Not much to say here, on my own. I just want to recommend a post by Armed Liberal about the Daily Kos/LGF controversy. I have lots of friends who probably have visceral reactions not entirely out of synch with those of Kos, who believe themselves to be adopting a moral position. My take, however, is that their position is really the attitude of prey, and A.L. has an erudite treatise on that topic. A few key grafs:
Many on the left reject it [patriotism], as Schaar pointed out:Posted by Demosophist at April 7, 2004 11:41 AM | TrackBackOpponents of patriotism might agree that if the two could be separated then patriotism would look fairly attractive. But the opinion is widespread, almost atmospheric, that the separation is impossible, that with the triumph of the nation-state nation. Nationalism has indelibly stained patriotism: the two are warp and woof. The argument against patriotism goes on to say that, psychologically considered, patriot and nationalist are the same: both are characterized by exaggerated love for one's own collectivity combined with more or less contempt and hostility toward outsiders. In addition, advanced political opinion holds that positive, new ideas and forces--e.g., internationalism, universalism; humanism, economic interdependence, socialist solidarity--are healthier bonds of unity, and more to be encouraged than the ties of patriotism. These are genuine objections, and they are held by many thoughtful people.And those thoughtful people, by virtue of their attachment to the wider world, cannot take sides; they can't view the tragedy of an American soldier's death as deeply different than the tragedy of an Iraqi soldier's death. They are one and the same; and so are paralyzed. They can't make a decision because all deaths weigh the same.
They don't weigh the same to me.
I value ours more than I do theirs; I value them most of all because they are fighting for me and the values which have created me and given me the life I enjoy. Yes, I value them because they are 'like me' as well, but the Pakistani troops who die fighting Al Quieda are, in the context of their own politics, fighting for me and my values as well. I don't see the sides as morally equivalent, and even if I had opposed the invasion of Iraq - which I almost did - I wouldn't see them as morally equivalent.
Very simple proposition: which folks are actively trying to kill me, which ones don't give a rat's ass, and which one's are trying to save my butt.
Posted by: Bravo Romeo Delta at April 7, 2004 05:45 PMPart of the problem with what Kos said is that it is simply "bad manners." Even if he didn't care about the deaths of the Americans, was it really necessary to say "screw 'em"? In phrasing his comment the way he did, he demonstrated contempt and a shocking lack of concern for the families of the dead Americans.
In effect, he was saying that he did not care that they died. I certainly take issue with that and find it incredible that any American would not have the attitude A.L. expressed in his post. That said, I find it even more offensive that someone would openly say he doesn't care about dead Americans in a public forum where the loved ones of the deceased would have access to the statements. Doing so compounds the crime, as far as I am concerned.
Posted by: Ben at April 8, 2004 11:50 AMPart of the problem with what Kos said is that it is simply "bad manners." Even if he didn't care about the deaths of the Americans, was it really necessary to say "screw 'em"?
I suppose it was, if you're commited to the notion that America is a hegemonic power, and that it has no right to defend itself by attempting to "impose" democracy and civil society on a culture that's probably better off without it. Never mind that their chief criticism of the US during the pre-911 era was that we did prescious little to support the democratizing impulses of the "third world," or the inherent logic in the position that reformers in the Middle East clearly need some institutional protectors if they aren't going to be crucified the minute they show their heads. Which, of course, was what those private security firms were doing there and why they were targetted.
But Kos, et al, aren't "anti-American." Heck no! It's just that totalitarian thugs always deserve the benefit of the doubt, especially in comparison to any sort of private enterprise.
Posted by: Scott (to Ben) at April 8, 2004 03:58 PM