(Cont. from Part 2) Frum and Perle explain with relief that Beers, who they don't name but describe as a "high-powered advertising exec", resigned and that her State Department office of public diplomacy "has reverted to its accustomed (low) place in the bureaucratic scheme of things." (p. 150)
Is it adequate to say of their view that it implies that America shouldn't have to explain itself? Or do they really mean that America shouldn't have to explain itself in any way that implies a trace of humility or recognition that some Muslim grievances against the US may be based in reality? Actually, the former is more accurate.
In words very reminiscent of Gen. William Westmoreland's notorious statement that Asians just didn't put the same high value on human life that us good Americans do, Frum and Perle explain that "the people of the Middle East" don't care about innocent people getting killed as long as they aren't Muslims. They ridicule the notion that America should stress that attacks like 9/11 are "un-Islamic." Frum and Perle are going for a "highbrow" tone, so they don't use the language of a Michael Savage or a Rush Limbaugh. But they're clearly telling their readers that those Muslims just don't care about human life the way us Good People do.
They conclude by saying essentially that Those People (Muslims) don't understand anything but force. After a few pages of polemics about how backward and generally evil Arabs are, they conclude: "Confronted with such obdurate unreason, it may seem doubtful that other ideas can gain even a hearing, much less real influence. Yet we have seen many times how evil ideas that seemed to hold millions in their grip have yielded to new realities - or been smashed by unexpected defeats." (p. 157)
These two fans of war seem to be interested only in what anarchists used to call "the propaganda of the deed."
No comments:
Post a Comment