Top Menu Left

Top Menu Right

Subscriber-only Content

This audio content is accessible only to current Audio or Premium subscribers. For access, login, subscribe or upgrade your subscription.

Get Access...

Subscriber-only Content

This ebook content is accessible only to current Ebook or Premium subscribers. For access, login, subscribe or upgrade your subscription.

Get Access...

Tribute to Iran

The High Muckety-Muck (HMM) of Iran sent President Bush an 18 page letter this week, doubtless with very tiny writing, in which he wrote:

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

Translation: in the war we are fighting, you in the west will be defeated, and we Iranians will win, because you have failed to help others.

Mahmoud_AhmadinejadOne of HMM’s chief platoons in the war is Hamas, a terrorist group that receives religious, moral and economic support from Iran, and now has a base of operations in the Gaza. Without Iran, Hamas—and the war—would not last long. So what have American leaders done about this?

This week, Secretary of State Rice convened a meeting with Russia, the UN Secretary-General, and Europeans, to discuss the resumption of economic payments to Hamas. Rice said that their goal was “to provide assistance to the Palestinian people so that they do not suffer deprivation and do not suffer an humanitarian crisis.” In other words, the Secretary took HMM up on his challenge to send him money.

Caroline Glick has exposed this forcefully as a flight from reality: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0506/glick051106.php3

In Glick’s potent words, “the US on Tuesday recommitted itself to a Middle East policy that has no connection to reality and thus no chance of ever succeeding. Indeed, failure is inevitable.”

There is, of course, a consequence to such a “delusion”: “the fact is that by aiding Hamas, the US is aiding Iran.” This is the fact that our leaders are desperate to evade.

Glick recognizes that “The purpose the Quartet was founded to advance was the shunning of reality, in the hope that if reality was rejected strenuously, that reality would change.” This is the epistemology of subjectivism: the notion that reality follows our whims.

Our leaders refuse to see that the Iranians—and Hamas—will not use the cash to help their people. They will see our largesse as weakness. The money will demonstrate, to those most passionate for war, the very weakness that HMM wrote of in his letter. What our leaders see as altruistic goodness is in fact moral capitulation. It is aiding and abetting the enemy, by paying him tribute.

The Romans once demanded tribute from those they conquered by the sword. As their Empire lost strength, they began to make payments to the barbarians at their gates. The barbarians saw this as weakness, and stepped up the attacks.

Today, our weakness is not physical, it is moral. We are not forced to send tribute to killers. Our leaders do so because they accept it as a duty. It won’t help us—and they know it—so the delusions get deeper as the aid increases.

It is only our acceptance of this duty that motivates us to send tribute to our sworn enemies. At least the Romans had to be forced to pay. At their worst moments they were never so perverted as to do it voluntarily.

Like this post? Join our mailing list to receive our weekly digest. And for in-depth commentary from an Objectivist perspective, subscribe to our quarterly journal, The Objective Standard.

Related:

Image: Marcello Casal JrABr

, ,


Comments submitted to TOS Blog are moderated and checked periodically. To be considered for posting, a comment must be civil, substantive, on topic, and no longer than 400 words. Ad hominem attacks, arguments from intimidation, misrepresentations, off-topic comments, and comments that ignore points made in the article will be deleted. Thank you for helping us to keep the discussion intellectually profitable.