Us versus Us

In commentating on the war in Iraq, Lawrence Auster (see here) highlights one of the fundamental problems that right liberals have in fighting wars.

In right-liberal ideology, all people are seen as rationale individuals who have the some core values. Therefore when a right-liberal country like the US invades another country, the invasion must be portrayed as an act of liberation.

In the case of Iraq, the US neoconservatives see themselves as liberating the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein’s oppressive dictatorship. However, this presents considerable difficulties when the majority of the population do not have the same values as those of the occupying country.

Instead of being seen as enemies, Iraqi’s attacking US troops must be treated as criminal suspects who have the same rights as American criminal suspects. Mr Auster points out the absurdity of such thinking with the following hypothetical situation:

"Sarge, I’ve got a clear shot at the Al Qaeda guys in that house who fired an RPG at our convoy, can I hit them?" "wait a sec, I’ll just ask my JAG…Nope, she says we can’t do it".

The liberal argument that "every ones the same underneath" has been used by Marxist guerrillas in the developing world for the over 60 years. The arms dealer character in Lord of War comments that in third world countries the military factions with the most virtuous names often have the bloodiest reputations. Violent revolutionaries often try to justify their motives by denying their hatred of their opponents and claiming the moral high ground through phrases like “people’s liberation army”.

The fact is that different groups of people have different values and this is one of the reasons why warfare is such a bloody business. An ideology of sameness can be just as destructive as a supremacist ideology like fascism.

That’s why real conservatives only advocate war when an aggressive "them", is a direct threat to the different "us".