Through one of those “only on the Internet” series of tangential links, I happened onto this site, and had to read their “About Us” page. As hard as it was to ignore the other three, I realized I had to write them about at least the third of their stated beliefs:

“In order to stop blowback on American interests we must change our foreign policy, mainly, our government must stop dictating to other countries how to live and govern their own people. A ‘non American’ way of life is just as important as an ‘American’ way of life. Self-determination is a fundamental right of all.”

I’ve read a lot of commentary over the years with which I’ve disagreed and that has spiked my incredulity meter, but that’s easily one of the most naive, self-contradictory, illogical, and frankly downright stupid statements I’ve ever seen. Yes, self-determination is indeed a fundamental right of all—and it barely exists, if it exists at all practically speaking, in any of the countries toward whom you insist we stop “dictating.” You want to see dictating? See Iraq, Saddam Hussein-era. See theocratic Iran. See Cuba, since 1959. See Syria, under either of the Assads. And don’t take my word for it; take Amnesty International’s. See just how much self-determination is swelling in those bastions of freedom. If the “non-American” way of life to which you refer is the way of life experienced by the unfortunate souls who live in countries which you defend against U.S. judgment, then no, that way of life is absolutely not as important as an American way of life, and to suggest so is an insult to those who live there. Their chance for real self-determination will only ever come thanks to the influence the freedom-loving countries of the world can exert on the dictatorial and oppressive regimes which squeeze all but the last inch of freedom from normal life. The only peace their “peace” movement guarantees is the peace of mind of dictators, tyrants, and terrorists.

I have yet to receive a response, but the day is young. I’ve an idea what it would entail, but I’m nonetheless curious.

P.S. The march toward living parody continues: “St Pete for Peace is a non-partisan, grassroots, anti-war organization that was founded in January 2003 during the build-up to the war on Iraq. We meet weekly to denounce war, occupation, imperialism and the injustices facing fellow Americans.” They meet weekly . . . to denounce things. It’s nice to see the can-do spirit that made America great alive and well. This calls for immediate discussion . . .

UPDATE 8/28/08

Finally a response. Frankly I’d forgotten about it. And the response is utterly forgettable:

Clint,

You don’t seriously believe the reason we’re in so many other countries is to help the people of those countries, right? If so, do you also still believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny? Our own government admits it’s reasons for many invasions/coups/assassinations/destabilizations/occupations - you may want to start with the CIA’s overthrow of the democratically elected leader of Iran in 1953, or this: CIA Reveals Scandalous “Family Jewels”. And by the way, if you’re still under the false belief that we in the U.S. have freedom, then you don’t know your own country’s history or are blinded by nationalism. Based on your writing ability I assume you’re a smart person. I’ll be happy to refer you to numerous books, articles, movies etc. that dispel the myth of U.S. ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’. It doesn’t take much objective research to see how badly you’re being lied to.

Chris

Of course I did have to respond:

Chris,

Ockham’s razor, my friend, Ockham’s razor. Make it your friend. Beyond that, as to whether our government has backed some bad characters in the past, and committed some immoral acts—of course it has. But to generalize from that to the notion that all of our foreign incursions have been immoral is either dishonest or intellectually lazy. I think I have tremendous freedoms in this country because *every day of my life here proves it*, and so does yours. You can do almost anything you damn well please in this country, including most *illegal* things, and get a slap on the wrist compared to what you can expect in other countries, much less counting the difference in type and number of activities to which we have a legal right compared to other countries. The freedom we have in this country is mind-boggling, in fact, especially compared to almost any other country in the world, including our European brethren, and most especially compared to the “aggrieved countries” on your list. Are you seriously asking me to believe that my freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of movement, and freedom to associate are more constrained here than in, say, Cuba, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, et al? Try mounting a protest march against the government in any of those countries (it’s okay, of course, if it’s against the villainous West). Try blogging about your lack of freedoms there, or criticizing the reigning secular or theocratic dictatorship. Try traveling freely in and around and out of those countries. You can’t dress the way you want, you can’t watch you want, you can’t listen to what you want, you can’t surf what you want, you can’t even groom yourself the way you want. And you’re seriously attempting to argue that we’re not a free country? Lower the landing gear and come back to Earth.

I have to ask in all seriousness: Have you actually read about the nature of the regimes and quality of life in the countries you’re defending? Like I said, Amnesty International is surely an organization you trust, and even as frivolous as it can get about what defines “human rights” violations, it’s still got enough sense to recognize that our freedom is orders of magnitude more expansive than that of the citizens of other countries. You’re afraid your phone calls might be listened to? Well, don’t take any calls from suspected terrorists in foreign countries and you don’t have to worry about it. Don’t want to have to spend an indefinite time incarcerated at Gitmo (and have to suffer three meals a day, gaining weight and better health care than the country you came from, get a free Koran, and an arrow on the ground pointing to Mecca so you know which way to pray)? Well, don’t get caught on the battlefield actively fighting against American troops or engaging in suspiciously terroristic activity. If being denied such treasured freedoms really cramps your style, I guess you’ll just have to live with everything else you get to enjoy in America. With all the unrestricted Internet access; 24/7 500-station television; total freedom of travel throughout the country; being able to publicly say the most vile things about your government and leaders, including accusing them of mass murder of their own citizens; etc., I hope you don’t get too bored.

In the meantime, I note that you didn’t actually engage the argument I made in my original e-mail, which is that the self-determination you claim to want to protect barely exists, if at all—certainly nothing like in the form we experience it here—in the countries you claim we shouldn’t influence. *Show me* where that self-determination exists in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Thailand (you know, where all the school teachers are being savagely murdered by Islamic radicals), etc. *Demonstrate* how continuing to allow murderous, oppressive regimes to continue murdering and oppressing their citizens improves those citizens’ self-determination. Until you can, one of your central tenets just doesn’t hold water. It in fact stands directly opposed to reality and common sense. For organizations such as yours to be taken seriously, you first have to act seriously.

In the past there were Democrats and progressives who, while wanting to foster more liberal progress on the domestic front, etc., still could distinguish the difference between real freedom and real oppression, and the threat that truly totalitarian ideologies posed to us, and were willing to do something about it. Folks like FDR and JFK, for instance. (Interesting that three of the four major conflicts in which we were engaged in the 20th century were led by Democratic presidents.) They were able to make that distinction. You and yours apparently can’t, instead falsely believing that peace is somehow a magic state of nature that can simply be conjured up, instead of recognizing that peace is *won*. It’s gained and kept—and protected—through strength. Being an apologist for dictators doesn’t make yours an organization for peace—it makes it an organization for oppression. The main difference between outfits like yours and me is that I actually care about the fate of the citizens of those countries. I believe we should actually *do* something about the regimes that oppress them and threaten us.

CH