The New Clarion

The New Clarion header image 2

Who’s the Villain?

January 2nd, 2009 by Bill Brown · 8 Comments · Comment Contest Friday

Many blogs do a caption contest every Friday wherein the blogger posts a picture and then visitors leave their take on an appropriate and funny caption for that photo. I really enjoy contributing to those sorts of things, but it doesn’t seem appropriate for TNC so how about a comment contest on Fridays. We select an article—nothing too lengthy—and you supply a comment analyzing it. Our commenters thus far have been exceedingly insightful so I’ll be most interested to read your take. Winner gets a free RSS subscription to TNC!

“Moral Clarity in Gaza”

8 Comments so far ↓

  • Jennifer Snow

    I think that the worst aspect of this article is the fact that its underlying assumptions destroy the very thing it presumes to champion–the fact that Israel has the *right* to defend itself.

    The author praises the Israelis for their restraint, when it’s precisely that restraint that has emboldened Hamas and led them to take the tactic they are currently taking. Of course Israel hasn’t taken a no tolerance policy after the Gaza retreat–the philosophical policy that *led* to the retreat militates against it.

    This philosophical conflict makes it all the worse that the article is overall so positive. It would be so much better if the author was plainly antagonistic to Israeli self-assertion. In the end, all it really does is demonstrate that the worst threat to your ideals are the people who support them for the wrong reasons.

  • Joan of Argghh!

    This is not ancient history.

    If you’re CK’s age, then, no. But in a news cycle ever more measured in seconds, much less days, count on the preponderance of outrageous lies and confusion to win the day for the Media and its allies in the Mideast.

    (Yes, I’ve stopped saying that the Media is the ally. It is the Enemy and the world players are its stooges. It’s my fantasy and I’m comfortable with it.)

  • Jim

    In dealing with Islamic terrorists who control territory with popular support, Israel pursues the same failed methods of ritualized warfare. While Israel is praised for the restraint that will led it to another failure, it needs a General Sherman who will break the will to war of the enemy population.

  • Madmax

    Metaphorically speaking, god save us from the Conservatives.

    “Israel is so scrupulous about civilian life that, risking the element of surprise, it contacts enemy noncombatants in advance to warn them of approaching danger…”

    He says this approvingly. This is Christian warfare being practiced by Jews. What will it take for humanity to abandon altruism? I’m starting to wonder if we ever will?

  • L-C

    Altruism, like any ethics, isn’t abandoned so much as replaced when the ideas that lead to it are changed.

    People don’t operate primarily on altruism, but on the underlying philosophy that prescribes it.

  • Madmax


    Good points. What would you say is the underlying philosophy in play here? Leftist egalitarianism? Christian pacifism?

  • Joan of Argghh!

    Altruists who have to kill people in order to survive are people I like to have in the gene pool.

    Altruists who lose their survival to a perverse sense of equity are not bad people, just dead people.

  • L-C

    Madmax, am I being too vague if I answer “irrationalism”? 😉

    It always starts with the basics. Metaphysics and epistemology determine ethics. Now, most people don’t consciously choose the aforementioned, which means they will default to contemporary philosophy.

    Some will come to object aspects of this philosophy, not on the metaphysical and epistemological level, but on the ethical level. You have the alienated Christian adolescent turned atheist, the libertarian tired of paying 60% taxes and so on.

    Every one of them is ultimately doomed to fail, though, if they don’t adopt a fully consistent philosophy. Metaphysics and epistemology are always there whether you acknowledge them or not, and the same premises in the same context will always lead to the same results.