August 12, 2003

THE EUROPEAN PROBLEM

Princeton’s Michael Walzer on just and unjust wars:

France and Germany did not refuse to fight or wrongly resist a just war; they refused to provide what was in their power to provide: a serious alternative to an unjust war ... The US needs partners, real partners, who can say 'yes' and 'no' to our government – but these have to be partners who are ready to take responsibility for the way the world goes. Iraq would have nuclear weapons today, had Europe alone been making decisions about the inspection regime, the embargo, and the no-fly zones. And there would be many fewer Kosovars alive in Kosovo today had Europe alone been making decisions there. It is easy to criticise American unilateralism; I do that all the time. But European irresponsibility is an equally serious problem.

Thus ends this site’s first approving extract from something called “a journal of analytical socialism”.

Posted by Tim Blair at August 12, 2003 12:41 AM
Comments

wow I take it that you supported the gulf war..what about the fact that we are living in a different time and era meaning that wouldn't it be polite to say that Iraq as we see it is more dangerous dead than alive?

Posted by: grindle at August 12, 2003 at 01:23 AM

Uh, what?

Posted by: murray at August 12, 2003 at 01:28 AM

Grindle, where can I buy the stuff you are smoking. Come back when you've come down. Whoops, sorry, just checked out your website, I guess you won't be down in a while.

Posted by: Edmund Burke at August 12, 2003 at 01:32 AM

Walzer is with the "democratic socialist" magazine, Dissent, which has long tried to forge a "responsible left" movement.

It's a very, very lonely place.

Posted by: KevinV at August 12, 2003 at 05:22 AM

whow, you just must have indeed been smoking some serious unhealty stuff.

we are america, comply or we will destroy you >:[
ein reich ein fuhrer, hail bush ...NOT

Posted by: me at August 12, 2003 at 06:43 AM

Hey, thanks for the reminder! I'd nearly forgotten in the last .003 nanoseconds since I last heard that Bush is Hitler.

Posted by: E.A. at August 12, 2003 at 07:53 AM

The whole article is worth a read - I don't agree with the man on lots of things, but it's refreshing to someone of "the left" who's actually rational and doesn't instantly demonize all who disagree with him. He has some seriously unkind words at the end for his ideological neighbors.

Posted by: Ben at August 12, 2003 at 08:12 AM

A lefty is still a lefty. Never trust them to get the point fully, it's too much for their little brains to handle.

Posted by: Toryhere at August 12, 2003 at 08:44 AM

Let's review the Left's strategy for dealing with Iraq: Don't go to war no matter what. Don't even threaten war, because it implies the possibility of actual war. Lift sanctions.

Ironically, physically removing Saddam was the only morally justifiable thing the US and her sensible allies could do.

And as an American I think it's time we left Europe to its own devices.

Posted by: S.A. Smith at August 12, 2003 at 08:51 AM


"It's refreshing to [see] seomone of 'the left' who ... doesn't instantly demonize all who disgree with him"

followed by:

A lefty is still a lefty. Never trust them to get the point fully, it's too much for their little brains to handle.

You guys crack me up.

Posted by: Geoff at August 12, 2003 at 09:42 AM

A very good read thanks Tim.

As to the sanctions thing I remember in the early days of Bush's campaign he was talking about lifting them and even removing the no fly zones. What a difference 9-11 makes!!!

Posted by: Rob at August 12, 2003 at 09:51 AM

It would be funny if the two passages you quoted came from the same person, but since they don't, I don't understand what you find so amusing -- unless it is the odd notion that two people from the same side of the political spectrum can have two different viewpoints on the same subject. I guess that's something you're not accustomed to seeing among your own ideological fellows.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at August 12, 2003 at 09:52 AM

That was directed at Geoff, by the way.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at August 12, 2003 at 09:52 AM

According to a rule who's name I cannot remember, mentioning Hitler = inability to argue the point further and admission of defeat.

me, you really should try harder if you expect to taken at all seriously.

Socialists do make the occasional good point, it's the actual practice of socialism which fails to meet the rhetoric. High ideals are nothing in the face of self-interest.

Posted by: Jake D at August 12, 2003 at 10:15 AM

Jake D., I think it's called "argumentum ad hitlerum."

Posted by: E.A. at August 12, 2003 at 10:58 AM

The German Greens now want to deploy troops to Iraq under a UN mandate.
"Under no circumstanes" and "never ever" obviously have a different meaning in German when referring to troop movements- Poland and the Sudetenland for example.

Posted by: Habib Bickford at August 12, 2003 at 11:30 AM

Maybe Germany's being more accommodating 'cos Deutsche Telekom was left out of the bidding for an Iraqi contract?

Of course, so was phrance, hehehehehehehe.

And/or Gerhard's angling for an invite to the WH. Don't think he'll ever see the ranch.

However, the German Armed Forces have been stellar in their support and aid.

Posted by: Sandy P. at August 12, 2003 at 11:46 AM

Provision of a viable alternative option rather than oppostion to anything proposed is always a good formula if one wishes to be taken seriously.

Europe could learn that from the federal ALP or just about any state Liberal party as they slide into obscurity.

Posted by: Gilly at August 12, 2003 at 01:49 PM

Andrea: I find it amusing to see a post whereby someone is lauded because he "doesn't instantly demonize all who disagree with him", followed by a post that, well, seems to demonstrate exactly that trait. :-)

Almost as funny as a message here not so long ago that asked "why do lefties have to make everything political?" On a Tim Blair blog, of all places :-)

I guess that's something you're not accustomed to seeing among your own ideological fellows

Why bring ideology into this? It's just a humourous observation.

Posted by: Geoff at August 12, 2003 at 02:51 PM

Jake D, it's called Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

Of course, having recently been labelled a member of the Hitler Youth by Analogue_Voter, I would know that.

Posted by: murray at August 12, 2003 at 03:52 PM

There was once a very funny column entitled Pseud's Corner which pilloried pseudo-intellectuals, quoting short extracts from their writings.

As I remember, it was put together by Barry Humphries and appeared, ironically, in the left-wing weekly, Nation Review (Australia).

Time to bring it back.

Posted by: ilibcc at August 12, 2003 at 04:09 PM

ilibcc

Private Eye still runs a Pseuds Corner. See here. It was especially funny during the Iraq war.

Posted by: Alex Hidell at August 12, 2003 at 04:34 PM

I meant to post the above to Stupid Intellectuals.

I think.

Posted by: ilibcc at August 12, 2003 at 04:37 PM

Thanks Alex

No idea where I got Nation Review and Barry Humphries from.

Posted by: ilibcc at August 12, 2003 at 04:39 PM

On a Tim Blair blog, of all places :-)

You mean there's more than one?

Posted by: Roger Bournival at August 13, 2003 at 12:48 AM

First he says: "The Taliban regime provided Al Qaeda with all the advantages of sovereignty, most importantly, a territorial base. It was entirely legitimate for the US to attack that territorial base and to overthow the regime that provided it.
...
And should there be other countries that enter into a partnership of the same kind with Al Qaeda, I would think, other things being equal, they would be subject to a similar attack. But, right now, there are no such other countries."

Then he says, "As for countries that harbour terrorist organisations, they can and should be dealt with through non-military means: diplomacy and, in extreme cases, international sanctions."

So I quit reading.

Posted by: Theodopoulos Pherecydes at August 13, 2003 at 01:47 AM

Theo,

That was exactly what I had in mind when I wrote "...I don't agree with the man on a lot of things..." -- his faith in the ability of sanctions to accomplish anything is misplaced, but the rest of the article really is worth reading.

Posted by: Ben at August 13, 2003 at 08:18 AM