The brain of Rice

Let’s be frank. Condoleezza Rice is not merely, as I have often described her, a smug unthinking ideologue. She gives ample evidence of being, quite literally, an idiot. Of course we are not supposed to use such language about a high government official, but what other conclusions can be drawn from Rice’s recent statements about the Hamas election?

We’ve been very clear [what has she been very clear about?] that we’re waiting to see [oh, she’s very clear that she’s waiting to see something; this is reassuring; but what exactly is she waiting to see?] if Hamas is going to live up to the obligations the Palestinians have taken over a period of more than a decade, and to see whether or not they’re also going to live up to the obligations that comes with governing as they try to meet the aspirations of their people.” [See, she’s completely on top of things. There’s been no setback here at all. She’s not gulled. She’s very clear and firm about the fact that she’s waiting to see if pigs have wings, and if a bowling ball can turn into a Buick. Gosh, it’s so great to have such a canny, no-nonsense, can’t-be-fooled person in charge of our nation’s foreign policy!]

A VFR reader, a psychologist by profession, analyzes Rice’s comments further:

Well, it’s pretty clear that the election of Hamas clarified nothing for Condoleeza Rice who was simply able to assimilate this into her own preexisting illusions.

“We’ve been very clear that we’re waiting to see if Hamas is going to live up to the obligations the Palestinians have taken over a period of more than a decade, and to see whether or not they’re also going to live up to the obligations that comes with governing as they try to meet the aspirations of their people.”

These obligations of course have been consistently ignored which in itself has largely been ignored by people such as herself. And she clearly implies that these people have some lofty aspirations that all people must share such as a yearning for peace and freedom, and she never even considers the obvious conclusion that the reason Hamas was elected is because most of the Palestinians have exactly the same aspirations as Hamas.

Then in referring to Hama’s “unexpected” victory Rice admitted the US has failed to comprehend the depth of Palestinian hostility toward their leadership.

So the hostility is towards their leadership. And what about the fact that the “Palestinians” indoctrinate their children to blow themselves up to murder innocent people. Is that something that commonly happens in societies when people become angry with their leadership? The fact that these people are being indoctrinated to hate from the cradle to the grave doesn’t even register, nor does the fact that becoming a terrorist murderer is given the highest social reinforcement in addition to the promise of eternal paradise. She completely misses the obvious substituting Pollyanna ideas of universal longings and victimology for reality.

Then comes the real mindblower.

Elections have brought gains by anti-American Islamic radicals in Egypt, Lebanon and Iran, but Rice said that the alternative was trying to bottle up seething anger in the region that could lead to more terrorism attacks in the West.

This can only mean that she believes that the “seething anger” comes from the lack of democracy and freedom. Here we see a complete absence of critical thinking. Do people who have lived under dictatorships in other societies become terrorists? Did the Russians and the East European peoples living under Communism become terrorists? Have the people of North Korea become terrorists? Amazingly she appears to believe that it’s better for terrorist regimes like Hamas to be elected who will indoctrinate all children from the womb with hatred for all infidels, with special emphasis on Israel and America, because at least they won’t get angry about being deprived of the experience of voting in an election. And she also seems to believe that not having elections would create more terrorists than establishing terrorist regimes with state power. Unbelievable. What is painfully clear is that she doesn’t have even the faintest idea that all the hatred and terrorism is motivated by an ideology.

And I shouldn’t fail to mention Bill Clinton who chastises the Danish paper that printed the cartoon of Mohammed, claiming this is prejudice against a whole people and likening it to anti-Semitism, and then turning around and saying that we should engage with Hamas, an organization whose whole reason for being is to spread anti-Semitism and murder Jews.

I think the reader for his insights.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 01, 2006 06:44 PM | Send