The Podhoretz Piece

Written by Mike on January 24th, 2005

I think one of the best defenses of the “Bush Doctrine” is offered by Podhoretz here in Commentary Magazine, entitled The War Against World War IV, it offers a fairly detailed synopsis of all arguments on both the Left and Right that swirl around D.C. today. He weakest defense of course is against the very conservative argument that says: what business is it of ours to spread democracy? Let’s get in, get out and be done with it. He illuminates this point quite well here:

With no mass audience to lose, no such worry bothers the exponents of another line of attack on the Bush Doctrine that has emanated from a neighborhood on the Right where utter ruthlessness is considered the only way to wage war, and where the idea of exporting democracy is thought to conflict with conservative political wisdom. On the Right though it obviously is, this neighborhood of superhawks is as distant from the precincts of paleoconservatism as it is from the redoubts of the anti-American Left.

He further explains the strength of this argument by his (somewhat) endorsement of it:

Of all the attacks on the Bush Doctrine, this set of arguments is the only one that resonates with me, at least on the issue of how to wage war. I have no objection in principle to the ruthlessness the superhawks advocate, and I agree that it would likely be very effective. The trouble is that the more closely I look at their position, the more clearly does it emerge as fatally infected by the disease of utopianism—the very disease that usually fills critics of this stripe with revulsion and fear.

His line at the end referring to utopianism is never fully explained in my opinion, but judge for yourselves, it is an excellent work. For the record I am not a neoconservative, mostly because I see a very slippery slope when it comes to justifying the democratization of dangerous portions of the world. First the Middle East, then Africa? When did freedom become something that must be given? We were not given freedom rather we fought for it. So too must other nations earn their freedom in a similar manner or they will not value it anymore than a man values the difference in a fish caught and fish given. When the opportunity is available, Iraq and Afghanistan being the prime examples, or when it is in the avowed national interest of the United States to do so, Japan and Germany after WWII, then reshaping a county’s political landscape is acceptable. But neoconservatives would have us galloping off to tilt at the windmills of tyranny, of which there are far too many and our lone lance wouldn’t make a dent in anyhow.

7 Comments so far ↓

  1. Jan
    24
    12:35
    PM
    Gary Livacari

    Michael, it is completely false that neoconservatives would have us “galloping off to tilt at the windmills of tyranny, of which there are far too many and our lone lance wouldn’t make a dent in anyhow.”

    We only believe in installing free societies when it is in the best interest of American national security. It just so happens that it is in the best interest of America to have a democratic Middle East. Indeed, by instigating democratic transformations in some counries - Iraq, Afghanistan, maybe Iran - it is possible that freedom will spread throughout the entire region, without having to utilize American military power in every country. So yes, our “lance” can put a significant “dent” in that tyranny infested region; one that will keep our posterity safe from the threat of terrorism.

    You don’t need to be a “neocon” to stand behind this President.

  2. Jan
    24
    12:46
    PM
    Michael Shutze Jr.

    Two points, I believe that the intentions of neo-cons are essentially good and secondly that they do not understand the fundamental nature of the societies they wish to change. I mentioned that neo-cons would have us galloping off to save the world as the slippery slope argument. It is true, we are not doing that now, but that is where this philosophy will take us. If a chain reaction does occur within the Middle East then so be it, but are we to try and set one off in Burma as well? How about the Congo? Both places are in desperate need of freedom from oppressive rulers, but how many Americans must die so that these people can elect new leadership? I don’t think many Arab societies are ready for that type of freedom just yet. Iraq, maybe, Afghanistan probably not, but it is in our national interest to try. Burma, whether we like it or not, must rot in its own hopelessness for the time being.

  3. Jan
    24
    4:41
    PM
    Gary Livacari

    Naysayers, like yourself, argued “that type of freedom,” would never take hold in Japan after WW 2, and in Germany and Italy as well. But it did. It happened throughout South America during the Reagan “Rollback” too. People said it could never happen in Afghanistan, and they were wrong, as Afghanistan just had a free election. It now has a functioning representative government. How many times must freedom transform foes into friends before you and others believe in its power.

    I don’t believe you understand the fundamental nature of humanity. All humans have the capacity to live in freedom. Do you really think that - given the choice - Muslims would choose tyranny over freedom? No one is saying that their governments have to be picture perfect models of American, Jefforsonian style democracy. Of course, they will have flaws. But if you believe that the human longing for freedom is universal, there is no reason to believe that free societies cannot take root in the Middle East. Indeed, it is already happening! Ultimately, free societies are in the best interest of American national security.

    You would be hardpressed to find a “neocon” who would advocate the democratization of the Congo or Burma. Again, you continue to misunderstand the fact that we want to bring freedom to only those places that breed and sustain the terrorist ideology. For the most part, such countries are in the Middle East. Of course, it would be nearly impossible, and even deconstructive to take down every dictator in the world.

  4. Feb
    26
    12:16
    AM
    bisexual gay monitor participation

    Well now I’ve seen everything.

  5. Jul
    19
    6:19
    AM
    Anonymous

    a really great homepage! i’m a big fan of your stuff although i’m just 16!

  6. Aug
    10
    7:47
    AM
    Anonymous

    great

  7. Aug
    11
    6:22
    AM
    Anonymous

    Howdy! Great site. Great content. Great! I can recommend this site to others!

Spruce up your comments with
<a href="" title=""><abbr title=""><acronym title=""><b><blockquote cite=""><cite><code><del datetime=""><em><i><q cite=""><strike><strong>
New comments are moderated before being shown * = required field

Leave a Comment





3 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Save The GOP » Africa and then?
  2. Save The GOP » Africa and then?
  3. canadian drugs