|
|
|
Unholy Alliance: Neoconservatives and the Christian Right |
|
In his book, Unholy Alliance, political commentator David Horowitz makes the claim that certain segments of American liberalism have made common cause with our Islamic enemies in a partnership that threatens to destroy the United States.
Mr. Horowitz should be one to talk.
Although he makes valid points in his arguments, Horowitz is himself part of an “unholy alliance” that consists of secular neoconservatives and the Christian Right. While I am not going to defend those on the Left who harbor contempt for America, the alliance that I speak of has done considerable damage to our foreign policy.
This partnership between neocons and Christian fundamentalists is not some grand conspiracy to control the world. Rather, the relationship is symbiotic on several major levels, and adversarial on others. Although significant differences exist between and within the two groups, they are held together by two issues.
The first is that both believe America should dominate the globe as the world’s only superpower and its military should be used as an instrument for advancing the cause of democracy and free markets.
The second deals with the lopsided support that the groups give to Israel. Neocons and Christian fundamentalists oppose any move on Israel’s part to “scale back” in terms of territory or power, and attack those who disagree with them on this issue. For many of them, Israel’s interests come first, even if they conflict with U.S. policy.
On the surface, this partnership would seem a strange one, given the origins of each group. The bulk of the neoconservative movement is largely – although not exclusively – made up of Jews, most of them former Leftists. When the great wave of Eastern European Jews came to this country at the turn of the last century, many brought progressive and revolutionary beliefs and established leftist enclaves. These political convictions stemmed largely from the persecution of Jews in Christian Europe as well as their participation in radical groups such as The Bund. In the New World, Jews figured prominently as socialists, communists, progressives, and even anarchists.
The first neocons emerged in the thirties and forties. Most were Trotskyites who became disillusioned with communism in the wake of Stalin’s atrocities. Led by intellectuals such as Irving Kristol and Frank Meyer, this first generation of “boat people” defected to the Right just in time for the Cold War.
The second generation emerged in the tumult of the sixties. Jews were disproportionately involved in the New Left and Civil Rights Movement but became dismayed by the increasingly anti-American, anti-Israel, and anti-Semitic statements coming out of the mouths of their “brothers.” The excesses of the Counterculture also put many of them off. Most were supporters of hawkish liberal Democrats such as Kennedy, Johnson, and Scoop Jackson. When the Democratic Party veered leftward during the 1972 election and embraced George McGovern, the second generation of “boat people” split to support Richard Nixon and later joined the Reagan Coalition.
The third generation emerged during the Reagan years. Although they were stranded in the wilderness during Clinton’s presidency, many came back into power in the Bush Administration, just in time for 9/11. The rest is history.
The odyssey of the Christian Right is not as dramatic. The movement was rooted in the South but spread westward with the postwar migration. The fundamentalists started in the Democratic camp but split with the party of FDR over civil rights, Vietnam, and the culture wars.
As for the groups’ belief in American power, it is neither prudent nor realistic. This fact is becoming all too plain around the world. We need to adopt a realist policy that recognizes our limits as a world power.
And while I consider myself a strong supporter of Israel, American interests should come before all else, even to the detriment of our Middle East ally. The claim made by many in the Israel Lobby and the Christian Zionist Movement that American and Israeli interests – or indeed the interests of any two countries – are “always” compatible is absurd and flies in the face of common sense. Israel is not the 51st state and should not be treated as such.
However, if anyone points out this obvious truth, he or she is attacked by the neocons as a “closet” anti-Semite. Yet, the fact that fundamentalist support for Israel is largely rooted in the conviction that all Jews who have not accepted Christ will eventually perish does not seem to bother them in the least. What a team.
|
|
#1 |
on June 10 2008 08:19:01
#2 |
on June 10 2008 09:44:56
#3 |
on June 10 2008 12:18:21
#4 |
on June 10 2008 12:38:50
#5 |
on June 10 2008 13:36:06
#6 |
on June 10 2008 14:37:50
#7 |
on June 10 2008 14:50:49
#8 |
on June 10 2008 15:01:30
#9 |
on June 12 2008 23:05:45
#10 |
on June 13 2008 00:56:07
|
|
|
Please Login to Post a Comment.
|
|
|
Rating is available to Members only.
Please login or register to vote.
No Ratings have been Posted.
|
|
|
Not a member yet? Click here to register.
Forgotten your password? Request a new one here.
|
You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ')group by comment_item_id order by a desc limit 10' at line 1You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ')group by comment_item_id order by a desc limit 10' at line 1 |
You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near ')group by comment_item_id order by a desc limit 10' at line 1 |
The military exists to protect from external threats. It should not exist or be used in order to promulgate our way of governance. Inserting "democracy" into other nations is an expensive and, ultimately useless exercise. It is no sacrifice to serve in a military that protects our country. It IS a sacrifice to give one's life or health for someone else's country. I do not believe in sacrifice. When one makes a sacrifice, one gives something of value for nothing in return.
On the other hand, international trade and commerce should be a cornerstone of our way of life. Here one exchanges values on a relatively level playing ground. Yet, we see our governing bodies resisting fair trade forums. On one hand, they wish to expand our power and influence, on the other, they wish to withdraw into our borders and keep everything at home. It seems to me that they have it backwards.
Neocon, far right, neoliberal, far left, etc, etc, etc. None of these groups have anything of value for us. It is time to kick them out of office and get back to basic.