Informed Speculation

…I will make at least this one exception (unless, of course, I lie again) to my ‘no-new-Muslim-cartoon-controversy-posts’ rule. I do want to spotlight the work of the great Jeff Goldstein, who has a new post tying in the controversy with a particular peeve of mine, identity politics:

[This is] the dilemma western proponents of identity politics have (and always will have) to face: namely, the point at which the necessary clash of soft, boutique mulitculturalism and the kernel beliefs of identity politics groups threaten to erupt into something much larger than a minor disagreement that can be fixed with a bit of superficial policy manipulation. Which is why even now you have Kos commenters contorting themselves into positions of self-righteous progressive onanism that are a wonder to behold—suddenly, free speech is not a universal right worthy of the crafting of puppet heads and the defacing of Starbucks’ windows, but instead is a culture-specific gift that needs to be filtered through the religious precepts of the culture of the Other. Unless, of course, that “Other” happens to be, say, Evangelical Christians. In which case, such extremists MUST BE SHOUTED DOWN with free speech.

Pretzel logic, clearly—and the dilemma that is at the root of an incoherent philosophical system that favors the sociology of group identity over the universality of individual rights. Ironically, George Bush, each time he argues that freedom is universal, is acting in a manner far more progressive than self-styled progressive activists.

Most conservatives or libertarians have a ‘Randian’ moment, in college, usually, when Atlas Shrugs and John Galt’s speech suddenly seem the most important things in the world.

This is usually followed by a short period of full-blown Objectivism, followed by a retrenchment, usually in reaction to some of the more cult-like aspects of the movement. One thing, though, has stuck with me, even after following that trajectory almost to the letter: the primacy of the individual. It manifests itself in a somewhat libertarian social policy streak (for example, I think the decriminalization of marijuana is something that would probably do society a lot of good – but more on that another time) and a deep-rooted antipathy towards unions, movements, and sociological mumbo-jumbo.

Any reasonable analysis of why democracy is the best of all possible political systems has to begin with the fact that it elevates the rights of the individual over those of the collective. The flip side is behind the collapse of socialism (outside of old Europe and Latin America, in any event). The state is a construct – it is held together either by (a) an authoritarian rule that brooks no opposition, or (b) the will of the individuals who live in that particular state. It is (b), of course, that holds the future.

And if the ‘clash of civilizations’ is inevitable (and it probably is), then this controversy is a battle in a long war – and in a long war, patience (and the truth) will win in the end. So once more, I retreat into my cocoon of silence on this issue, and I hope that those on both sides who deliberately fan the flames will reconsider their tactics, and realize that the provocations of the other side don’t need to be met through further provocations. The truly strong can afford to sit back and wait…