The Neo-Conservative Tragedy

Tags

America, America 911, American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Coffee, Counter-Jihad, Defend the modern world, Democracy, Facebook, Iraq War, Islamisation of London, Islamism, Israel, jordan, Liberalism, Multiculturalism, neo, neo con, neo con iraq, neo conservative, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, Twitter, United States, Zionism

I used to consider myself something of a neo-conservative (pejoratively abbreviated ‘neo-con’ by the left, often with an anti-Semitic edge to it). I was genuinely enlivened by the prospect of the West enforcing its moral and political standards on the rest of the world, believing for some time that the project was a simple yet complete fix for the problems of our time; most importantly, the problems of terrorism and Islamic anti-development.

Like many, I now know better. Neo-conservatism has failed, and failed badly, in practice. The use of the doctrine to liberate and improve the condition of Iraq has barely succeeded. While the country is now technically democratic, it remains crippled by religious tradition, unable and unwilling to develop beyond the limitations of that tradition. This should really have been predicted from the get-go. The fact that it wasn’t exposes the fundamental naivety at the heart of the neo-conservative experiment.

Put at its most basic, neo-conservatism pushes the idea that democracy has a positive value. Neo-cons (if there still are neo-cons) believe that democracies are less likely to go to war, less likely to collapse into chaos, tolerate corruption and extremism or shelter terrorists than are dictatorships and autocracies. On the surface this sounds reasonable enough. The Western democracies of today are certainly more averse to these evils than the third world; as are the remodelled nations of the far-east. Why wouldn’t the same be true for the rest of the world?

The answer in the case of the middle east is Islam. As political equations go, Islam plus democracy equals regression is one of the most reliable. The evidence for this can be found in modern ‘liberated’ Afghanistan – a country which has gone from a tribal theocracy controlled by the Taliban, to a democratic theocracy policed by the Taliban. One can also point to ‘liberated’ Iraq, which itself has gone from a secular Baathist dictatorship to a democratic Shia theocracy. Looked at from this vantage point, was either project worth thousands of free Western lives lost in the course their completion?

I was a fool to have ever thought so.

As well as Iraq and Afghanistan, neo-conservatism has also destroyed the nation of Libya, a country that previously had the highest Human Development Index ranking in the world. Post-liberation, the country is a sharia-ridden desert, robbed of its infrastructure, foreign investment and political coherence. As to whether Syria falls to the neo-con wave remains to be decided. One can justifiably presume that if democracy does strike the country, it will swiftly go the same way as Iraq and Afghanistan have.

If neo-conservatism was – as its detractors have always maintained – merely an ideological cover for destroying the Muslim world, then it has been remarkably successful. But I don’t believe in that conspiracy. Neo-conservatism – I think – was simply an embarrassing misfire of the Western intellect. We will be living with the consequences for a very long time.

D, LDN

Advertisement

The Politics of Irrelevance.

Tags

2 party state, America, American Liberty, Barack Obama, BBC, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Defend the modern world, Democracy, democratic reform, foreign policy, Gay Marriage, Liberalism, media, politics, politics of irrelevance, punch and judy, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, relevant, same sex marriage, United States

Gay marriage has been legalised in all 50 states of America. Jubilation is conquering the social networks. Celebrities are popping open extra bottles of champagne. The religious and conservative are bemoaning the imminent destruction of the country, if not the world.

My view? None of this matters… and that was always the point.

Gay marriage is part of the politics of irrelevance (POI), a very deliberate side-show performed in democratic countries to distract voters from a lack of real choice.

In America, the POI usually concerns things like flag-burning laws, school meals, the death penalty debate, prayer in schools and cannabis law reform.

Airy and light topics like these are easy to speak passionately about. It is easy and respectable to take a different side on any of these matters to your core electorate, even to your best friend or partner.

By contrast, real politics, real life and death issues – China, immigration, foreign policy, Islam etc… – are more difficult for the actors in a phoney democracy to speak freely about.

Since politicians in the West want to get elected more than anything else, they won’t lay out a concrete position on substantial issues for fear of diminishing their vote. Instead, they will practice a very developed (almost artisan) kind of hypnosis – dancing a merry dance around the subject and climaxing with a very vague (but complete sounding) answer.

America would change dramatically if the politics of irrelevance was no longer an option. Politicians would then be forced to take a stand on real, flesh and blood topics. Career politicians would be weeded out almost immediately. The mind-numbing centrism of the modern US would give way to a sharp divide, providing the people with genuine choice.

There is a reason Fox news and MSNBC exist. In Britain, we call it ‘Punch and Judy politics’ (Punch and Judy are the titular characters of a traditional puppet show – popular in English seaside towns – in which each character beats the other with a stick). The kind of politics so loudly combative and dumbed down that everyone can understand it – everyone except the genuinely informed. Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannity are not real journalists. They are cartoon characters – Mrs Liberal and Mr Conservative, and they fight exclusively about the irrelevant.

