The argument: two perceptions

US News Bad Guys provides a concise description of the ‘war or crime’ debate that exists about the war on terrorists.

I’m convinced …we face a globalized, radical movement of militant Islamists who seek to impose theocratic rule over much of the world. It is an absolutist, misogynist, intolerant ideology that belongs in the 12th century, not the 21st. Some brand this movement Islamofascism, harking back to earlier battles with the totalitarian forces of Nazism and communism. …

But Mike Vlahos says we’re wrong. “We are losing our wars in the Muslim world because our vision of history is at odds with actual reality, … Instead, the resistance we find is but one aspect of a worldwide reaction to entire swaths of humanity being left behind”

This gets off to a good start but then Vlahos takes off on the “left behind” and resistance of the victims meme. That is the view that is at odds with the reality of actual history. He contradicts his own thesis.

Those condemn the wealthy as causing discomfort in the impoverished ignore the history of Western Culture and its influence on many peoples and cultures. The poor are too busy trying to survive to create revolution. The attacks of the terrorists are by well educated and funded personnel. Where economic freedom has surfaced over totaliatarianism and corruption the wealth of the masses has flourished.

If there is anything behind the victim mentality, it is greed and envy. Those who do not care to undertake the necessary responsibility for their own welfare are envious of those who do. There was a fairy tale about this – something about three pigs and the houses the built?

Comments are closed.