Contemporary liberalism and its role in Islamic anti-Americanism.

[Sirotnikov]

I read just several opening paragraphs and found faults in all of them.


Aeson puts it well.

To claim that the muslims are angry at american humiliations of people in abu ghraib is true. to say that americans see it as 'fraternity pranks' due to relative morals is stupid.

Who ever did those pranks is an idiot, and not someone who holds any moral view.

Who ever did those things as an intentional torture, certainly does not apply to relativist morals.

[Berzerker]

When you read their work, you find that there are no denunciations of modernity, no condemnations of science, no condemnations of freedom. In fact, their whole argument seems to be that the United States—through our support of secular dictators in the region—is denying Muslims freedom and control over their own destiny.

It’s more accurate to say that they do not hate us for our freedom, but they condemn us for how we have used our freedom. The thrust of bin Laden’s argument is that America has become a pagan, immoral society. That’s bad enough
for him, but he also sees the United States foisting its paganism on the rest of the world—both through its foreign policy and through its culture. And he believes that it’s the duty of all good monotheists to rise up in rebellion against it. That’s the real root of Muslim rage.

Which is it? Our foreign policy or our culture? Lets see, did they hit Vegas and San Francisco? Hollywood? Nope, seems they like hitting military, government, and economic interests - hardly bastions of cultural liberals. At the top of Osama's list of gripes in his declaration of war was the placement of troops in Saudi Arabia. Second was our support for dictators in the region, and third was the Israel-Palestinian issue.

On the one side you have conservatives who believe in traditional values, which is to say that there’s a moral order in the universe external to us that makes claims on us.

Guess who will tell us what this moral order means for us? Yup, conservatives will tell us how to behave, not any "God" or external source. That makes conservative morality just as subjective as liberal morality.

On the other side, you have the liberal assertion that there is no external moral order but that morality is subjective. You find it not by looking out there, but in here. Morality is not a product of the norms of nature or nature’s God, but the product of the dictates of one’s own heart. This is a kind of new morality and is at the root not only of the culture war, but also of the anti-Americanism around the world.

Umm...after 9/11 anti-Americanism was about as low as it had been since WW II... Funny, this guy is looking at the world's reactions to Bush's foreign policy and blaming liberals.
Yeah, some Muslims dont like our culture, or dont want our culture being adopted in their country, but that aint why we got attacked. I dont like Muslim culture but you dont see me killing Muslims, but I would be if they invaded my neighborhood to impose their culture on me.

This is particularly true of the traditional cultures around the world: South America, Africa, the Middle East, India, and China—in other words, the whole world with the exception of Europe and North America. This new American morality—the liberal morality—is considered an assault on the traditional values that most people hold dear.

Much of the traditional world is oblivious to western culture, if people have televisions they aint watching "Friends". What gets people pissed off is when western corporations and politicians make deals with dictators to steal resources right out from underneath tribal lands.

So we’ve failed to really understand the Islamic anger over Abu Ghraib, just as we feel misunderstood by much of the international community.

Geez, I think we all understood that. Kinda the point if you're blackmailing people to become snitches. But how is this a product of cultural liberalism? Its the conservatives downplaying Abu Ghraib so obviously they feel more comfortable about trashing the honor of people... Look what they did to McCain in South Carolina!

[Barnabas]

"This is particularly true of the traditional cultures around the world: South America, Africa, the Middle East, India, and China—in other words, the whole world with the exception of Europe and North America. This new American morality—the liberal morality—is considered an assault on the traditional values that most people hold dear"

In my experience south americans (most of them, brazilians, argentines, paraguayans, colombians.. chilea + peru + bolivians are rather conservative) are more sexually promiscuous than yanks or europeans, people lose their virginity earlier, have more sexual partners, cheat on their spouses more often, pay for sex more often etc etc

Think of the rio carnival, so this doesnt make much sense to me.

In the USA they impeached clinton for getting a blow job from a secretary, in most south american countries if the president does something like that his popularity skyrockets.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Jesus, that's one freakin' stupid article. But it does contain a kernel of truth: Muslim fundies hate the values we most associate with liberalism: tolerance, equality, freedom of expression, secularism, etc. It's opposition to those values that led to the overthrough of the Shah of Iran, for example (the Shah's modernization program included teh importation of "scandalous" western media, like the tv show Dallas).

But that's the point they never get to: Muslim fundies don't objec to liberal values. They object to encountering liberal values, which happens in their home countries courtesy of global capitalism.

But I suspect it would be a bit harder to rally Americans around the cause of advancing transnational corporate hegemony.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
In the USA they impeached clinton for getting a blow job from a secretary, in most south american countries if the president does something like that his popularity skyrockets.

They like it when thier leaders show contempt for the law?

