Do Anti-War and Anti-State Equal Anti-Americanism?by
Bill Barnwell
This is going to be the column for libertarian readers everywhere to send to your conservative friends who feel you’ve gone off the deep end. We all know such people. Could be a co-worker, could be a person from church, it could even be a family member. You know the type I’m talking about. They are good patriotic conservatives who love George W. Bush and have full faith in the war in Iraq. They are appalled by your position on the war. Maybe you even made the fatal mistake of respectfully questioning the merits of the federal Pledge of Allegiance. Sure they want to cut government, but you seem to really dislike government, and it’s beginning to make them feel like you’re some kind of dangerous crazed subversive. After a few more mistakes on your part, perhaps after criticizing Medicare or Bush’s education bill, all patience has been lost. They’ve reached the conclusion in the back of their mind…you’re not a patriot! You don’t love your country! You belong in France! You’re dangerous! Or are you? It’s not unusual for anti-war and libertarian individuals to have their views denounced as "anti-American." LewRockwell.com bills itself as an "anti-state, anti-war, pro-market" information and educational site. Many people, particularly conservatives, consider such notions unpatriotic and unappreciative of the American way of life. Therefore, it must be determined, does opposition to the State’s most sacred causes – warfare, government spending, continual expansion – equate to a hatred of one’s own country? We must soundly conclude that it does not. Not only is such a position ridiculous, it requires 100% devotion and trust for every single policy, whim, and desire of American politicians. Such a concept is more fitting for the Dark Ages than it is for the revolutionary spirit that gave America its national character. The case has been made by such publications as the National Review that those conservatives who opposed the war in Iraq were "unpatriotic." The mainstream conservative movement is appalled by "so-called" anti-war conservatives. Establishment conservatives refer to the right-wing heretics as the "Blame America First Crowd" and the "Hate America Crowd." In the minds of most conservatives, once the bombs started falling on Iraq, the rest of the country was morally required to "get behind our Commander-in-Chief" and "Support Our Troops!" (which of course means keeping them in harm’s way, even if the war isn’t in their interest, but I digress). Failure to do so is tantamount to treason and aiding and abetting the enemy. This, however, is just plain nutty. Let’s say a President wakes up one morning and decides to mobilize his troops to "bring Democracy" or "spread freedom" to some third-world country in a war that is clearly against U.S interests. Is everybody forced to support it? What if a President decides to use the military to commit moral evils like genocide or to impose slavery on another nation? These are extreme examples, but illustrate that simply because a President makes a decision to go to war or that because troops are out fighting, it does not logically connect that it is correct policy that deserves support. In the 60’s and 70’s many considered all war protestors to be nothing more than America-hating hippies. While some of them were, can one really look back on the Vietnam situation and claim that everybody who opposed the war was unpatriotic or ungrateful to America? Do we still want to look back on that war and claim that just under 60,000 American lives lost (and between one and two million Vietnamese lives lost) were "worth it" to make South Vietnam safe for democracy (until 1975, that is, when it fell to Communism anyway)? Only pot-smoking, America-hating, Communist-loving traitors would claim it wasn’t worth it, of course. The idea that once you’re in you must "stay the course" and "finish the job" even amongst mounting evidence that the invasion was a mistake in the first place is another illogical idea. Do we apply this sort of thinking to any other area of life? Absolutely not. If something is found to be incorrect, unjust, or wrong on our part, it makes little sense to continue whatever it is we are doing. We prevent further losses and change course to correct the matter. Such logic doesn’t apply to warfare apparently. Even after incredible loss of life and property, we must "stay the course" and make a bad situation worse. It’s also worth considering that while conservatives are proudly beating their chest right now in support of their beloved Commander-in-Chief, they have not always been singing the same tune. The majority of the conservative movement criticized President Clinton bitterly when he went to war with Serbia to "end hate" and "stop genocide" in Kosovo (we now know claims of genocide were widely overstated, but again, I digress). Why was it OK to criticize the President and the "mission" then but not now? What’s with the double standard? Most conservatives found that war to be illegitimate and said so even after the bombs started falling. In that war, true patriots were the ones who wanted to "expose" Clinton for his lies and motives in going to war. In that war, it was OK, to say "I support our troops but not this war." Five years later and things have changed. You either support the war and the President unconditionally or you are an America-hating nutcase. It would be worth asking if many of these same conservatives hated America five years ago when they voiced their opposition to the war against Serbia. In 1999, I actually thought the conservative movement had developed some principle in opposition to the war against Serbia. I was wrong. It was all about politics and sticking it to Bill Clinton. The Right still loves war, as long as one of their own is dropping the bombs. That begs the question, is patriotism more about "the troops" or about supporting the correct politicians? One must also consider the motives of those who oppose the current war. I’ve yet to read one piece on LRC from a writer who opposed the war because they hated America