But what happens when the irrelevant can no longer be made to seem relevant? We may soon find out.

Gay marriage has now gone. Flag burning legislation was worn out years ago. Cannabis is being steadily legalised… The authentic is primed for a comeback, and that could be explosive.

The long sleep of the real has provided protective cover to profound failures of government. It has deadened the limbs of the libertarian majority, who when woken may throw off the establishment, both right and left. Phoney politics has postponed argument over the relationship between Islam and Islamist terrorism, the increasing use of the Spanish language in a traditionally English-speaking nation, government surveillance of law-abiding citizens, suicide rates among army veterans, the Mexicanisation of the pacific South-West, the national debt, trade imbalances with China and India, and a whole variety of real, consequential topics.

American politics is due for a makeover.

D, LDN.

The West or Nothing.

Tags

America, America 911, American Liberty, Christianity and Islam, Civilisation, Coffee, Defend the modern world, Democracy, developed countries, European, Europeanisation, Facebook, Industrialised countries list, Islam, Liberalisation, Niall Ferguson, Race and ethnicity in the United States Census, The West, The West versus the Rest, United States, West, West best, West is best, West versus the rest, Western culture, Western world, Western World developed countries, Westernisation

The Western World (Europe, Oceania, Japan, Israel and North America) is so often compared against the dusty wastelands of the Islamic world that a casual observer might think this disparity was an isolated one. It isn’t.

It is a vital truth that the Western world is not only a preferable environment to Planet Sharia, but to all other environments on Planet Earth.

I am writing this post as a self-conscious chauvinist. To me, there is simply no comparison between the relaxed, liberal manners of European culture and the chaotic, antiquated or eccentric alternatives offered by the third and second worlds.

Even those civilisations we can count upon as friends, like China, Africa, Indochina, India and Latin America are dizzyingly inferior to our own. We enjoy very special advantages confined to our range of habitation – advantages hewn violently over centuries, the glistening produce of bravery, rebellion and innovation.

Outside of this luxurious reserve, primitivism and bigotry can be found almost everywhere. In non-Muslim African countries, for example, girls from certain tribes have their breasts ironed flat to delay puberty and sexual development. The process is said to be mind-scarringly painful and is usually performed by the girls mother or grandmother. In democratic India, one particular ‘caste’, the Dalit, are considered ‘untouchable’ due to a perceived (wholly imagined) ancestral wretchedness. Members of this caste are condemned to the most menial professions and forbidden from inter-marrying with members of ‘superior’ categories. Likewise in Brazil – the land of toted post-racialism – the darker you are, the less likely you are to get on in life. With race an impossible concept (due to centuries of mixing) simple colorism – every bit as nasty as race prejudice – wears its clothes.

A majority of non-Western countries, including non-Muslim countries, approve of arranged (forced) marriages. This hideous idea means that young people never get to enjoy the romance of dating, seduction and sexual discovery, but are simply tacked on to a family friendly to their own. Those who rebel against the tradition and date outside their tribe or caste are subject to acid attacks and honour killings.

Speaking of violence, in Mexico (sunny, happy, vacation-friendly Mexico), neighbour of the great United States of America, there are more beheadings per year than in the entire Middle East. I’ll repeat that – in Mexico, there are more beheadings per year than in the entire Middle East. This unbelievable slaughter occurs only a slim river away from the peace and affluence of suburban Texas. By itself, this speaks volumes about the sharpness of contrast under discussion.

Despite the position of the far-right, the West isn’t actually a biological mass. Multiracial, Japanese and Jewish experiments have achieved (or even surpassed) the European standard. In the same spirit, Immigrants to the West can become naturally Western if they so desire, including people from the most Neanderthal backgrounds. Ayaan Hirsi Ali can no longer sensibly be compared to the inhabitants of pre-wheel Somalia, for example. She has become a Westerner, understands this and displays joy and gratitude for it. We all should, however native we consider ourselves.

As to the secret ingredient of the West (the cause of its distinction), I would nominate the legacy of Anti-Traditionalism; the breaking by axe of the formaldehyde jars preserving ancient mistakes. Westerners realise that the solemnities of royalty are a pantomime. We also can’t be impressed by ten-limbed, Elephant-headed deities, Chinese tea-making ceremonies that last 10 hours, competitively obedient wives, Buddhists staring at walls, insect-worshipping Jains or anything else that is completely out-of-place in a century of awesome material potential. The secret of Western success is a devotion to the real.

And only the real is of any worth; only it can be truly inspiring- the shimmer of the sun on skyscraper glass; the colourful stacks of wares at supermarkets the size of football fields. How luxurious and sane our countries have become. We should be prepared to kill millions to protect this.

For me at least, as far as modernity is concerned, the choice is ultimately not the West or Pakistan, but the West or nothing at all.

D, LDN.