Sep 26th, 2006, 09:30 PM
Definitions
What is "Liberal?"
Dictionary definitions will only get you so far. Listening to political commentators will only confuse the question for you. "Liberal" has nearly become a pejorative term in modern political discussions. It stands for weakness, moral equivalence and indecisiveness. It means you are a pussy. A hippie. A slack-jawed, mouth breathing, impotent, selfish little nerd that will never make it in the real world outside of college. This should not be so. This is a political influence of terminology and thus engineered by politicians and the punditry, thus, it is not to be trusted as something “real.” While the so-called Liberal political party in America, the Democrats, has lost almost all their political power in this country, we Americans should not make the mistake of believing this is due to their Liberal motivations. It’s not happening because they are hippies. It’s happening because they suck at running a party, and they’ve lost their foundation.
In fact, I would argue the Democrat Party is no longer a Liberal institution at all. Liberalism is best defined within the belief structure this country was founded upon: "...that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
The second two words there, "all men," (dated English, of course referring to women, too) suffer from no limitation of nationality, religion or creed. That is confirmed by the inclusion of the word "unalienable" later on. All of these words, of course, are quoted from the American Declaration of Independence, which was a revolutionary manifesto in global governance. These words sparked the fire that produced the world's most successful form of Liberal government in world history: ours. Just as an interesting side note, it’s interesting to remember that “all men” is also not exclusive of illegal immigrant men, Cuban men, or some men that have sex with each other…
The Liberal form of our government, nevermind it's historical actions for now, has fired an economic engine that has begun a radical transformation in every nation on the planet, including not least of all our own. Not only has our influence and example helped inspire other nations to emulate us in hopes of achieving on our level, we have learned the lessons taught by the positive, Liberal actions of other nations. We fought for basic Liberal principles in our own Civil and Revolutionary Wars, where millions died for the concept of "ALL men." That was 88 years after slavery was first outlawed in Scotland. We were the 27th country in the world to accept Universal Suffrage, another Liberal precept. Similarly, we did not pioneer finance, but we managed to perfect it to the nearly inflation free version of economy we enjoy today. Following Europe once again, and largely only due to our Great Depression (the culmination of a century of financial instability,) we finally re-adopted a National Banking System. We were able to combine our belated acceptance of economic Liberalism, however, with our other social and political realizations of the ideology to such great effect as can be witnessed in our current state of sole Superpower. We lead the world in Liberal innovation, if not invention, due to our unique foundation in Liberty.
Dr. Martin Luther King, jr. was an American invention, however. In our Civil Rights struggles, we took Liberalism to a new level of inclusiveness, coming closer than ever to the dreams proclaimed in that initial Declaration.
These volatile periods in our own past have forged a nation that is unique in the history of the world. Our acceptance of Liberalism has made us the strongest and most successful country planet Earth has ever seen. The concept of "ALL men" has caused us to extend a helping hand to those nations traveling the same path when they have been threatened by those on more regressive paths, as in the three World Wars as well as the current one. The courage of our convictions has always assured our victory.
Read "An Empire of Wealth" if you want to learn more about American History.
A "Liberal" supports the concept of maximum freedom in all facets of life for all the people of the world.
What is "Globalization?"
Again, throw out your dictionary.
Globalization is the observable progress of Liberalism throughout the world. Globalization is mutually assured dependence upon one another for all of us. ALL men, again. There are conditions to partaking of the vast financial benefits of connecting to the Global Economic Network, however. You must also accept the social and political reforms also required of Liberalism.
Simply opening your markets is not enough. Investors are scared of otherwise un-free societies. Only upon adoption of the entire Liberal social package will the financial pipeline to "Western" investment capital fully be opened.
Read "The Lexus and the Olive Tree" to learn more about Globalization.
What is "The War on Terror?"
The War on Terror exists on two levels. In the more basic plane, it is the most current iteration of the West’s effort to enforce security upon the “Wild West” of the Middle East. It is a protective effort, based in knowledge accumulated throughout all our previous efforts to intervene in and or control the political structure of the people there for our own safety and profit. Because the strategy of the War on Terror is such a radical departure from previous efforts to tame the third world and the methodology apparent so far indicates the implementation of that accumulated knowledge, it’s pretty damn likely that security in the region will be increased markedly as long as we, for lack of a better turn of phrase, “stay the course.”
The way to see the other level of the War on Terror is to filter it through the prism of globalization. Liberalism is maximum freedom for all men, and Globalization is the process of spreading Liberalism to all men. The War on Terror is a means to do so. Notice please: I did not say the only means to do so, but it is definitely one of them. As I said, other means have indeed been tried, and they have failed. Those previous failures are obvious, aren’t they? Among those failures, we can at least count the forms of diplomacy we’ve tried and simply hoping the problem will go away. We may also safely include any attempts at control, influence or peace made in complete ignorance of Arab culture and Islamic temperament, as we have a rich modern history of those sorts of failures.
Why, you might ask, must we include war as an option for Liberal means? Well, you can’t have a war without an enemy, and believe it or not, the idea that Freedom is universal to our ALL men has a few detractors left in the world. The good news is that Globalized Liberalism is so pervasive in the 2/3rds of the world we call “the West” that even the conservative political party here in America is dedicated to it. In the past, these enemies of Liberalism enjoyed being treated with other means than war. Saddam Hussein and Slobodan Milosevic are great examples that even something as stern as economic sanctions won’t suffice to sway such people to the kindler, gentler and more modern way of life we call Liberalism. Needless to say, diplomatic concessions have been proven to be even much more useless if our goal is to actually increase the levels of freedom in the parts of the world ruled by such men. The now defunct Soviet Union, Kim Jong Il and the dearly departed Yassir Arafat are easily accessible examples of how bargaining is so readily made into a tool used to destroy rather than promote Liberalism.
The better question, in my opinion at least, is why NOT war? What have the despots of the Middle East done to deserve being handled with kid gloves? The whole world has moved on, and things are looking better per capita every day, yet the only thing they insist upon is that their third of the world be roped off and ignored… to be left to the disconnectedness, poverty and ignorance… the near total lack of freedom… that best suits assholes like Hafez al-Assad, Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein al-Tikriti and Kim Jong Il.
(If you wish to read more about the War on Terror, try “The Pentagon’s New Map.”)
If we have the technology, and we do, to take dicks like that out and the wherewithal, which I hope we will develop, to guide the world into the peaceful, Liberal future ahead of us, why shouldn’t we do that? When you vote, shouldn’t you vote for people that support that sort of future? Are the people you are voting for now, or the people you’ve been voting for so far voicing support for Liberalism in the supreme form I’m relating to you now? Why not?
Next question: What is "Radical Islam?"
I’m tired now, though… I’ll continue this later.
|
Linear Mode
