The Ignorance of Ignatius

David Ignatius of the Washington Post posits the UN as a world government, with all subserviant to their doctrines. Yes, another liberal fantasy, but how Ignatius gets to this conclusion exposes the depravity of liberal thought. He starts by endorsing the thesis of a book written in every lefty's favorite decade, the sixties:

A theory that explains the chaotic world of 2006 -- one where people from Baghdad to Beijing seem unable to cooperate on projects that would make them better off -- was written more than 40 years ago by an obscure American economist named Mancur Olson Jr.

The problem, he said, is that although everyone would benefit from the collective good of, say, greater security, it's irrational for any individual to make voluntary sacrifices to achieve it.

Let's pause for a second.

The endorsement of this statement means that every American who signed up for military service after 9/11 was irrational. Those lines of folk we see in pictures from 1941 signing up at their local recruiting stations after the attack on Pearl Harbor? Irrational.
Every firefighter who runs into a burning building, every policeman who breaks up a crime - irrational.
There are no heroes in the liberal mindset; no one is capable of putting thier own immediate safety ahead of the well-being of a group . People are inheritantly selfish, and bad, and cannot be trusted to be left to their own devices.

Here it comes:

Olson's escape from this conundrum was his recognition that it's necessary to compel the collective behavior that is in everyone's interest. Workers must be compelled to join a union; otherwise, they'll freeload.....

Told ya! Only the liberals know what is best for us, and the freedom-loving democratic activist Ignatius is on board with compelling us to do what he feels is best for us. And what does he feel is best for the United States, and the world, when it comes to international security?

In the international arena, the appropriate instrument of compulsion is not, as the Bush administration has believed, the United States. It is the United Nations. Making the United Nations effective enough that it can compel the common good is the right answer to Olson's paradox.

The United Nations, folks, is a better arbitar of values than the United States; that's what Ignatius is telling us. What about the pervasive stench of anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli bias? What about the UN's podium being used as a bully pulpit to constantly bash the United States, who finances the whole stinkin' joint? What about the fact it cannot even agree to apply sanctions to the most obvious abusers of international law (Iran, North Korea) and when it does finally employ sanctions (Iraq), they are used not to punish, but to enrich UN functionaries and the bureaucrats of signatory nations? What about those Human Rights panels that strictly focus on two nations, the United States and Israel, while the rest of the world's mayhem goes ignored and effectively endorsed? I'll stop here, but you know I have barely scratched the surface...

Ignatius so hates his nation that he is willing to force us (for our own good, of course) under the wing of an organization that loathes our values, our strength, and our strong economy; yet covets them all. We would be destroyed as a people and a nation under its juristiction; our military placed at the hands of despots, our economy subverted and taxed to enrich the UN's favorite client-states, and our values replaced with whatever pervison, be it liberal doctrine or Islamist Sharia law, that is the fashion of the moment.

Ignatius statement about the UN is the conclusion of his essay; he offers no factual support for his declaration for a worldwide UN government. And that is the functional dishonesty of Ignatius' writing - he knows what a hellhole the United Nations is, yet he is willing to give them full power over his country. You cannot reconcile love for America with a desire to be ruled by Kofi Annan and his small-minded ilk. A United States, under the UN, would not resemble the world's greatest nation, a country which has saved the world with its ingenuity, its overflowing economy, and with the lives of its fighting men and women.

This is the nation that Ignatius wants to subvert to UN values, because according to his favorite book, the people who produced its greatness were "irrational". Oh, there is irrationality here, and it sits with Ignatius and his undefendable doctrine. But don't worry; I'm sure he is being toasted in all of the liberal palours and embassies of Washington right now, while our security becomes strengthened by the UN's strong actions in the Middle East, Iran, North Korea, and the Sudan...