The View From 1776

§ American Traditions

§ People and Ideas

§ Decline of Western Civilization: a Snapshot

§ Books to Read


Liberal_Jihad_Cover.jpg Forward USA

Friday, November 12, 2004

Peanut Speaks

Former-president Peanut Carter displays typical liberal blindness.

In an opinion column in today’s New York Times (where else?), incomprehensibly titled Casting a Vote for Peace, former President Peanut Carter wrote:

“When given a chance by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin of Israel, Mr. Arafat responded well by concluding the Oslo Agreement of 1993, which spelled out a mutually satisfactory relationship on geographical boundaries between Israel and the Palestinians. The resulting absence of serious violence by either side was broken when a Jewish nationalist assassinated Mr. Rabin. Mr. Arafat later rejected a proposal devised by President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barak of Israel, but its basic terms have led to positive initiatives between private groups of Israelis and Palestinians, in particular one known as the Geneva Accords. This proposal addresses the major issues that must be resolved through further official negotiations before a permanent peace can be realized.”

Not a mention of the Intifada ordered by Arafat, a deliberate terrorist campaign in which suicide bombers have murdered scores of innocent Israeli women and children and made any peace settlement impossible. 

In the myopic liberal world of the Peanut, poor Arafat, already victimized by the West’s capitalistic, unequal property-and-income distribution, had his benign and peaceful plans derailed by a Jewish nationalist who assassinated Prime Minister Rabin.  But, says the Peanut, good-hearted Arafat soldiered bravely on with the Geneva Accords (which have done some good?  if so, what?)

Peanut’s breathtakingly one-sided depiction of Arafat’s “negotiating” technique is hardly surprising.  Liberals, since the French Revolution in 1789, have consistently and repeatedly placed their faith in the ability of intellectuals to eliminate evil and social misfortune through agreements based on a chimera called “the community of nations.”

Reality, represented by historical experience, cannot penetrate liberal rationalism.  Liberal-socialists remain ever confident that the force of “world opinion,” when it’s manipulated by intellectuals, is all that’s needed to perfect human affairs.