Me thinks I am dealing with dogmatists

Back in the old days, the JFK type of words about advancing liberty and defense of freedom made sense. It still does if you are living in the New World, in my case the USA. What is interesting is now seeing so many that talked the words then now come across as fascists now. They all come across as various kinds of apologists, as only able to operate inside their own culture which will tolerate them, protect them, and feed their egos. How about the rest of the world, and harnessing western press to expose their cultural adversaries , hopefully push them towards a more western solution, and make their peace. Can anybody say Darfur?

Those who suggest sending our children to fight in their latest cause are especially dangerous. “Trendy” is not national policy. And thank goodness we have hopefully gotten past video foreign policy in the USA. Perhaps the adults are in charge again? This question alone is disturbing. Is Elmer J. Fudd the latest version of so many Americans’ idea of a foreign policy? The alternative is National Interest. We do have things worth fighting for, and recently enough people trying to take it away by all means, to include killing us. Some of these people are domestic, so there is a long row to hoe, so to speak.

What gets me is the difference between well intentioned people who will take what they can get, and the rest of us. These well intentioned people could take the rest of us down the historical tubes into the dust bin of history, and well, many of us don’t buy it. There are other alternatives, most better. Of course the alternative is that they have to be fascists types because they have no other recourse.

Enough fascist talk. What is meant? Let us be practical. Imposing women’s rights in the western world and not in Darfur is sexist. Accepting all this is fascist. Those operating in their own self interest are the worst sort of leaders who do not deserve to go forward in history. They should stay home. Of course most are not leaders, just pontificators and writers. So what happens in Darfur is important in human history. The implications are as simple as the consequences. The local debate is one of religions, and races. The local talk can even be about cultures. Let the realists and practicality kick in. Which way is it to go? Advance a 100 years and get a good guess.