|
5bb6eb0
|
George Bush made a mistake when he referred to the Saddam Hussein regime as 'evil.' Every liberal and leftist knows how to titter at such black-and-white moral absolutism. What the president should have done, in the unlikely event that he wanted the support of America's peace-mongers, was to describe a confrontation with Saddam as the 'lesser evil.' This is a term the Left can appreciate. Indeed, 'lesser evil' is part of the essential tactical rhetoric of today's Left, and has been deployed to excuse or overlook the sins of liberal Democrats, from President Clinton's bombing of Sudan to Madeleine Albright's veto of an international rescue for Rwanda when she was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Among those longing for nuance, moral relativism--the willingness to use the term evil, when combined with a willingness to make accommodations with it--is the smart thing: so much more sophisticated than 'cowboy' language.
|
|
al-shifa-pharmaceutical-factory
anti-war
ba-ath-party
bill-clinton
democratic-party-united-states
evil
george-w-bush
iraq
iraq-war
leftism
liberalism
madeleine-albright
moral-absolutism
moral-relativism
morality
opposition-to-the-iraq-war
peace-movement
presidency-of-bill-clinton
presidency-of-george-w-bush
rwanda
rwandan-genocide
saddam-hussein
sudan
united-nations
united-states
|
Christopher Hitchens |
|
2e57d33
|
"Suppose that we agree that the two atrocities can or may be mentioned in the same breath. Why should we do so? I wrote at the time ( , October 5, 1998) that Osama bin Laden 'hopes to bring a "judgmental" monotheism of his own to bear on these United States.' Chomsky's recent version of this is 'considering the grievances expressed by people of the Middle East region.' In my version, then as now, one confronts an enemy who wishes ill to our society, and also to his own (if impermeable religious despotism is considered an 'ill'). In Chomsky's reading, one must learn to sift through the inevitable propaganda and emotion resulting from the September 11 attacks, and lend an ear to the suppressed and distorted cry for help that comes, not from the victims, but from the perpetrators. I have already said how distasteful I find this attitude. I wonder if even Chomsky would now like to have some of his own words back? Why else should he take such care to quote himself deploring the atrocity? Nobody accused him of not doing so. It's often a bad sign when people defend themselves against charges which haven't been made."
|
|
al-shifa-pharmaceutical-factory
despotism
emotion
islam
islamic-terrorism
middle-east
monotheism
noam-chomsky
osama-bin-laden
propaganda
religion
september-11-attacks
terrorism
the-nation
theocracy
united-states
war
war-crimes
|
Christopher Hitchens |