Krauthammer: “The current liberal ascendancy in the United States..has set us on a course for decline”

by Infidelesto on October 11, 2009 · Comments

Excellent speech by Krauthammer. There’s a short video clip at the end as well where he says “Obama indicted America”

Nothing is inevitable. Nothing is written. For America today, decline is not a condition. Decline is a choice. Two decades into the unipolar world that came about with the fall of the Soviet Union, America is in the position of deciding whether to abdicate or retain its dominance. Decline–or continued ascendancy–is in our hands.

[...]

Facing the choice of whether to maintain our dominance or to gradually, deliberately, willingly, and indeed relievedly give it up, we are currently on a course towards the latter. The current liberal ascendancy in the United States–controlling the executive and both houses of Congress, dominating the media and elite culture–has set us on a course for decline. And this is true for both foreign and domestic policies. Indeed, they work synergistically to ensure that outcome.

The current foreign policy of the United States is an exercise in contraction. It begins with the demolition of the moral foundation of American dominance. In Strasbourg, President Obama was asked about American exceptionalism. His answer? “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” Interesting response. Because if everyone is exceptional, no one is.

Indeed, as he made his hajj from Strasbourg to Prague to Ankara to Istanbul to Cairo and finally to the U.N. General Assembly, Obama drew the picture of an America quite exceptional–exceptional in moral culpability and heavy-handedness, exceptional in guilt for its treatment of other nations and peoples. With varying degrees of directness or obliqueness, Obama indicted his own country for arrogance, for dismissiveness and derisiveness (toward Europe), for maltreatment of natives, for torture, for Hiroshima, for Guantánamo, for unilateralism, and for insufficient respect for the Muslim world.

Quite an indictment, the fundamental consequence of which is to effectively undermine any moral claim that America might have to world leadership, as well as the moral confidence that any nation needs to have in order to justify to itself and to others its position of leadership.

The liberal internationalism of today is different. It is not center-left, but left-liberal. And the new left-liberal internationalism goes far beyond its earlier Clintonian incarnation in its distrust of and distaste for American dominance. For what might be called the New Liberalism, the renunciation of power is rooted not in the fear that we are essentially good but subject to the corruptions of power–the old Clintonian view–but rooted in the conviction that America is so intrinsically flawed, so inherently and congenitally sinful that it cannot be trusted with, and does not merit, the possession of overarching world power.

For the New Liberalism, it is not just that power corrupts. It is that America itself is corrupt–in the sense of being deeply flawed, and with the history to prove it. An imperfect union, the theme of Obama’s famous Philadelphia race speech, has been carried to and amplified in his every major foreign-policy address, particularly those delivered on foreign soil. (Not surprisingly, since it earns greater applause over there.)

View the whole speech here hattip: Flopping Aces

Related posts:

  1. Video: Iranian TV blames “United States and Zionists” for Mumbai terror attacks
  2. BBC contribution to the decline of Britain
  3. Krauthammer on UN racism conference
  4. Islam Caused Islamic World’s Decline
  5. When liberal dreams collide with public opinion
  6. Liberal Genius?
  7. Liberalism And History: 5 Moments That Might Have Changed The World, And 5 That Still Might
  8. Video: Sarah Palin blasts Obama for his terrorist connections
  9. The Sanction of Evil
  10. Liberal idiots blather on about Fort Hood jihadi, and of course, get it all wrong
Want automatic updates?
4 choices: Twitter, Facebook, RSS feed or get daily email updates
  • JEWHAWK
    I like Krauthammer's comments on FOX News.Unfortunately
    he's suffering on a wheelchair.Pity.


    The American Left has an obsession of throwing their
    own country under the bus to look good to their
    European Bolshevik pals's envious eyes.
  • Henry Bowman
    "Facing the choice of whether to maintain our dominance or to gradually, deliberately, willingly, and indeed relievedly give it up..."

    This is like pretending that an aircraft that has lost all its engines has a "choice" of whether to remain airborne or plow into the ground. By pre-spending all the money individual Americans are likely to make in the next 20 years, the Obama administration (not to ignore the last few months of the Bush administration) has destroyed our economic engine. It's now no longer a question if if, but when.
  • Storm_Rider
    The American understanding of equality, up until the "New Deal," was equal rules (law) for all; now the new understanding of equality is that of Karl Marx, i.e.: equal outcome with unequal rules. Marxist equality is evil because those of lesser means and accomplishment will be made equal to those of higher means and accomplishment by social-engineering Marxist government which drags the latter down to the level of the former - not the former encouraged to achieve to higher levels through individual liberty, creativity and labor. In the end all serfs will be equal in serfdom (except for the Marxist ruling elite of course). Marxism on this level is the irrational desire for economic equalization of those individuals who labor creatively with those who don't - and never mind the immeasurably greater inequality that results between the new Marxist ruling class and the now homogenized and equalized class of serfs.

    This Marxist understanding of equality is also active on the international scale. God-forsaken hell-holes of Marxist and Islamist tyranny will not be brought up to a higher level of justice through a true revolution in human liberty and creativity, i.e.: government of the people, by the people, for the people; rather, the United States will be reduced to their level. Then all nations will be equally destitute and under equal tyranny overseen by the United Nations under the New World Order. Marxism on this level is the irrational desire for equalization of those nations which secure the individual God-given rights of their people to life, liberty and creative pursuit of happiness (private property honestly earned) with nations who don't.

    Don't ever forget this: Free individuals will always have natural economic inequalities; and free nations will always be unequal (better) than un-free nations, because freedom is better (unequal) to tyranny, and because good is unequal (better) than evil.
  • funkybarfly
    There is no unanimity in freedom,but for freedom itself.
    Marxism requires consensus;and verily,
    our freedom is merely something that must be overcome.
  • hellosnackbar
    And FBF, the veresimilitude of your comment is something that West had better learn; and fast!
    It must be frustrating SR;that the apathetic proletariat of the west have scant understanding of the status quo!
    Small wonder that honest cynics like H L Mencken declared themselves permanently unnelectable to public office.
  • ARJIS
    Krauthammer has Obama so pegged. And not just Obama, the Liberal Left. It is like they don't give a rats behind for what America has accomplished, it's heritage, or it's legacy. Obama's words are treasonous to patriotic Americans
blog comments powered by Disqus