The Discerning Texan
All that is necessary for evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing.
-- Edmund Burke
-- Edmund Burke
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Sometimes modern evil calls for a medieval response
John O' Sullivan writes in the Chicago Sun-Times that an appropriate response to the gruesome events like the beheadings we have recently been subjected to might warrant the use of equally brutal overwhelming force on the part of those trying to eradicate that evil. He argues that being too "civilized" about such matters is not in the interest of true civilization:
In fact, to be overcivilized is to be less civilized because genuine civilization includes a robust willingness to enforce its order and truths on anarchy, violence, murder and superstition.
This is similar to the point we attempted to raise on Monday with the post "When Law is Not Enough". A society and a media which spends weeks upon weeks gnashing its teeth over unsupervised soldiers' non-lethal humiliation of Iraqi terrorist prisoners in Abu Grahib, but which does not apply the same intensity of coverage and emotion on the barbarism and murderous acts of our enemies, is a society in danger of being overrun by those evil people who are willing to do "whatever it takes" to impose their way of life upon us.
This war is a war between two very distinct world views: one medieval, repressive, and based on an outdated and sick fundamentalist vision; the other based on freedom of thought and speech, democracy, and respect for all men. But the other side of this coin is: to preserve our way of life and to win this war, it will likely require leadership with strong moral convictions AND strong will: the will to do "whatever it takes" to defeat this enemy. And the leader must have both. The strong center of moral clarity is necessary so that we do not become that which we detest. If we must make difficult decisions about the loss of innocent human life, let those decisions only be made when it is absolutely necessary, not as a matter of course. The fine line between barbarians and civilized men may lie in a very grey area. And that grey area is where moral clarity is critical. Whereas a leader with no moral center is more likely in those circumstances to become a barbarian, or worse, a coward who does not have the will to take the actions necessary to defend freedom.
In this upcoming election, I do not believe it could be any clearer which candidate has both the will and the moral conviction that we need, and which candidate is sorely lacking on both counts.
In fact, to be overcivilized is to be less civilized because genuine civilization includes a robust willingness to enforce its order and truths on anarchy, violence, murder and superstition.
This is similar to the point we attempted to raise on Monday with the post "When Law is Not Enough". A society and a media which spends weeks upon weeks gnashing its teeth over unsupervised soldiers' non-lethal humiliation of Iraqi terrorist prisoners in Abu Grahib, but which does not apply the same intensity of coverage and emotion on the barbarism and murderous acts of our enemies, is a society in danger of being overrun by those evil people who are willing to do "whatever it takes" to impose their way of life upon us.
This war is a war between two very distinct world views: one medieval, repressive, and based on an outdated and sick fundamentalist vision; the other based on freedom of thought and speech, democracy, and respect for all men. But the other side of this coin is: to preserve our way of life and to win this war, it will likely require leadership with strong moral convictions AND strong will: the will to do "whatever it takes" to defeat this enemy. And the leader must have both. The strong center of moral clarity is necessary so that we do not become that which we detest. If we must make difficult decisions about the loss of innocent human life, let those decisions only be made when it is absolutely necessary, not as a matter of course. The fine line between barbarians and civilized men may lie in a very grey area. And that grey area is where moral clarity is critical. Whereas a leader with no moral center is more likely in those circumstances to become a barbarian, or worse, a coward who does not have the will to take the actions necessary to defend freedom.
In this upcoming election, I do not believe it could be any clearer which candidate has both the will and the moral conviction that we need, and which candidate is sorely lacking on both counts.
