By Brandon Crocker on 6.14.05 @ 12:06AM
Left-wing modernity at its most consistent.
Back when I was in college in the 1980s, the American and
European left propounded a belief known as "Moral Equivalence"
which essentially said that America was every bit as bad as the
Soviet Union. The argument ran something like: "Sure, Stalin,
utilizing the powers of a totalitarian state, executed millions of
his own citizens, but the United States interned Japanese-Americans
during World War II; the Soviets enslaved eastern Europe, but the
U.S. supported dictators like the Shah of Iran." The point was that
the world was made up of two "morally equivalent" superpowers that
were both doing nasty things (though somehow the Soviet's actions
were more "understandable" or even "defensive") in a struggle for
world domination and that America, the leader of the "so-called"
Free World, had no moral standing to object to the Soviet
empire.
Apparently, the doctrine of Moral Equivalence did not die along
with the Soviet Union. The left has just substituted a new evil to
which the United States is supposedly morally equivalent.
Senator Ted Kennedy showed himself in the forefront of this
revival with his venomous spewing on Abu Ghraib. On the floor of
the Senate Mr. Kennedy proclaimed: "Shamefully, we now learn that
Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S.
management." Saddam filled mass graves with hundreds of thousands
of people, and tortured (by which I mean raped, cut off hands and
tongues, electrocuted, conducted beatings with steel rods) hundreds
of thousands more. Obviously this is the moral equivalent of a
handful of degenerate guards making naked Iraqi prisoners form
human pyramids or wear underwear on their heads.
And now Amnesty International writes that the detention facility
at Guantanamo Bay is "the gulag of our times." I wonder what that
makes North Korea. At Amnesty International they still can't resist
comparing the United States to the Soviet Union and in ways as
ludicrous as ever. Amnesty International would have us believe that
there is no difference between Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and an
al-Qaeda fighter; no difference between sleep deprivation in order
to get information from terrorists and hard labor, exposure to the
deadly Siberian winters, and malnutrition to "reeducate" political
dissidents.
In the old days, many leftists promoted "moral equivalence" not
just because they disliked the capitalist United States but also
because they sympathized with Soviet Communism. The new moral
equivalence arguments are just as silly. Those who make them,
however, do so not out of any sympathy for Saddam Hussein or
militant Islam, but simply out of a dislike of the United States
(or, in the case of Senator Kennedy, a dislike of George W. Bush
and the belief that engaging in disgusting calumnies against the
United States is perfectly "patriotic" as long as there is a
Republican in the White House).
The new moral equivalency, however, does not just deal with the
United States, per se, but with Christian Western Civilization as
well. Robert Reich, for instance, has written several articles and
a book (Reason: Why Liberals Will Win the Battle for
America) expounding the idea that "[t]he great conflict of the
21st century will not be between the West and terrorism....The true
battle will be between modern civilization and the anti-modernists;
between those who believe in the primacy of the individual and
those who believe that human beings owe their allegiance and
identity to a higher authority;...between those who believe in
science, reason, and logic and those who believe that truth is
revealed through Scripture and religious dogma. Terrorism will
disrupt and destroy lives. But terrorism itself is not the greatest
danger we face."
Pope John Paul II, Billy Graham, Jerry Falwell, Muqtada al-Sadr,
Osama bin Laden -- all cut from the same cloth, so to speak.
This was the popular notion echoed by Ridley Scott in his film
Kingdom of Heaven in which the real dangerous
troublemakers in the world are the religious -- be they Christian
or Muslim. Compare for instance the Christian world's reaction to
Palestinian gunmen killing a caretaker and taking over the Church
of the Nativity, and the Muslim world's reaction to false reports
about a Koran being flushed down a toilet at Guantanamo Bay, or the
Christian reaction to writers and filmmakers who produce works
critical of Christianity and the Muslim reaction to a filmmaker
like Theo Van Gogh or a writer like Salman Rushdie. Pretty much the
same, right?
Well, not exactly. But that's what the left wants us to believe.
Sure, we currently have a problem with radical Islam, but
Christianity and Judaism, are really just as bad, just as
dangerous. And the problems we are having with militant Islam
should be reminding us that we need to be more frightened by
Christianity, and particularly by Christians who think they have
the right to cast votes based on their moral values. According to
much of the left, we should regard anyone who has genuine religious
convictions as a would-be member of the Taliban. Beware the coming
theocracy headed by John Ashcroft and George W. Bush.
The tactic of arguing moral equivalence is to focus attention
away from the obvious evil -- Soviet Communism or militant Islam --
and to refocus attention on the rather less obvious supposed evils
of what the left sees as the more immediate impediment to the
achievement of its goals -- America, with its heritage and value
system that promotes capitalism and individual liberty, and
Christianity which promotes an unacceptable moral code and the idea
that there are things greater than the State.
The comparisons made by the proponents of moral equivalence have
always been transparently absurd. Yet those that give voice to
these arguments think their grotesque hyperbole is justified in
order to make their point -- though they are often deceptive about
what, exactly, that point is. But just as during the days of the
Soviet empire, today's proponents of "moral equivalence" merely
demonstrate their own moral -- and intellectual -- bankruptcy.
topics:
Islam, Iraq, Iran, NATO, North Korea, Communism, Oil