Political v. moral arguments
01.29.2003Here's an interesting article in the Star Tribune by Paul Scott on the over-the-top militancy of some of the anti-war left.
Brief excerpt:
I just wish that every gathering of my lefties didn't have to become such a tedious exercise in cause-linking, chant-bullhorning and supposed truth-telling. I have the fantasy of a progressive cause with no Youth and Student Coordinator, no West Coast Representative, no brother from the movement in the country to the south and no presumption that words like Solidarity, Network, Action and Uprising are always to be treated as gospel, the code words that say we are all the same.
I bring this up because I've noted (in previous posts) that some anti-war protesters support questionable causes. ANSWER supports Milosovic and denounces The Hague war crime tribunals. Americans Against Bombs defends Franco and Southern Secession. Some anti-war protests were tinged w/ anti-semitism. Don't march along w/ questionable groups. Jesse Jackson and David Duke both oppose our Israel policy, but they don't march together.
The dictum "my enemy's enemy is my friend" may be true for political arguments, but not for moral ones. A moral movement against war in Iraq should avoid linking itself to other causes. You may have good reasons to oppose military action in Iraq ... but Franco's fascist regime? Politics makes strange bedfellows and accepts choices between "lesser" evils. Morality isn't so generous and requires great consistency and steadfastness.
Of course, the same could be said of right-wing activism. I'm not a big fan of activism in general, to be honest. It usually just sinks into back-patting and empty rhetoric. The biggest crime, of course, is the unwillingness to concede that maybe, just maybe, one's opponents might have at least one or two decent arguments.
Posted by Miguel at 01:58 PM
Comments
I agree, that for the sake of political or practical purposes, 2 countries/groups may form an ally, but it's just a temporary one. And it does not make them""friends".
Posted by: Lippy at January 29, 2003 11:46 PM
Good point ... but what I meant was that activist groups that argue for moral objections to war should be carefuly not to muddy those arguments w/ others. If anti-war protesters join groups that support other questionable causes, they may accidentally lend credibility/support to those groups' other causes.
If I opposed Sharon's foreign policy, I wouldn't protest along w/ David Duke. We might come to the same conclusion, but from different moral premises ... and that is the most important thing to keep in mind. Joining racist anti-semites in a political protest essentially acknowledges those moral premises as equally legitimate to the ones you used. It doesn't make you racist or anti-semitic, but it does suggest that you have little cause to distance yourself from them.
Posted by: Miguel at January 30, 2003 12:54 AM
will keep that in mind. thanks.
Posted by: lippy at January 30, 2003 03:15 AM