Monday, October 31, 2005

Who are we?

A question I've been mulling over for some time is this: Who are we to make judgements on other cultures and societies, and go so far as to attempt to bring them to freedom and democracy? Mike, in his own inimitable style, provides the answer:
As for that last bit, here’s who we are to judge other cultures: we’re the creators - not just the inheritors, the creators, every single day, by a bazillion different actions and in a bazillion different ways — of the most successful, benevolent, and all-around right nation this poor sad planet has yet produced, and the world would do well to profit from our freely-offered example rather than merely jealously carping about some detail we may have gotten slightly wrong. If that sounds arrogant, insensitive, or jingoistic, well, tough shit, Poindexter; I just don’t care.

And for the rest of us, we would do well to always remember not how lucky we are to have had so grand a birthright handed to us, but how serious the responsibility for maintaining, respecting, defending, and advancing that birthright is. And what that means in turn is not that we should ignore or shout down honest and legitimate discourse over how best to live up to that responsibility, but that we must acknowledge valid criticism and work to correct what mistakes we can, without denigrating or debasing the very foundations of our society as so many on the Left seem so eager to do. As Americans, we must respect honest dissenting opinion; however, the hateful tripe offered up by the present-day Left is, for the most part, nothing of the sort, and needs to be vigorously countered.

The United States is simply the greatest, the most free, the most successful nation this world has ever seen. Period. Obviously we're doing something right. Recognizing this is not being racist, culturalist, or any other word ending in -ist; it's merely stating objective fact. Just because we're the ones saying it doesn't mean it isn't true.

So if we've determined that the best way to secure the future safety of the United States, and all the other nations that share our love of freedom, from the depradations of a fascist theocratic ideology that calls for our complete destruction - simply because we are successful and are not under their dictatorial bootheels - is to attempt to remake their society and show them there's a better way, why not adapt what has worked well for us? The key word here is adapt. The recently approved Constitution of Iraq is not the same as the Constitution of the United States. It reflects that there are certain cultural differences between us and them. But those differences do not preclude a common desire for freedom and democracy, the desire for a nation where government is by the consent of the governed, the aspiration to the dignity of free people. They do not, and the approval of the Constitution of Iraq should be all the proof anyone needs that this is so.

No comments: