Conscientious Objector or Benedict Arnold?
Often times you hear those on the political left complain that they are caricatured as un-patriotic or even anti-American. Although I’m not personally familiar with any legitimate or influential conservative politician voicing such rhetoric, it’s a charge that gets regurgitated on a regular basis. But, is there a basis for such a charge? Has the claim of being labeled un-American only been used to deflect actual liberal mindsets and actions that warrant such labels? Is there a difference between taking un-American stances and being righteously anti-American?
I’ve said before that many on the left DO hold patently un-American views. Such comments typically receive immediately guarded recoils, as they should. Like charges of racism, claims of un-American views and actions need to be used lightly and not without support. Sadly the evidence to support these claims increases by the day, and here’s why.
How about those who preach outwardly against religion, specifically Christianity, or those who prefer an economy more in tune with European social democracies, or those who believe the larger the government, the better off we are, or those who preach mandated equality above all, not worrying about whose liberties they squash along the way? Are these views not standing in direct opposition to the basis of our country’s storied values? I would say yes, and add that those on the left who passionately stand against such characterizations are simply exhibiting a profound lack of self-awareness that I believe is dangerous.
For clarities sake I’m not saying that the average liberal hates our country, or is adamantly anti-American. To me the average liberal American loves our country with the same passion as the average Conservative. I’m simply saying that many of the pillars of current liberal ideology are in direct opposition to historical American principles, and those liberals who do love this country simply love it for different reasons. And a high percentage of those folks are simply liberal above all. Like family oriented African Americans, religious Jews and Hispanics, and even humanist or environmentalist leftists, they simply wear their liberal name tag in front of all others. To them their notions of fairness and big government trump religion and even our own national security.
Take the current WikiLeaks scandal involving Private First Class Bradley Manning, responsible for the largest leak of government military information of all time. Google his name and what comes up first; The Bradley Manning Support Network with the headline “Exposing War Crimes is not a Crime.”
Last month the New York Times reported on the story, and yesterday released an article documenting the “Early Struggles of Soldier Charged in Leak Case.” In typical liberal fashion the article attempts to “understand” the criminal instead of rebuking his narcissistic actions. The story paints a picture of a troubled youth, haunted by homophobic family members and classmates, intolerant and power hungry military superiors, and xenophobic Europeans and Oklahomans. Although his former principal called him a fairly average student adding, “There was nothing in his disciplinary record that would suggest any bad behavior while he was here,” the Times article details someone vehemently opposed to religion and authority, quick to support separation of church and state or launch into a fit of rage desperately trying to survive in an unjust world. The article also speaks of his hacker community group in eloquent terms; accepting of his geeky side, his liberal positions, and his ambition, that their philosophy is “information should be free and accessible to all.”
So, even though our defense department excoriated the information leaks saying that Private Manning took an oath to “protect the nation, defend the Constitution and also safeguard classified information,” he’s being exalted as a hero by many on the anti-war left and treated as a conscientious objector by some media outlets. Do those that support or rationalize classified document leaks regardless of potential harm it can do to existing ground troops warrant the un-American label? If the answer to this is no, is it appropriate to ever use that label?
How about those who seek to impose equality of results while discriminating against others along the way? How about those who believe we have no right to enforce our immigration laws or protect our borders, language, culture and communities? How about those who believe that defining marriage the way it has always been defined has been un-Constitutional since 1787? How about those who believe that a violent crime committed against a gay man by a straight man is worse than that same crime committed by a gay towards a straight? Until we take a reasonable approach toward these types of questions our culture will only become more irrational and polarized. Is it fair to take a long and hard look at our military engagements and assess them on merit? Absolutely. But is it also okay to put liberal ideology, anti-war sentiments, and compassion for criminals above country? Absolutely NOT.