Friday, June 09, 2006

The Machiavellian Media

Observing the news media with regard to the most recent triumph in our war against Islamist terror, I've become upset with the never-satisfied, always nay-saying attitude of the press: Zarqawi is finally dead, a murdering, horrible, evil villain responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people, Iraqi and American. But the media can only speculate about his "martyrdom," and whether his death helps or hinders our cause. This is odd, given that prior to Zarqawi's demise, the media's standard line was to criticize our alleged inability to capture and kill top al Qaeda operatives. Which do they want?

Conclusion: Liberals and the media have decided that this war is wrong, they desire to see the U.S. fail in its policy aims and want our troops out--all in order to validate their opinions and bring their party back into power. For them, it isn't about good and evil, it's about power--their own power, and the sense of power they receive when proven correct. And this is true even if being proven correct includes proving that certain peoples cannot handle democracy, proving that liberty is not a universal value, and proving that American values are no better than those of any other society.

But, I suppose, if one doesn't believe in good and evil to begin with--if one doesn't think some values are more correct than others, it makes no sense to say that American values are better or worse than others' in the first place. If that's true, however, why does the media cry foul at what they perceive as, for example, Republican disregard for the poor, or Republican religious intolerance? Allowing, arguendo, that Republicans do disregard the poor and are intolerant, aren't those "values" equally amoral and OK under liberals ideology? As the reader can see, the liberal viewpoint of cultural and moral relativism is nonsense--it is a mask for an ethical system that values one thing: power. I remember being told of a man from 15th century Florence that thought the same way...