The Postmodern Affliction

Today Victor Davis Hanson published Part 4 of his "Perfect Storm of Hating Bush" series, which is dedicated to the confluence of various movements and ideologies into the pathology of Bush-hatred that is so apparent in today's discourse. This particular part is dedicated to the cultural relativism which is a hallmark of the postmodernist movement. Read the whole thing, it's an insightful look into the machinations of the plague which has been gripping modern academia for almost a century, but whose efforts have only now been bearing the heaviest fruit in the last 30 years or so.

The Left has always decried the "Neo-imperialism" of the United States whenever a new foreign "adventure" is afoot. Have they not reviewed the last 100 years of our military history? Have we fought a war in that time by which we directly gained treasure or territory? All of the wars we have fought were self-sacrificial, and any material gain to ourselves was easily outweighed tenfold by losses, even without the foolish financial denouement of a Marshall Plan. Their cries of "Blood for Oil" ring hollow in the ears of anyone familiar with our history. The only military conflicts on which the Left has put its stamp of approval are the ones that involve little risk on our part and do not directly benefit our own national interests. See Balkans, The. The last time I checked the oil belongs to Iraq. But the Profit Bogeyman will not recede, and it will not, as it serves a purpose for those with a hatred of Capitalism.

But it's most convenient for the Left to stammer its indignation at their own country through uncut throats; they do not notice that their foreign policy, or lack thereof, is directly opposed to their own personal safety. Will the Islamofascists distinguish between the infidel imperialists and the infidel protestors? It is indeed convenient that the past three years of relative vigilance and military efforts abroad have at least helped to avert another 9/11 so far. Such conservative efforts have made leftist Bush-hating possible. But it is a dangerous game if they gamble their righteous indignation on a losing premise. Consider the consequences of their presidential candidate offering Iran nuclear fuel in lieu of creating their own (this didn't work so well with North Korea) while simultaneously opposing our own development of new "bunker-busting" nuclear weapons. Nukes for them, no nukes for us. Welcome to the Fanciful Plane of Moral Equivalence, where We are just as bad as They, and where sword-toting mullahs peacfully sip Latte side-by-side with the Greenwich Village multiculti socialists in the bombed-out Starbucks.

But what if they're wrong? Hanson asks:

"In contrast, should the United States fight a moral, defensive war
against amoral aggressive terrorists and autocrats, seek democracy and social
justice in place of Fascism, promote religious and gender tolerance where
prejudice was endemic, find that American military force, not UN discourse,
saved lives, then what in the world would the deductive Left do other than stage
plays and skits about assassinating George Bush, trash capitalism through the
largess of a currency speculator, cite historically high gasoline prices at home
as proof of American petroleum theft abroad, or claim that American military
police are the new Baathist henchmen?"

Indeed.