Struggling toward a view of American order, but too mired in liberalism to get there

John D.writes:

Front and center on The American Thinker’s homepage is this article entitled Judeo-Christian Values, by Ronald Cherry. In the last three paragraphs, the author contradicts himself several times, sometimes even in the same sentence. He writes:

America is a melting pot of diverse people including Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists and Atheists; and from the Judeo-Christian perspective: all made in God’s image. We have in America a multiethnic society, and that is good. What is unhealthy for America is for it to become Balkanized, which is very likely to happen with the atrophy of Judeo-Christian American Culture and Values.

Worse yet would be for America to adopt the toxic values which exist in some parts of the world and which are endemic in some foreign cultures. The values of Fascism, Nazism, Communism or Totalitarian Islamic Sharia Law for example must never metastasize in our American Culture, which traditionally has been Judeo-Christian. These values have been with us from the beginning and they have made us strong and successful. These Judeo- Christian Values should be kept central to the American spirit and culture even as we have become more multi-ethnic. Honoring foreign cultures is desirable, but we should never tolerate the values of violence, coercion, totalitarianism, supremacism, bigotry or intolerance; values which are sadly endemic in some foreign cultures.

We must recognize that our culture, too, is worth preserving.

First, he acknowledges the existence of America’s multiethnic society (calling it a melting pot) saying that this is a good thing (though he doesn’t say why this is a good thing), but we should not allow Judeo Christian values to deteriorate. How is this possible if everyone coming into our country is allowed to uphold their indigenous values, whatever they may happen to be, with each and every culture inevitably diluting our values with their own. He then goes on to say that America should honor these cultures but not adopt their toxic values that they promote, nor allow them to spread into our culture. Huh? How can we honor something which we must absolutely oppose? He then says honoring foreign cultures is desirable (he doesn’t say why it is desirable) but we should not tolerate their values.

His final line is the capper:

We must recognize that our culture, too, is worth preserving.

“Too”? Like it should somehow take a back seat to all others.

Mired in incoherency like this, while supposedly speaking out for traditionalism, it’s no wonder the author can’t seem to realize any solid footing, but keeps slipping deeper and deeper into the abyss that is liberalism.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 06, 2007 01:33 PM | Send