Romney’s greatest failing—or a routine fact?
Terry Morris writes:
You say that if conservatives elected Giuliani, they would forever lose the ability to stand for traditional morality in American life.
Question: If conservatives back Romney—the man who said in his faith speech that he believes all religions he’s ever encountered, including Islam, draw their people closer to God—can conservatives ever again raise the issue of the incompatibility of Islam with the West; Islam’s inherent militancy against all things not Islamic?
LA replies:
You’re reversing the causal order of the problem we’re facing. You’re acting as if conservatives have had a position that Islam is not good and does not draw people closer to God, and that electing Romney would mean a falling away from that conservative position.
In fact, the established, default position for American politics and American conservatism is that all religions are good and draw people closer to God. If you hold against Romney the fact that he has that view you automatically exclude voting for any U.S. politician. The only possible exceptions I know of would be Virgil Goode and Tom Tancredo. So we’re not facing the problem of America moving from a conservative position on Islam to a liberal position if we elected Romney. The liberal position is already the established position. Therefore there is nothing lost if Romney were elected. Short of Islam gaining power over us and silencing all criticism of Islam, the situation vis a vis the American understanding of Islam cannot get worse. It can only get better.
In the case of Giuliani it is just the opposite. Social conservatism has been an important part of the conservative movement. If conservatives elected Giuliani, that would be destroyed.
TM replies:
Thanks. I thought you might answer me that way so I’d ask a follow up: Can we—conservatives who understand the problems inherent to Islam—by endorsing Romney and the right liberal default position on Islam that comes with him, and which he’s stated explicitly eleven months ahead of the general election, ever again seriously raise the issue of Islam’s incompatibility with the West? When I voted for President Bush I did not know I was endorsing this position on Islam.
My friend, MT, argues something similar to what you’ve said here. He says that Americans are simply not ready to hear the truth about Islam given that this liberal position is the default position. I say that we shouldn’t be making determinations on what Americans are ready for and what they’re not ready for in regards to Islam. My point is that the truth about Islam is not being spoken except in the far corners. It is that Americans, while most couldn’t identify a particular thing about Islam that they’re uncomfortable with, may yet have certain inclinations that this odd religion is just not American. I think this is a real possibility, though I cannot prove it.
As is always the case, liberals make a lot of noise and it scares everybody off. I’m reminded of the story of the Isrealis, facing apparent insurmountable odds, removing their mufflers from their vehicles so as to make it sound as if they had scores of tanks lined up for battle. Liberals tend to use these kinds of tactics in their warfare with the right.
LA replies:
YOU thought I might answer that way? The answer didn’t occur to ME until hours after I got your e-mail.
Of course I disagree with your friend’s position, as my constant writings on Islam testify. It is essential that the truth about Islam be communicated and understood. But people, including Romney, aren’t there yet.
Look, when I determned not to vote for Bush in 2000, it wasn’t because he was failing to grasp some advanced idea that only a few conservatives had seen; it was because he was abandoning the long established view of America and conservatism about immigration, which is that immigrants are admitted on the basis that they adopt the language and culture of this country. He was the first national politician to say we don’t have a culture in this country and let’s become more and more like a Latin American culture. So I was rejecting Bush, not because he wasn’t an “advanced right winger” like me, but because he was betraying a fundamental, long-accepted, conservative and American belief.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 18, 2007 10:46 AM | Send