Ron Paul, and a Responsible America
The recent Republican debate had plenty of drama, particularly when Rudy Guliani attacked Texas Congressman Ron Paul for daring to imply that America had a share of responsibility for the attacks of 9 / 11
Pundits on Fox News tried to explain how such a notion could escape the mouth of an elected Republican. Michelle Maulkin stated that Ron Paul should not have been on the stage. His name and picture where mingled with images of Rosie O'Donnell, and mentions of 9 / 11 conspiracy theories, in a blatant attempt to discredit him by association. This is even more interesting in light of the fact that Ron Paul earned 2nd place in a post-debate poll conducted by Fox News.
Pro-war activists have called Ron Paul's words "treasonous". To even suggest that the policies of the US government might be responsible for the mess we find ourselves in is considered anti-American. This strain of propaganda is dangerous nonsense. What could be more American than an informed criticism of our own government?
Conservatives act as if America was just walking down the street minding its own business when it was suddenly attacked for no reason. This is to ignore the fact that a superpower does not act in a vacuum, and cannot throw its weight around without incurring reactions. We will not save our nation by lying to ourselves about the consequences of our long-running interventionist policies towards the Middle East, nor the fact that they are motivated by a dependence on oil - a diminishing resource and already obsolescent energy base - and not the humanitarianism and evangelical "spread of democracy" that have been opportunely grafted onto them.
There was a time when conservatives were known for advocating personal responsibility. If someone was poor and homeless, it was a result of his own actions. The mentality of victim-hood was an affect of liberal "sickness". Inconsistently, conservatives have never applied this ethic to American government and its role in world affairs. We are somehow supposed to be able to meddle in volatile a region distinguished by fierce pride and religious fanaticism, toppling and propping up governments, and supporting and arming brutal dictators like Saddam Hussein so long as they serve our immediate purposes - all without incurring any violent consequences to ourselves. Such a view is irresponsible in the extreme.
The attacks of 9 / 11 were an atrocity, but they did not come out of the blue. They were a result of the shortsighted petro-imperialist policies of the US government. This is not to say that America "deserved" what happened. It is to say that an attack of some kind was going to happen as a result of these policies that engender intense hatred towards us. A nation of responsible should own up to it.
Pro-war activists will accuse me of "blaming America first". They do this to shut down all debate, for blame is negative, implies punishment, and leads nowhere. Conversely, to take responsibility is positive, and leads forward by providing more options. A responsible man does not trouble himself with "blame" and "guilt", but knows that his power is such that it brings on his own successes and failures. A responsible man knows he is his own worst enemy, and that no one can destroy him but he himself. A responsible man steps forward, not because he is necessarily to blame, but because he knows that he has the power to make a difference.
As a responsible man acts, so must a responsible nation. We will not survive our problems by lying to ourselves about the complicity of our government's policies in bringing about our currently mounting catastrophe. By owning our problems and eschewing victim-hood, we can make new choices.
We have all seen a self-destructive person blame other people for his problems. 'If he would only become conscious of himself', we think, 'he could change everything'. To suggest that his triumph will come by keeping his head buried in the sand is insane. So is the idea that America will somehow "win" if it remains blind to the ways it has brought about its own problems.
-Werbinox
Pundits on Fox News tried to explain how such a notion could escape the mouth of an elected Republican. Michelle Maulkin stated that Ron Paul should not have been on the stage. His name and picture where mingled with images of Rosie O'Donnell, and mentions of 9 / 11 conspiracy theories, in a blatant attempt to discredit him by association. This is even more interesting in light of the fact that Ron Paul earned 2nd place in a post-debate poll conducted by Fox News.
Pro-war activists have called Ron Paul's words "treasonous". To even suggest that the policies of the US government might be responsible for the mess we find ourselves in is considered anti-American. This strain of propaganda is dangerous nonsense. What could be more American than an informed criticism of our own government?
Conservatives act as if America was just walking down the street minding its own business when it was suddenly attacked for no reason. This is to ignore the fact that a superpower does not act in a vacuum, and cannot throw its weight around without incurring reactions. We will not save our nation by lying to ourselves about the consequences of our long-running interventionist policies towards the Middle East, nor the fact that they are motivated by a dependence on oil - a diminishing resource and already obsolescent energy base - and not the humanitarianism and evangelical "spread of democracy" that have been opportunely grafted onto them.
There was a time when conservatives were known for advocating personal responsibility. If someone was poor and homeless, it was a result of his own actions. The mentality of victim-hood was an affect of liberal "sickness". Inconsistently, conservatives have never applied this ethic to American government and its role in world affairs. We are somehow supposed to be able to meddle in volatile a region distinguished by fierce pride and religious fanaticism, toppling and propping up governments, and supporting and arming brutal dictators like Saddam Hussein so long as they serve our immediate purposes - all without incurring any violent consequences to ourselves. Such a view is irresponsible in the extreme.
The attacks of 9 / 11 were an atrocity, but they did not come out of the blue. They were a result of the shortsighted petro-imperialist policies of the US government. This is not to say that America "deserved" what happened. It is to say that an attack of some kind was going to happen as a result of these policies that engender intense hatred towards us. A nation of responsible should own up to it.
Pro-war activists will accuse me of "blaming America first". They do this to shut down all debate, for blame is negative, implies punishment, and leads nowhere. Conversely, to take responsibility is positive, and leads forward by providing more options. A responsible man does not trouble himself with "blame" and "guilt", but knows that his power is such that it brings on his own successes and failures. A responsible man knows he is his own worst enemy, and that no one can destroy him but he himself. A responsible man steps forward, not because he is necessarily to blame, but because he knows that he has the power to make a difference.
As a responsible man acts, so must a responsible nation. We will not survive our problems by lying to ourselves about the complicity of our government's policies in bringing about our currently mounting catastrophe. By owning our problems and eschewing victim-hood, we can make new choices.
We have all seen a self-destructive person blame other people for his problems. 'If he would only become conscious of himself', we think, 'he could change everything'. To suggest that his triumph will come by keeping his head buried in the sand is insane. So is the idea that America will somehow "win" if it remains blind to the ways it has brought about its own problems.
-Werbinox
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home