Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, August 21, 2006
Michael Barone :: Townhall.com Columnist
Our covert enemies
by Michael Barone
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
With unemployment at 10.2%, what will happen by the end of Obama's first term?



In our war against Islamo-fascist terrorism, we face enemies both overt and covert. The overt enemies are, of course, the terrorists themselves. Their motives are clear: They hate our society because of its freedoms and liberties, and want to make us all submit to their totalitarian form of Islam. They are busy trying to wreak harm on us in any way they can. Against them we can fight back, as we did when British authorities arrested the men and women who were plotting to blow up a dozen airliners over the Atlantic.

Our covert enemies are harder to identify, for they live in large numbers within our midst. And in terms of intentions, they are not enemies in the sense that they consciously wish to destroy our society. On the contrary, they enjoy our freedoms and often call for their expansion. But they have also been working, over many years, to undermine faith in our society and confidence in its goodness. These covert enemies are those among our elites who have promoted the ideas labeled as multiculturalism, moral relativism and (the term is Professor Samuel Huntington's) transnationalism.

At the center of their thinking is a notion of moral relativism. No idea is morally superior to another. Hitler had his way, we have ours -- who's to say who is right? No ideas should be "privileged," especially those that have been the guiding forces in the development and improvement of Western civilization. Rich white men have imposed their ideas because of their wealth and through the use of force. Rich white nations imposed their rule on benighted people of color around the world. For this sin of imperialism they must forever be regarded as morally stained and presumptively wrong. Our covert enemies go quickly from the notion that all societies are morally equal to the notion that all societies are morally equal except ours, which is worse.

These are the ideas that have been transmitted over a long generation by the elites who run our universities and our schools, and who dominate our mainstream media. They teach an American history with the good parts left out and the bad parts emphasized. We are taught that some of the Founding Fathers were slaveholders -- and are left ignorant of their proclamations of universal liberties and human rights. We are taught that Japanese-Americans were interned in World War II -- and not that American military forces liberated millions from tyranny. To be sure, the great mass of Americans tend to resist these teachings. By the millions they buy and read serious biographies of the Founders and accounts of the Greatest Generation. But the teachings of our covert enemies have their effect.

Of course, this distorts history. We are taught that American slavery was the most evil institution in human history. But every society in history has had slavery. Only one society set out to and did abolish it. The movement to abolish first the slave trade and then slavery was not started by the reason-guided philosophies of 18th century France. It was started, as Adam Hochschild documents in his admirable book "Bury the Chains," by Quakers and Evangelical Christians in Britain, followed in time by similar men and women in America. The slave trade was ended not by Africans, but by the Royal Navy, with aid from the U.S. Navy even before the Civil War.

Nevertheless, the default assumption of our covert enemies is that in any conflict between the West and the Rest, the West is wrong. That assumption can be rebutted by overwhelming fact: Few argued for the Taliban after Sept. 11. But in our continuing struggles, our covert enemies portray our work in Iraq through the lens of Abu Ghraib and consider Israel's self-defense against Hezbollah as the oppression of virtuous victims by evil men. In World War II, our elites understood that we were the forces of good and that victory was essential. Today, many of our elites subject our military and intelligence actions to fine-tooth-comb analysis and find that they are morally repugnant.

We have always had our covert enemies, but their numbers were few until the 1960s. But then the elite young men who declined to serve in the military during the Vietnam War set out to write a narrative in which they, rather than those who obeyed the call to duty, were the heroes. They have propagated their ideas through the universities, the schools and mainstream media to the point that they are the default assumptions of millions. Our covert enemies don't want the Islamo-fascists to win. But in some corner of their hearts, they would like us to lose.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Michael Barone is a Fox News Channel contributor and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. He is Senior Political Analyst for the Washington Examiner and a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to receive Michael Barone's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Moral Relativism
I know you probably won't read this, since this column is so old (I came across it in a reference to hate speech in this column in another blog), but I have to tell you that your analysis of moral relativism is morally bankrupt. For someone who does not subscribe to what you falsely call "moral relativism" -- I would assume that you have strong dictated morals from somewhere else -- it seems that integrity is not so important. I intend no offense, but I do want to set your record straight on moral relativism.

Yes, Hitler could have been considered "not immoral" for some moral paradigms, especially the nationalist German Aryans. Yes, slavery was acceptable to many peoples and still is to this day, but in a different form. But you can still label things Good and Evil, at your discretion (because who is to dictate what is Good and what is Evil?). Luckily we have some sort of a consensus: we mostly agree that helping people is Good and hurting people is Evil. We could take that as a definition, if we want. The point is that moral relativism means that you are responsible for the moral value of your actions, and that no point of view should be privileged BECAUSE of the rich white men who imposed it -- that point of view can only be privileged if you think that it is Good, and if we take that as the definition, and you consider respect for other people to be Good as well, you must respect opposing points of view unless they are harmful to others.

As a conservative, you may not believe that helping others is Good, and therefore my definition is not the one you will take. Perhaps you think it's more important that we protect our borders and leave American citizens -- children of illegal immigrants -- to die when their parents are taken away; perhaps you think that this is more important than making sure these children have a good home. In this case, you yourself are guilty of moral relativism, which hopefully, you will agree, is not a bad point of view to take.

What liberals believe, and I myself am a liberal, if you can't tell, is not that other peoples are morally equivalent but ours is worse, but that we need to respect other peoples regardless of their moral value and we need to maximize our own. It's easy to say that we liberals focus on the bad news, like the torture of innocent people in Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib, but the truth is that we care about the moral value of our own country, and it is more important, or at least just as important, to be right as it is to be victorious. We are told that we fight to preserve our freedoms, but we like to believe that we fight for justice, and our "bad news", errors, and war crimes undermine our moral victory in the War on Terror. Israel's attack on Lebanon may have been in self-defense, but when it is a slaughter of the Lebanese and a wholesale destruction of their infrastructure, is it so justified? Are the Lebanese not justified in wishing for the elimination of the country that oppresses them? If you lost a family member in 9/11 (I hope not, obviously), you would probably want justice brought to the perpetrators and the masterminds. If you were an Iraqi and you lost a family member, four other family members, your house, your daughter's virginity, and two of your limbs due to American bombs and attacks, how would you feel?

This is the essence of "moral relativism": consider your opponents' actions from their point of view and don't assume that yours is better just because it's yours. You're right that I don't want the so-called Islamofascists to win, since they are Evil and want to impose their views on me. You are also right that in some corner of my heart, I want Bush's War on Terror to fail -- not because I want my country's ruin but because this war is not being fought with the moral values critical to us bleeding-heart liberals: integrity, respect, justice. When there is a struggle between the West and anyone else, it is natural to be immediately suspicious of the motives of the West, given our track record of supporting death squads in Central America by selling weapons to radical Muslims, for instance, and our desire to economically control the world. With this latest disrespect for the inhabitants of the countries we invade, our moral values have been critically compromised, though it isn't like this is new. Simply put, and I think I speak for many liberals here, we fight for justice and for moral virtue, where this is defined by what is right and not by bias. If conservatives also fought for moral virtue rather than military might and conquest, all we would disagree on would be the details.

Not so Covert Enemies
There is no doubt that radical Islam is a mortal threat to all of us. However, we had better maintain some perspective about the ranking of our enemies. The maniacal Left under its various guises, communism, socialism, environtmentalism, etc., has killed more innocent people in the last 80 years than Islam has in all its history. These fanatics are now on the verge of taking over the democratic Party.

I leave the choice up to you who is the greater threat.

Dan Gorski

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.