[Barnabas]

No, they like blow jobs

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Brachy-Pride
No, they like blow jobs

So sexual harassment then?

[Barnabas]

Sexual harassment what?

Do you think he sexually harassed Monica?

He was the most powerful man on earth, she probably felt admiration for him, and wanted it too

[Straybow]

Originally posted by Berzerker
Which is it? Our foreign policy or our culture? Lets see, did they hit Vegas and San Francisco? Hollywood? Nope, seems they like hitting military, government, and economic interests - hardly bastions of cultural liberals. At the top of Osama's list of gripes in his declaration of war was the placement of troops in Saudi Arabia. Second was our support for dictators in the region, and third was the Israel-Palestinian issue.

Jane, you ignorant slut...

They attacked globally recognized symbols of American domination. What would they do in your straw-man scenario, blow up the famous "Hollywood" sign? "Ins'Allah, that showed those decadent Americans! It will take them weeks to rebuild!"

Umm...after 9/11 anti-Americanism was about as low as it had been since WW II...

Yeah, for a whole year, and part of a second. But mostly the American anti-Americans were just waiting for somebody else to say it first. Then the election cycle hit, and whoever said it first got lost in the mad rush to say it second.

Funny, this guy is looking at the world's reactions to Bush's foreign policy and blaming liberals.

Dsouza is looking at the media's depiction of the world's reaction to the media's depiction of Bush's foreign policy and blaming liberals. That would be because the liberals are looking at the media's depictions and saying, "See? We're right!"

Yeah, some Muslims dont like our culture, or dont want our culture being adopted in their country, but that aint why we got attacked. I dont like Muslim culture but you dont see me killing Muslims, but I would be if they invaded my neighborhood to impose their culture on me.

"We" aren't being recruited to kill Muslims. Unless, of course, you buy the liberal "rich white guys send brown Americans to kill brown foreigners" schtick.

Muslims are being recruited to kill Americans because out culture leads us to support Israel, to help kick Saddam out of Kuwait, to stay in SA when the King of SA asks us to stay...

If it were just money politics we'd be gone from SA and Iraq by now, saying, "Let us know when you guys sort things out so we can get back to business." We wouldn't support such an insignificant trade partner as Israel. Who cares if the Muslims want to kill them?

If we were really Godless pagans going wherever the profits lead we'd be like the French or the Germans or the Russians. We wouldn't stick our necks out for anybody.

Much of the traditional world is oblivious to western culture, if people have televisions they aint watching "Friends". What gets people pissed off is when western corporations and politicians make deals with dictators to steal resources right out from underneath tribal lands.

Because it was so much better when their dictators were selling off their resources to the Soviets, or the French colonialists, etc. And it is so much better now, with their dictators making deals to sell off their resources to China.

News flash: the dictators know it always helps to demonize your enemy. USA makes a fat target, and largely inconsequential because the US companies that have to do business there (in Venezuela, e.g.) will do business there no matter how much the dear leader villifies the US.

[Arrian]

Second, the conservative and Christian can paradoxically fight the war on terror by fighting the culture war at home. We can help improve America’s image worldwide by working for the restoration of American culture, by strengthening the expression of religious values in the public sphere, by defending the traditional family, and by producing a healthy alternative to popular culture.

Traitor.

-Arrian

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Muslim fundies hate the values we most associate with liberalism: tolerance, equality, freedom of expression, secularism, etc. It's opposition to those values that led to the overthrough of the Shah of Iran, for example (the Shah's modernization program included teh importation of "scandalous" western media, like the tv show Dallas).

So the unpopularity and eventual overthrow of the Shah had nothing to do with the fact that he was a tyrant and a stooge for a foreign power who overthrew a democratically elected president.

It was because Dallas was on TV.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Straybow
If it were just money politics we'd be gone from SA and Iraq by now, saying, "Let us know when you guys sort things out so we can get back to business." We wouldn't support such an insignificant trade partner as Israel. Who cares if the Muslims want to kill them?

If we were really Godless pagans going wherever the profits lead we'd be like the French or the Germans or the Russians. We wouldn't stick our necks out for anybody.

Do you not see a connection between US economic and military dominance?

[Arrian]

Of course there is a connection. But that doesn't mean that commerce is the sole driver of US policy. It's pretty clearly not, although it's a major consideration.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
Of course there is a connection. But that doesn't mean that commerce is the sole driver of US policy. It's pretty clearly not, although it's a major consideration.

-Arrian

The point is that the US uses it's military for economic reasons, and I think that's the biggest reason why we keep troops in the ME, not because of our culture. Americans could really care less about culture these days.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Kidicious
The point is that the US uses it's military for economic reasons, and I think that's the biggest reason why we keep troops in the ME, not because of our culture. Americans could really care less about culture these days.

This competely contradicts the PNAC dream which drove the Iraq campaign in the first place.