Why I’m not a Democrat anymore

I’m from a family of Democrats, was raised to be a Democrat, went to college and had Democrat professors echo in more erudite words the same things my parents and grandmother had always said about politics.  But always, there was cognitive dissonance.  I would read things, hear things, that just didn’t add up in the Democratic calculus of my family and teachers.  Things like nuclear disarmament.

This morning, right next to the picture of my daughter Elizabeth and the bishop in the New Mexican, runs the headline, Obama envisions nuke-free world.

Oh, for crying out loud.

Even as a relatively ignorant 17-year-old just starting college, I realized how asinine it was to talk about a nuclear-free world.  Earth to liberal professors and student activists:  THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE!  The nuclear disarmament movement was a big part of the cognitive dissonance that finally destroyed the fruits of my liberal upbringing and education.  I’d sit there listening to these earnest do-gooders talking about a nuclear-free world, and I’d think, yeah, just like the Japanese kicking out all the foreigners and extending their happy little medieval world of swords and samurai another couple hundred years.  But eventually Commodore Perry showed up, and the gig was up.

We live in a rapidly shrinking world, where there no simply no hiding from technology the way the isolationist Japanese did.  Nuclear technology has been invented, and it’s not going to be un-invented by do-gooder leftists simply wishing it away.  Frankly, I think Barack Obama (and a lot of other leftists in positions of power) are actually smart enough to know this, and they’re just talking the talk that all the starry-eyed idiots on the far-left fringe of their party want to hear.  At least I hope they are.  Because if they aren’t, we are in a world of trouble.

Comments 6

  1. Dan wrote:

    While I do believe that MAD has prevented the ravages of World War III upon the first world (We managed to inflict plenty of ravages on third worlders in our various proxy wars instead) I find myself wondering why some of the same people who oppose nuclear disarmament favor attacking other countries for wanted to build their own deterrents.

    Honestly the idea that that (for example) Iran is more likely to build a nuke and give it to Hezbollah/Hamas than some corrupt military commander in a former soviet state (including Russia itself) is to sell one to insert terrorist bogeyman here strikes me as borderline insane.

    Please note I don’t know your opinion on preemptive military action to prevent nuclear proliferation beyond your previously stated defense of the most recent Iraq War on those grounds and am not seeking to put words in your mouth.

    I think we’re all aware that even if all sides agreed to completely eliminate nuclear stockpiles that the US, Russia, China, Israel, and probably the UK would still keep some in a secret reserve. The real goal is of course to get them out of unstable and/or highly corrupt countries like Pakistan and Kazakhstan where they could easily find their way into the hands of fanatics who are unconcerned with the consequences of using them.

    Posted 08 Apr 2009 at 9:50 pm
  2. Brigette Russell wrote:

    I find myself wondering why some of the same people who oppose nuclear disarmament favor attacking other countries for wanted to build their own deterrents….Please note I don’t know your opinion on preemptive military action to prevent nuclear proliferation…

    This is something I’ve given a lot of thought to over the years. In theory, it does seem mighty hypocritical to tell other countries, “We get to defend ourselves, but you don’t.” In practice, it’s in the national interest of the US to keep countries like Iran from getting nukes. To be perfectly honest, it’s an issue to which I still haven’t worked out a perfectly satisfactory conclusion.

    I lean, however, toward the “US might makes right” argument, since if the shoe was on the other foot and the fundamentalist Muslim countries were the ones with nukes and the “Great Satan” was trying to develop them, there’s not a doubt in my mind that they’d be utterly ruthless in keeping us disarmed.

    Posted 09 Apr 2009 at 4:36 am
  3. Bowden Russell wrote:

    Obama’s view is utopian. Russia has engaged in a massive upgrade of their strategic nuclear forces and it’s ludicrous to think they’ll just walk away from their one trump card in the deck.

    The again, the US is now bankrupt and can’t afford to modernize it’s nuclear forces like Russia has and can continue to do.

    We had a choice between guns and butter, and we choose poorly.

    The time to pay the piper is at hand.

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 5:22 am
  4. Bowden Russell wrote:

    The = then in 2nd paragraph.

    Posted 14 Apr 2009 at 5:22 am
  5. Gordi wrote:

    I’d like to uslysht just a little additional on this topic

    Posted 26 Apr 2013 at 7:52 am
  6. http://socientize. wrote:

    Hey very interesting blog!

    Posted 14 Jul 2013 at 12:23 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *