eternal return
American Conservative magazine has endorsed John Kerry.Don't get excited: American Conservative is nutty as a Snickers bar. They tend toward exposes on how black people are all on welfare and the dirty Mexicans are invading the formerly all-white state of California. On foreign policy, they're strictly a "seal the borders and let the world go to hell" crew, firmly determined to keep American purity uncontaminated by inappropriately degrading interactions with lesser peoples. This spring, they ran a story arguing that it was entirely reasonable for the government to have thrown tens of thousands of Japanese-American citizens into camps during WWII. They have, in other words, a bug up their unmentionable on the topic of race. And they have a view of foreign policy that is, viewed historically, genuinely conservative.
So what does that make George W. Bush's foreign policy?
What's amazingly bizarre about this Bush-vs-conservatives debate is that it's very much -- and I mean very much -- a nineteenth century debate over empire. Conservative isolationism has always been the answer to a kind of global salvationist agenda, a.k.a. the "white man's burden." Whatever you think about Bush, you can't deny him this: he's
one of the most enlightened 19th-century policymakers we've ever seen.
The nation is once again split over the War of 1898. I ask you: is this "conservative" foreign policy, or is this?
posted by Chris Bray @ 1:34 AM
2 Comments:
I was going to ask why they didn't endorse Badnarik since his platform is very close to their own. But I see that they did (while justifying it by saying that the Libertarian candidates aren't nearly as insane as they used to be). And they endorsed Nader (since he occasionally says things they like even though they hate every thing he's ever done). And they endorsed Peroutka (and he's even on the ballot in a few places). And they endorsed not voting at all (as a protest since the absence of both of their readers from the polls would certainly strike fear into the major parties). And they endorsed Kerry (as the boyfriend who disgusts them but who would make their abusive husband jealous so he'd pay attention to them). And they endorsed Bush (while holding their nose and crying and pretty much violating Godwin's Law.) Basically, they endorsed everybody, but their final answer was Peroutka; presumably because that combines the futility of not voting at all with the way out wackyness of a Badnarik/Nader love child.
Mojo (still hating Blogger)
"Whatever you think about Bush, you can't deny him this: he's one of the most enlightened 19th-century policymakers we've ever seen."
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one saying this. The 20th century is being inverted; the 19th century has gone back on the march. Let freedom (of contract) reign once again!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home