Liberals, Israel & Wolves
January 14, 2009
Among the rampant contradictions attendant to liberal thinking and
behavior is this:
From Boston to Berkeley, "scientific” liberals boast of their devotion
to the idea that life on earth evolved through a blind struggle for
However, when it comes to human affairs, liberals blithely urge the
taking of enormous gambles regarding survival or ignore its demands
entirely — as in the case of pacifists, whom Orwell correctly described
as enamored of a perverted "moral phenomenon” that was (and will always
be) "objectively pro-Fascist.”
These thoughts come to mind today as the result of the current act being
played out in the ongoing tragedy of the Middle East, a tragedy whose
enduring, fundamental theme was established in 1948 when Arab monarchies
and Palestinians reacted to the establishment of Israel by dedicating
themselves to the cause of Israel’s destruction.
Indeed, Israel’s enemies have pursued their goal with such astonishing
violence and hatred that sensible people agree the fear Israeli Jews
have not just for the survival of their state but for their lives is
based firmly upon reality and reason.
Sensible people agree ... but not liberals.
Moreover, and more frightening, liberals are so certain about the
correctness of their vision of Israelis as paranoiacs (or emotional
jellyfish whose intractable depressiveness and raging anxiety exaggerate
the threat to their lives) that they denounce Israeli policies with the
same angry ferocity associated with the filth that flows from the
fascist mouth of an Iranian ayatollah or president.
For evidence of this perfectly arrogant, perfectly stupid liberal
perversity, let us turn first to Jimmy Carter, the self-anointed
ambassador of peace extraordinaire who revealed his shameless pride in
the following statement quoted by the Washington Post:
"I know from personal involvement that the devastating invasion of Gaza
by Israel could easily have been avoided.”
Is it even possible to imagine the mass of this arrogance, exhibited by
a person who claims wide and intimate knowledge of the Middle East but
speaks of how "easily” Israel can find another, infinitely less
"devastating” avenue with which to reach an honest, lasting accord with
terrorists committed to its destruction?
(Of course, Carter’s liberal admirers will disagree with that
assessment, quickly informing us that the Jimmy Peanuts whose magic
music had charms to sooth the savage breast of Kim Jong-il can easily
reprise his act to soften the rock that is Ahmadinejad and bend the
knotted oaks called Hamas and Hezbollah.)
We move on now to Roger Cohen (New York Times), who laments that he has
"never previously felt so despondent about Israel, so shamed by its
Surely, Cohen must feel such shame because he "knows” how "easily”
Israel can live happily ever after with its "perceived” enemies.
Of course, Cohen must also believe that unending bliss for Israelis is
possible only if they place their survival into the hands of liberals
who will be happy to "rehabilitate” fascist, psychopathic terrorists of
the Middle East in the same way that from bud to blossom to fruit, they
bring out the humanity of the most vile murderers, rapists, and
pedophiles in America.
(Ah, liberals, our modern alchemists who turn not base metals but base
humans into gold, along the way viciously mocking infidels such as
Steven Pinker, who dared to condemn "horrific genocides inspired by
Marxist pseudoscience about the malleability of human nature.”)
Finally, there is Rosa Brooks (LA Times), bashing Israel with this bit
of lecturing mockery: "Wring your hands every now and then, but don’t
engage seriously with European, Turkish or Arab actors anxious to
propose compromises that could end the conflict [in Gaza].”
So, what does one do about Ms. Brooks’ hallucination that pictures the
French, Swedes, Spaniards, Turks, and assorted "Arab actors” kicking
groins, biting ears, and scratching eyes in a fight to be first in line
to propose, help negotiate, and meticulously enforce a just peace
between Israel and it enemies?
Well, to protect one’s sanity and insure one’s survival, one first
thinks carefully about how Europe reacted to the institutionalized
murder, torture, and rape inflicted upon innocents in the part of the
European backyard called Bosnia.
Next, one considers how "Arab actors” have responded to genocide in
Then, to fulfill one’s responsibility to morality, one pleads with Rosa
to make an appointment with the best pharmacological psychiatrist she
can find — immediately.
The image of the liberal as a raving lunatic —
What an excellent way to end; for it explains at least three important
facts about liberal behavior vis-à-vis Israel, facts that Israelis and
their friends should never forget in the name of "Never Again.”
... Why, with the ugliest of angry insults, neurotic guilt ridden
liberals condemn a people who are in a terrible fight for their survival
against rabidly wolfish enemies.
... Why, with an air of smug superiority, arrogant liberals dismiss the
Russian proverb that advises, "If you live among wolves you have to howl
like a wolf.”
... Why, with a fierce certainty that dismisses the entirety of human
experience with a dismissive wave of a prideful hand, megalomaniac,
appeasement loving liberals deny there are crucial lessons to be learned
from the fearful wolf that confronted Dante:
"And she has a nature so malignant and ruthless,
That she never satisfies her greedy will,
And after eating is more ravenous than before.”