As George Lakoff and the Rockridge Institute explored in our recent book Thinking Points (Chapter 6), conservatives regard security as the use of force, while progressives view security as protection. To make sure that our ports, our infrastructure, and our troops are protected is part of the progressive understanding of security as protection. Bush's policies take the conservative conception of security to its absurd conclusion. It emphasizes the use of force to challenge threats and potential threats to the exclusion of other tools, such as diplomacy. Secretary of State Rice or other officials are dispatched to shore up support for military action, not to broker political compromises that would make military action unecessary. Even providing adequate body armor, part of the progressive concept of protection is security, is not a priority to this administration.
That explains a lot, doesn't it? The use of force actually makes me feel insecure. But not the conservatives, apparently. How to solve this problem is beyond me.
No comments:
Post a Comment
New policy: Anonymous posts must be signed or they will be deleted. Pick a name, any name (it could be Paperclip or Doorknob), but identify yourself in some way. Thank you.