I had an epiphany yesterday, one I should have had long ago. Actually, I did have it long ago in a different venue, but apparently I had forgotten the lesson, as indeed I'm certain I will again. Unfortunately, I have a short memory.
What did I realize? Nothing exceedingly brilliant. In fact, in place of "brilliant" I would substitute "glaringly obvious." It is this -- there are people in this world for whom there are no circumstances under which anything the United States of America does, particularly its president, will be seen as morally correct. This is the a priori of your moral universe.
How do I know this? Because like Cardinal Martino, the latest apotheosis of highly visible liberal wanks who hide behind the robes of Jesus, you worry that our military doctors treated poor Saddam like a cow when in all likelihood they were looking for hidden poison capsules (does the name "Hermann Goering" ring a bell for anyone?). You worry that we might have damaged his fragile, sociopathic self-esteem when one of our military spokesmen referred to him being caught like a rat in a hole. You worry about whether we might have violated the Geneva Convention by displaying Saddam on TV when the purpose was to demonstrate conclusively that we had captured the real McCoy, and the Iraqis could now rest at ease from their fear that he might yet rise again. You pontificate that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" as though Paul meant to suggest that there are, therefore, no gradations of evil in the sight of God. You draw moral equivalence between the President of the United States and a man who, more than just being capable of great evil as we all are, actually perpetrated things like this and this.
Why are Americans "sensitive" about criticism by others around the world? Why have we finally turned up the squelch? Because to engage in this discussion is to engage people who will only discuss matters with us when we accept their a priori presumption of our guilt and will only converse with us when we move to their position, but will not move so much as a micron in our direction. You, not we, are the true unilateralists in this picture.
I do not mean to write any of you off wholesale -- there is much I have to learn from you on other topics, but on this particular topic, we have nothing further to say to one another. On this subject, I find you morally reprehensible, even repulsive, and I simply cannot even begin to think where I could begin a constructive conversation on this subject with you. Even the most tolerant person has his limits, and I have reached mine on this matter. I have had my fill of lectures on tolerance from the intolerant.
Where does dialogue stop? When it becomes nothing more than two blithering monologues talking past each other.
Posted by Mike at December 17, 2003 12:54 PM | TrackBackWell said, sir!
It should be restated every day as a mantra/reminder to self and others to maintain one's inner sense of balance and propriety.
In situations like this I think it is insightful to reverse the situation and see how it fits.
Let's suppose that George Bush had been captured by Hussein loyalist during his visit and was being shown on Al Jazeera being forcibly examined by a doctor. Would we find that acceptible?
It is marvelous how the perspective you are taking alters the way a situation looks.
It was important to show he was captured but that did not justify intrusive humiliating footage being shown. Let us not forget that he is entitled to be treated humanely and with dignity even though he did not accord others the same privilege. That is what the bible taught me anyway.
Posted by: TheGreenMan at December 17, 2003 05:58 PM