I am preparing a much larger and fuller post on the Iraq War and my opinions of the conflict nearly 8 years since its inception, but for now I just felt the need to make a smaller post on two particular issues I find very galling in regards to Iraq and the opponents of the war.
I was just briefly tuned into a blog tv session of a user I am a fan of when the issue of Iraq came up. The session was with a few other people of a lefty persuasion who fairly unambiguously rejected any notion of internationalism and were enthusiastic (explicitly stated) supporters of isolationism. What was at least refreshing in the conversation was an absence of the usual conspiracy theories and hysteria that relates to the 'New World Order' or the oil companies' plans for the Middle-East. Instead there was an unambiguously pessimistic view of the practicality of Operation Iraqi Freedom. What I found particularly interesting was the explicit use of the term ethnography, to relate culture (and as such necessarily history and tradition) to the political practice that resulted and thrived within that environment, in this referring to the possibility of democracy in Iraq.
One of the things that is always absent from the discussions on MultiCulturalism and Mass Immigration is the origin of these 'diverse' agents of progress. It's all very well and good preaching the value of a diverse demographic makeup if you worldview is limited to a rosy Middle-England bourgeois upbringing that struggles to acknowledge a significant separation amongst peoples that goes beyond language and cuisine. For example let's take the following statement: 'The Iraqi people do not want democracy.' There are numerous ways that this can and has been spun. This is also used to refer to the fact that democracy would not only not be the most ideal situation in Iraq but is quite literally impossible to ferment.
Of course you won't get anyone that makes up the Multi-Culti consensus to agree to this. Democracy apparently cannot work in large parts of the Muslims world, but we should regardless allow massive levels of immigration from these same areas we deem irreparably undemocratic to enter and participate in the make up of our nations. What's worse is that in reply to this they may even say that change would necessarily need to be internal and there may be indigenous democratic reformist elements within these nations. If that is the case, then why would we drain these areas of their potential reformers of the values these people are supposed to believe in. The same applies to the leftists that attempt to justify MultiCulturalism with pleas to extreme Neo-Liberal/ Thatcherite economic arguments. These namely range from the idea of stealing the most intelligent and skilled members of the population from the third world to enhance our own economies, and immigration practices that destroy the prospects of the white working class within this nation while shamelessly benefiting the rich and big business. It was supposed to be Mrs Thatcher that said that there was no society and that we're all only essentially economic agents, which in regards to the immigration discussion has become the dogmatic position of the modern left.
I would compare someone who disagreed with the decision taken in 2003 who out of spite/ stupidity decided to support the insurgency in whatever form they came as a result, to pacifists in the Second World War who opposed the conflict but in response to the bombing of German cities, declared their support for Nazism. It should surely be possible to disagree with your own government, while supporting democratic movements in foreign countries.
In other words to date, in youtube comment sections and at left-wing seminars you will routinely hear the left criticise America for supporting dictatorships, overthrowing dictatorships, funding pro-authoritarian militants, funding democratic revolutionaries, using sanctions, not using sanctions, interfering, not interfering. In my eyes as badly handled as the war in Iraq may have been the discourse that it produced in a swell of changing paradigms created after 9/11 have been just as poor if not worse than the ideas that spawned the supposedly terrible adventure in Mesopotamia. This leaves us in a bad state of affairs from an intellectual standpoint and an even worse state of affairs when it comes to dealing with the new and pressing issues of today, namely those of rogue regimes like Iran where even fellow Muslims in the region desperately wish for America to act which has sadly become paralysed by this breakdown in sensible discussion.