It's about me, not liberation
Posted by aogWednesday, 06 October 2004 at 08:54 TrackBack Ping URL

The comments to the post I was discussing yesterday were informative as well. The primary argument in favor of the insurgents was to “kick out the occupiers”. No thought was given as to whether violence was the best method for doing so. Clearly achieving some result was secondary to simple violence. In this we see once again that it’s not really about the Iraqis or their future but about the Leftists who support the insurgents. I think this preference for violence over results is the confluence of three dehabilitating trends in the modern Left:

  • Addiction to violence in and of itself. The Left calls others “bloodthirsty” but no movement seems to have more of a visceral desire for blood letting than the Left. In other movements it tends to be much more instrumental but the Left frequently seems to view it as an end in itself.
  • Process over results. The EU is of course the epitome of this trend, but we still see here the logic that the process of getting rid of an occupation is fighting it without much concern about whether this is the best method or even will be successful. It’s just how it’s done. It’s one more point of alignment between the modern Left and other reactionary movements.
  • Anti-Americanism. Given the lack of calls for the Lebonese to fight their occupiers, once can’t help thinking that the calls for Iraqis to fight are driven as much by the desire to hurt Americans as anything else.

The sad part is that this melange of motivations is presented as for the benefit of the Iraqis, when it’s really about satisfying the primal urges of the Stoppers. I doubt that they’re fooling anyone but themselves.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
Dave Sheridan Wednesday, 06 October 2004 at 20:58

It’s always All About Us. None of Iraq’s ‘liberation’ goups have voiced what they’d do if we were to exit the scene, but we have some pretty good ideas: - The Sunni groups want their Baathist government back, with them running it. They’re supported by their now-unemployed mullahs who want the same thing. - Zarqawi et. al. want a Taliban-style government hospitable to incubating and exporting Caliphascism. - Al-Sadr wants a Shiite theocracy, with him at the head. All the groups have violence and the defeat of the U.S. led coalition as common denominators, but it’s not the only ones. Human rights as we understand them disappear under any of the three. Which of these outcomes does the Left favor? If they like the process, they need to be forced to defend one of its endpoints.

End of Discussion