Why We Fight

Terrorists have suicide belts, but progressives have academic articles, like the one University of Buffalo professor Ernest Sternberg published in the Winter 2010 Orbis, the Foreign Policy Research Institute's journal of world affairs. It's called "Purifying the World: What the New Radical Ideology Stands For," and it's both silly and scary:

Though a mouthful, world purificationism would do well in expressing what the movement wants. It wants to achieve a grand historical vision: the anticipated defeat of imperial capitalist power in favor of a global network of beneficent culture-communities, which will empower themselves through grassroots participatory democracy, and maintain consistency across movements through the rectifying power of NGOs, thereby bringing into being a new era of global social justice and sustainable development, in which the diverse communities can harmoniously share an earth that has been saved from destruction and remade pristine. . .

As for the movement’s proponents, they think of their cause as the anti-globalization (or "alter-globalization" or "no-borders") movement, eco-socialism, grass-roots globalism, global resistance, global justice movement, global intifada, transnational activism, protest networks, movement of movements, peace and justice movement, and coalition of the oppressed. . .

The new ideology is most clearly identified by what it opposes. Its enemy is the global monolith called Empire, which exerts systemic domination over human lives, mainly from the United States. Empire does so by means of economic liberalism, militarism, multinational corporations, corporate media, and technologies of surveillance, in cahoots with, or under the thrall of, Empire’s most sinister manifestation, namely Zionism. . .

Convinced that they have this unique mission, they must motivate hatred of opponents. They carry out or at least legitimize ruthless violence. And they assert the privilege to shape life’s purpose and meaning for millions. "Their ultimate goal," Gentile writes, "is to create a new civilization along expansionist lines beyond the Nation-State."

As Andrew Thomas observes at American Thinker, purificationism would produce profoundly totalitarian rule unaccountable to any electorate. Every belief and behavior would be tolerated--except conservatism, capitalism, and faith (though Islam might be a welcome ally).

It's easy to dismiss purificationism as the values of "Avatar" morphed from movie to manifesto: change the Smurf blue to "green." But such legislated self-loathing presumes everyone a victim; infants without the free will to be assigned blame or the responsibility to better one's self or society.

This truly would be the end of civilization--and to progressives, seemingly a feature not a bug. Which is why all remaining adults should oppose it.

(via Maggie's Farm)