and loved Iraq. I have read, and written plenty myself, on the false pretenses this war was waged on. I’ve seen much that dealt with protecting the lives of innocents, and keeping our troops away from unnecessary battles. How dare we look out for the lives of our troops and even – gasp – innocent Iraqi’s! Not only this, I’ve read much that deals with many logical and practical reasons for opposing the war on moral, theological, political and philosophical grounds. Yet it is much easier for pro-war enthusiasts to just claim we hate America than actually answer our arguments and defend their own positions. In the current war, with the embarrassing lack of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, the growing toll of lives lost on both sides, and more and more Americans questioning why we are there, history will vindicate the anti-war dissenters, just as they have largely been vindicated with Vietnam. It would help our skeptical conservative friends to realize that we have opposed this war precisely BECAUSE we love America. We don’t want to see American lives lost. We don’t want to see our reputation sullied. We want America to make the world a better place. We simply see our amazing industrious, charitable, creative and entrepreneurial spirit as a better way to do that rather than waging unnecessary wars. Switching gears to the concept of the State in general, conservatives are equally appalled at libertarian ideals. How could we criticize our government and leaders so harshly (Remember though, criticizing Bill Clinton harshly and even calling him the anti-Christ and a murderer is acceptable. He is a Democrat. And he liked sex a little too much)? While conservatives say they want to cut and shrink government, they also believe that too much criticism of the State is also anti-American and unpatriotic. But since when was a love for the political State intrinsically intertwined with a love for American culture, values, and people? Why are we told to worship and blindly follow the governing State, no matter what its decrees and no matter how tyrannical it becomes, in order to be good patriots? If anything, the State has devolved American values. Anything it injects itself into it seems to harm and ruin. Yet the deification of the State and its politicians (as long as they are of the same political party) is now a necessary ingredient for good patriotism. It is so completely illogical to equate criticism of government structures and policies with anti-Americanism that it doesn’t even warrant much discussion. If that is the standard for patriotism, then no American is allowed to possess freedom of conscience, liberty, and individualism, all of which are supposedly distinct American characteristics. Where on earth did the silly idea come from that being critical of a federal department or legislative policy was "anti-American"? When will conservatives notice that what is being demanded of them is not patriotism but a lemming-like call to follow the State wherever it demands to lead? Religious conservatives are particularly troubled by my rhetoric. How could a pastor speak so negatively of the government? Haven’t I read Romans 13:1-7? I’m supposed to submit to the governing authorities! Am I blind, or just ignoring Scripture? Let me just say to my Christian friends that I am fully aware of what Romans 13 says, in its proper context and what the New Testament on a whole says about the relationship between the Christian and the State. Also, does being critical constitute a lack of submission? Or is submission only blind and happy devotion to whatever the government desires? Romans 13 is not some proof-text that citizens must blindly follow whatever the government does, or that they have no right to criticize the actions and policies of their public officials (If so then I guess we have no right to criticize any historical tyrant who has ever been in power). That is a highly irresponsible interpretation of the Scriptures. In fact, it would be good for Christians to remember that Paul, who wrote Romans, constantly defied the State (but respectfully and in a submissive manner) in the book of Acts. The latter part of Acts can be viewed as a solid example of defiance against the State. Watch for a column on the Christian’s obligation to the State and what the Scriptures actually say about it in the near future. What conservatives are really saying in response to libertarian rhetoric is that they have full faith in the State and little faith in the people to advance our country. Furthermore, they are unfortunately blinded to the fact that the worshipping of the American government, forced displays of support for ill-fated policies, and attempts to stifle dissenters, is not proving their love for their country, but proving their allegiance to American politicians and government structures. In sum, the libertarian objection to war and the State is not founded upon hatred for America. It’s founded on a love for America and a desire to see America advance to its full potential. Modern warfare and State intervention into our lives have done little to advance us as a people or as a country. The State’s interventions have destroyed wealth, created dependency, hampered the free market, violated and trampled over individual rights, and even suppressed religious expression. Yes, my skeptical conservative friends, we too are patriots who love America. We are anti-war and anti-State because we have America’s best interests in mind. We simply don’t see the State and war as the ways and means to make America a better place. If you search honestly and long enough, you might find yourself wondering why you do. God bless America.
P.S. It would be fitting on this eve of Independence Day, for my conservative friends to put down their Freedom Fries for a moment and solemnly thank France, who without their help and intervention, we probably would not have won the Revolutionary War. July 3, 2004 Bill Barnwell [send him mail] is a pastor in Swartz Creek, Michigan and a Master’s of ministry student at Bethel College. Copyright © 2004 LewRockwell.com |
Happy
Independence Day.