unique role to play in this struggle to complete democracy's triumph over tyranny and so drain the swamp of terror.

Judging by his speech yesterday, Dean does not believe the U.S. has an exceptional role to play in world history. Dean did not argue that the U.S. should aggressively promote democracy in the Middle East and around the world. [...]

The world Dean described is largely devoid of grand conflicts or moral, cultural and ideological divides. It is a world without passionate nationalism, a world in which Europe and the United States are not riven by any serious cultural differences, in which sensible people from around the globe would find common solutions, if only Bush weren't so unilateral.


This is another example of how religious faith has become the dividing line within America and across the West, which does make it odd that the Buchananeers are so opposed to the Bush view.

Posted by Orrin Judd at December 16, 2003 10:26 AM
Comments

He sure furrows his brows well, though.

Posted by: Barry Meislin at December 16, 2003 10:38 AM

On the other hand, if it is true that:

"Dean does not believe the U.S. has an exceptional role to play in world history [and that] Dean did not argue that the U.S. should aggressively promote democracy in the Middle East and around the world..." then it would seem that Conservative isolationists (e.g., Buchanan et al.) would certainly see eye to eye with the Democratic Candidate from Vermont.

Add that to the profound dismay of seeing your president---and your party---hijacked by neo-con Jews (with their "Rasputin-like influence" over him and their fervor to "place Israel's interests above that of the US"), and there might well be grounds for a natural alliance.

The beginning of a beautiful relationship, no doubt.

Posted by: Barry Meislin at December 16, 2003 10:47 AM

Exactly how many Buchananeers are lined up behind pugnacious Pat? And don't count the ones who voted for him in Palm Beach County.

Posted by: jim hamlen at December 16, 2003 11:38 AM

In answer to Jim Hamlen above, nearly zero.

What you are seeing actually are people who placed their bets over a year ago that things would go bad in Iraq. France, Lew Rockwell/Buchanan, Germany, Democrats, and the news media and if things do go badly they win.

I am not so sure you are seeing a consistent ideology in operation. In the case of Germany they wanted to tap into latent anti-americanism for Political benefit. In the case of France..well they are just French.

Posted by: h-man at December 16, 2003 12:33 PM

Come on, how much "religious faith" do you think Brooks, Kristol, Wolfowitiz, or Perle really have? What they have is "idelogical faith," which is something quite different. What they lack is what statesmen need to effectively pursue the national interest -- a certain degree of skepticism about their own plans.

Posted by: Steve Sailer at December 16, 2003 1:26 PM

Steve:

None. It's not their war. They just want to make Israel safe. It's W who's pushing the reform of Islam.

Posted by: OJ at December 16, 2003 1:39 PM

Pat has his problems(boy does he)but at least he's on our side in a slightly deranged way.One cannot say the same of all too many Democrats.

Posted by: M. at December 16, 2003 2:08 PM

"What they lack is what statesmen need to effectively pursue the national interest."

Which is, of course, what the State Dept. posseses in spades. Ergo, Bush should have put all his chips on State?

"It's not their war."

Not Wolfowitz's war? Nor Perle's? Nor Kristol's?

(Probably would darn well have been, though, if the US screwed up.)

Posted by: Barry Meislin at December 16, 2003 5:01 PM
« NO LET UP: | Main | BRIEF AND WRONG: »