To the Editor:
A few days ago, I had the “pleasure” of talking to an anti-war liberal outside the Barone Campus Center. As I stood there listening to him, I noticed a problem inherent in his argument, as well as in the arguments of liberals in general.
This problem is idealism. Though the conversation was mainly about the current situation in Iraq, we began discussing forms of government. The protestor described a society in which private property was abolished and everything was controlled by the government, a society where everyone shared the wealth evenly. We all know this as communism. Of course, when it came down to the actual implementation of communism, a disaster ensued as millions of people were killed. In theory it was a good idea but, alas, it is not very practical, for it suppresses the avarice of humans.
The majority of our talks did not center around communism, however; they centered around the current situation in Iraq. The protestor’s main problemwith the war was that innocent Iraqi civilians were dying. In his idealistic world, no one would die an unjust death. Sure, like communism, this sounds wonderful, but, like communism, it is also not practical. As tough as it may be to digest, in the real world people do die.
The United States has killed innocent civilians, but their deaths are a necessary price to pay to obtain our objectives; objectives which will make Iraq, The Middle East, and the world a safer place. It was George Bernard Shaw who said reasonable people adapt themselves to the world. This man I spoke with, as well as the majority of other liberals, are not being reasonable. They refuse to adapt to the real world and instead are floating in their own world full of unpracticalideas. We are currently living in dire times and it is most important that we buckle down and become practical. We need pragmatism, not idealism in times like these. For idealism, though sound in theory, can be used as a weapon when placed in the wrong hands.
Sincerely,
Greg Pasler, ’06
Leave a Reply