First some background. A universal trait of mankind is that once a group progresses beyond hunter/gatherer, members start specializing in trades and making items for trade. Once trade is institutionalized and a monetary system created you have capitalism. This was the only economic model for large groups for most of history.
In the 19th century, a couple of new economic systems were invented. These were first implemented in the early 20th century. They were Communism and fascism. During the 1920s and 1930s, intellectuals were expected to support one of these. No one supported capitalism. After the start of World War II, fascism was discredited leaving Communism. If you were an intellectual you were expected to support Communism or Socialism to some extent, especially on the campus.
Back in the 1980s, a friend who had been a communist in college admitted that the American Communist Party never caught on because they spent all of their energy justifying the actions of the USSR. This left them with a reflexive anti-American impulse.
A couple of days ago I quoted Christopher Hitchens:
I had to ask myself - is there an international socialist movement worth the
name? No. No, there is not. Okay - will it revive? No, it won't. Okay then - but
is there at least a critique of capitalism that has a potential for replacing
it? Not that I can identify."
So there is nothing left for the Left to be for but they still have that anti-American bias. This is relevant to Iraq because the anti-war movement was coordinated by the Communists.
Really.
International Answer, a leading anti-war organizer, shares its headquarters and most of its board of directors with one of the few remaining Communist groups in America.
The Left has hated Bush since before the 2000 election. Remember how many Hollywood stars said that they would leave the country if Bush was elected (sadly, they all reniged)? Gore made things worse with the recount challenges. He convinced his supporters that he had won and that George and Jeb Bush managed to keep the ballots from being counted properly.
After 9/11, the hard Left felt that we made the wrong response. Instead of war, we should be sending police after bin Laden and forcing a two state solution in Israel. There wasn't a lot of them but they were there - International Answer and Not In Our Name, protesting in favor of the Taliban.
Many of these same people had been protesting the Taliban just a month earlier when Afghan women started a web site showing Taliban oppression.
This didn't make any sense, it was simply reflexive anti-Americanism.
As the memory of 3,000 dead faded, the Left regained its voice, more frantic than before.
A telling point - one column written after the first presidential debate said that Democrats could now support their candidate instead of simply hating Bush.
Democrats talk about Republican thugs but so far the vitriol seems to be coming from them. Republicans may dislike Kerry but they don't hate him with every fiber of their being like the Democrats hate Bush.
Which brings me to:
When Democrats Attack.
Michelle Malkin has a summary of recent attacks. Part 1 here.
Not listed was a break-in of a Bush campaign office in Seattle last week.
Plus Toby Keith's bus driver was shot. This might be related because Keith is a known Bush supporter. The service man who was beaten in Columbus had been to a Toby Keith concert.
Missing the Point. After the debate, ABC came up with footage of Cheney and Edwards together at a prayer breakfast to prove that Cheney had met Edwards before they walked onto the stage.
Cheney's point was that there are only 100 Senators and Cheney is in the Senate weekly. They should know each other from there but they don't because Edwards never shows up for work. Neither does Kerry.
No comments:
Post a Comment