Verbosities

But Is It Good for the Conservatives?

One reason [The American Enterprise Institute] stands as the capital's premier research organization is that it alone would think to assemble a quartet of intelligent and accomplished people to debate the implications of Darwinism for political thought and public policy.

Oh, this should be good, neocons talking about evolution. The panel was called "Darwinism and Conservatism: Friends or Foes?," and included two "pro-Darwinians" (the article's nomenclature, not mine), and two guys from "The Discovery Institute," which is essentially the PR agency of the "Intelligent Design" movement.

(T)he subject of their panel wasn't the primary question of whether Darwinian theory is true; it was the secondary question of whether Darwinian theory and political conservatism abet each other as ways of understanding and shaping the world: "Does Darwin's theory help defend or undermine traditional morality and family life? Does it encourage or discredit economic freedom?"

You probably have to have spent as much time reading neoconservative theory as I have to appreciate the irony of this panel discussion. The entirety of the neoconservative movement is predicated on the influence of the strong over the weak, which easily fits as a "pro-Darwinian" notion. Neoconservatives believe in "growth" as the primary notion of economic policy, giving tax cuts (i.e., "the Bush tax cuts" that the Democratic candidates keep talking about rolling back) to the most wealthy Americans so that they may continue to influence "growth." They believe that welfare from the state is a necessary evil, but they wish to dictate who is "deserving" of these handouts - the rest can suck it. And in foreign policy?



Irving Kristol @ AEI - The Neoconservative Persuasion

Barring extraordinary events, the United States will always feel obliged to defend, if possible, a democratic nation under attack from nondemocratic forces, external or internal...

[snip]

Suddenly, after two decades during which "imperial decline" and "imperial overstretch" were the academic and journalistic watchwords, the United States emerged as uniquely powerful... With power come responsibilities, whether sought or not, whether welcome or not. And it is a fact that if you have the kind of power we now have, either you will find opportunities to use it or the world will discover them for you.

This, of course, is the proactive use of force that is ostensibly designed to spread our influence values across the globe. Note that the protectionism we are "obliged" to exert is in opposition to "nondemocratic forces," an umbrella under which you can find just about any reason to show your teeth and flex your biceps. Neoconservatives believe America is "uniquely powerful," and it is our duty to use that power, which is a "pro-Darwinian" theory if I've ever heard one.

So a true debate on "Darwinism" as an AEI panel? Please. It's like letting grizzly bears debate the pros and cons of salmon. The entirety of the movement depends on the strong dominating the weak. This is nothing but irony at its finest.

Powered by ScribeFire.