Political Cortex: Brain Food for the Body Politic

2. No apology for tyranny
We decline to make excuses for, to indulgently `understand', reactionary
regimes and movements for which democracy is a hated enemy -- regimes
that oppress their own peoples and movements that aspire to do so. We draw
a firm line between ourselves and those left-liberal voices today quick to offer
an apologetic explanation for such political forces.

6. Opposing anti-Americanism
We reject without qualification the anti-Americanism now infecting so much
left-liberal (and some conservative) thinking. This is not a case of seeing the
US as a model society. We are aware of its problems and failings. But these
are shared in some degree with all of the developed world. The United States
of America is a great country and nation. It is the home of a strong democracy
with a noble tradition behind it and lasting constitutional and social
achievements to its name. Its peoples have produced a vibrant culture that is
the pleasure, the source-book and the envy of millions. That US foreign policy
has often opposed progressive movements and governments and supported
regressive and authoritarian ones does not justify generalized prejudice
against either the country or its people.

8. Against racism
For liberals and the Left, anti-racism is axiomatic. We oppose every form of
racist prejudice and behaviour: the anti-immigrant racism of the far Right;
tribal and inter-ethnic racism; racism against people from Muslim countries
and those descended from them, particularly under cover of the War on
Terror. The recent resurgence of another, very old form of racism, anti-
Semitism, is not yet properly acknowledged in left and liberal circles. Some
exploit the legitimate grievances of the Palestinian people under occupation
by Israel, and conceal prejudice against the Jewish people behind the formula
of `anti-Zionism'. We oppose this type of racism too, as should go without
saying.

11. A critical openness
Drawing the lesson of the disastrous history of left apologetics over the crimes
of Stalinism and Maoism, as well as more recent exercises in the same vein
(some of the reaction to the crimes of 9/11, the excuse-making for suicideterrorism,
the disgraceful alliances lately set up inside the `anti-war'
movement with illiberal theocrats), we reject the notion that there are no
opponents on the Left. We reject, similarly, the idea that there can be no
opening to ideas and individuals to our right. Leftists who make common
cause with, or excuses for, anti-democratic forces should be criticized in clear
and forthright terms. Conversely, we pay attention to liberal and conservative
voices and ideas if they contribute to strengthening democratic norms and
practices and to the battle for human progress.

12. Historical truth
In connecting to the original humanistic impulses of the movement for human
progress, we emphasize the duty that genuine democrats must have to
respect for the historical truth. Not only fascists, Holocaust-deniers and the
like have tried to obscure the historical record. One of the tragedies of the Left
is that its own reputation was massively compromised in this regard by the
international Communist movement, and some have still not learned that
lesson. Political honesty and straightforwardness are a primary obligation for
us.

(From "Elaborations")

We repudiate the way of thinking according to which the events of September
11 2001 were America's deserved comeuppance, or `understandable' in the
light of legitimate grievances resulting from US foreign policy.

. . .

This opposes us not only to those on the Left who have actively spoken in
support of the gangs of jihadist and Baathist thugs of the Iraqi so-called
resistance, but also to others who manage to find a way of situating
themselves between such forces and those trying to bring a new democratic
life to the country. We have no truck, either, with the tendency to pay lip
service to these ends, while devoting most of one's energy to criticism of
political opponents at home (supposedly responsible for every difficulty in
Iraq), and observing a tactful silence or near silence about the ugly forces of
the Iraqi `insurgency'. The many left opponents of regime change in Iraq who
have been unable to understand the considerations that led others on the Left
to support it, dishing out anathema and excommunication, more lately
demanding apology or repentance, betray the democratic values they profess.

. . .

Vandalism against synagogues and Jewish graveyards and attacks on Jews
themselves are on the increase in Europe. `Anti-Zionism' has now developed
to a point where supposed organizations of the Left are willing to entertain
openly anti-Semitic speakers and to form alliances with anti-Semitic groups.
Amongst educated and affluent people are to be found individuals
unembarrassed to claim that the Iraq war was fought on behalf of Jewish
interests, or to make other `polite' and subtle allusions to the harmful effect of
Jewish influence in international or national politics -- remarks of a kind that
for more than fifty years after the Holocaust no one would have been able to
make without publicly disgracing themselves. We stand against all variants of
such bigotry.

Nice, isn't it? According to the authors, we are anti-American, anti-Semites, Communists, Marxists, apologists for terrorists, defenders of authoritarian regimes, and supporters of people who are all of the above and worse. Now why on Earth would the Malkins want to endorse this document? What a mystery.

But seriously, folks. I'd suggest that all of you familiarize yourselves with this little document. You'll be hearing about it all over the place. It'll be brought up by conservative bloggers every time they want to make some lame comparison between sensible, moderate liberals and us radicals. Maybe it'll gain enough momentum that it'll break free of the computer screen and appear on television or in opinion journals. And everyone who cites it will neglect one key fact: There's nothing particularly liberal about it. The authors throw around words like "egalitarian" and "social justice" to mask the fact that their policy only relates to "the Left" in the most general of terms.

Seriously, read it for yourself. The Manifesto includes such earth-shaking pronuncements as:

3. Human rights for all
We hold the fundamental human rights codified in the Universal Declaration
to be precisely universal, and binding on all states and political movements,
indeed on everyone.

4. Equality
We espouse a generally egalitarian politics. We look towards progress in
relations between the sexes (until full gender equality is achieved), between
different ethnic communities, between those of various religious affiliations
and those of none, and between people of diverse sexual orientations -- as
well as towards broader social and economic equality all round.

5. Development for freedom
We stand for global economic development-as-freedom and against structural
economic oppression and environmental degradation.

15. A precious heritage
We reject fear of modernity, fear of freedom, irrationalism, the subordination
of women; and we reaffirm the ideas that inspired the great rallying calls of
the democratic revolutions of the eighteenth century: liberty, equality and
solidarity; human rights; the pursuit of happiness.

I realize that in today's political climate, some of the above are (sadly) incredibly controvertial statements. But for the most part, they're middle-of-the-road statements. The ride the fence, tipping over to the right just long enough to take a shot at "the Left" before returning to the mushy middle. Maybe they're not deliberately shilling for the right, but that's exactly how their work will be used.

I'd like to close with the Manifesto's own conclusion, which pretty thoroughly summarizes its lunacy:

It is vitally important for the future of progressive politics that people of
liberal, egalitarian and internationalist outlook should now speak clearly. We
must define ourselves against those for whom the entire progressive-democratic
agenda has been subordinated to a blanket and simplistic `anti-imperialism'
and/or hostility to the current US administration. The values
and goals which properly make up that agenda -- the values of democracy,
human rights, the continuing battle against unjustified privilege and power,
solidarity with peoples fighting against tyranny and oppression -- are what
most enduringly define the shape of any Left worth belonging to.