Toughness, courage, and ideology

The best article that I read last weekend was Ian Buruma’s review in the New York Review of Books of Norman Podhoretz’s new book World War IV: The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism. (Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan).I have a lot of respect for Buruma and even though I don’t always share his conclusions and his logic, I agree generally with his stand on issues such as multiculturalism. Thus, it wasn’t difficult for me to enjoy his take on Podhoretz’s ideology and on his need to divide the world between the right and the evil doers and their enablers. Sugary excerpt:

The key to Podhoretz's politics seems to me to lie right there: the longing for power, for toughness, for the Shtarker who doesn't give a damn about anyone or anything, and hatred of the contemptible, cowardly liberals with their pandering ways and their double standards. Since Podhoretz, himself a bookish man, can never be a Shtarker, his government must fill that role, and not give a damn about anyone or anything. And not only the US government, but Israel too. Arik Sharon was a typical Shtarker, and thus much admired. Bibi Netanyahu tries hard to be a Shtarker. The US was enviably tough against the Nazis, and then against the Communists, and is now called to arms once more against the Islamofascists. Since Western Europe seems destined to be "conquered from within by Islamofascism," just as it had been once by Hitler's blitzkrieg, America must go it alone this time, with a little help from the Brits. As in "World War III" against the Soviet Empire, this World War IV against Islamofascism will be "a test of the overall worth of the United States as a nation among nations." The words, quoted by Podhoretz, are George Kennan's, who regretted having said them, because they were interpreted as a call for military action, which is not what he had intended. Podhoretz uses them as though he had.

[…] If the key word in Podhoretz's political writings is "tough," the word most favored by the neoleftists is "courage." To criticize Ayaan Hirsi Ali is cowardice. To denounce Tariq Ramadan is an act of courage. The name of George Orwell is often invoked, usually by writers who like to think of themselves as his intellectual heirs. Orwell was undoubtedly courageous, but never dogmatic. He did lapse on one occasion into the habit of denunciation. Mortally ill, he supplied a list of names of "crypto-Communists" to a friend working in the Foreign Office. But the point of his best writing was precisely his skepticism, his readiness to criticize people who were in many ways on his side. That is what made him a true liberal.

Comments

[Elizabeth A. Leib]

Commentary on Anniversary of 9/11 re: Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

[Elizabeth A. Leib]

This web post may be of interest to you and your readers: http://mitzvahmom.podbean.com/2007/09/09/anniversary-of-911/