|
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.
|
|
morality
moral-absolutism
presidency-of-george-w-bush
presidency-of-bill-clinton
al-shifa-pharmaceutical-factory
rwanda
rwandan-genocide
sudan
bill-clinton
anti-war
ba-ath-party
democratic-party-united-states
opposition-to-the-iraq-war
george-w-bush
iraq
saddam-hussein
united-nations
peace-movement
iraq-war
united-states
madeleine-albright
moral-relativism
liberalism
leftism
evil
|
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."
|
|
war
emotion
religion
al-shifa-pharmaceutical-factory
noam-chomsky
the-nation
despotism
monotheism
war-crimes
theocracy
osama-bin-laden
september-11-attacks
middle-east
islamic-terrorism
terrorism
united-states
islam
propaganda
|
Christopher Hitchens |