SEPTEMBER 28, 2012 12:00 A.M.
The Tribe of Liberty
When Islamists lecture us, it’s time to circle the
wagons.
By Jonah Goldberg
We like tribalism for the same reason we like fatty
foods: We evolved that way.
Homo sapiens didn’t survive long on the African
savannas as rugged individualists. Alone, they couldn't scare away the scarier
animals, and, for the most part, they couldn't catch and kill the tastier ones.
But in groups, humans rose to the top of the food chain thousands of years ago
and have been passing down their tribe-loving genes ever since.
Customs and practices that ensured the survival of
the species were worked out through trial and error and passed from one
generation to the next. Over time, and with many setbacks, the knowledge
accumulated until we hit the critical mass required for modernity.
Indeed, the story of modernity is the story of how
we moved away from traditional, non-voluntary forms of tribalism based on
familial, ethnic, or even nationalistic lines and toward voluntary forms of
tribalism.
The American founding was revolutionary in its
embrace of the universality of human rights (even as it fell so short of its
own ideals with the institution of slavery). Since then, the West has fought
several civil wars to break away from various tribal ideologies, including not
just monarchism and imperialism but also Nazism (racial tribalism), Communism
(economic tribalism), and fascism (national tribalism).
In fits and starts, we've moved toward ever greater
voluntarism, which is a fancy way of saying we've moved toward greater
individual liberty. According to the American creed, no one, and no thing, is
the boss of me unless I agree to it. To a certain extent, that’s even true — at
least in theory — about the government, which is a representative institution
created solely by and for the people, who are sovereign.
But the instinctive attraction of tribalism endures.
The same drives that once pushed tribes to kill the villagers downriver still
reside in us. We've just learned to channel and check them better. Bowling
leagues, football franchises, high-school rivalries, motorcycle clubs, Goth
clubs: You name it, these free associations — what Edmund Burke called the
“little platoons” — satisfy our innate desire to belong to “something larger
than ourselves,” as so many politicians like to say.
Now, in the context of American politics, I would
(and often do) argue that the Left has grown confused about all this. It has
tried to turn government itself into a tribal enterprise of some kind.
Democratic politicians tell us that “Government is just the word we use for
those things we do together.” “We’re all in this together!” has become at once
a rationalization and a battle cry for larger government and higher taxes.
At their recent convention, the Democrats rolled out
a video proclaiming that government is “the one thing we all belong to.” This,
to me, is pernicious nonsense. The government belongs to us, not the other way
around.
But that is an argument for another time.
What got me thinking about all of this is the effort
by various Muslim leaders at the United Nations to lecture us about free
expression. Leaders who abuse and torture their own citizens for expressing
their ideas or faith seem to think they have standing to lecture us about the
limits of freedom.
Well, the tribe of barbarism doesn't get to lecture
the tribe of liberty about what freedom means. A few years ago, Dinesh D’Souza
wrote a book, The Enemy at Home, in which he argued that American conservatives
and Muslim conservatives should make common cause against liberals and
leftists. The book was predictably denounced by liberals, but it was also
rejected by conservatives.
Why? One reason, I think, is that whatever our
differences with American liberals may be, conservatives understand that our
argument with them is still within the family. The fighting is intense, but
we’re all trying to figure out what it means to live in this country bequeathed
to us by the American Revolution and the Enlightenment.
Well, the thugs haranguing us about the proper limits
of free expression aren't members of that tribe. They haven’t paid their dues.
Because the moral superiority of liberty is
irrefutable, totalitarians often feel the need to wrap barbarism in the
language of freedom. For example, North Korea calls itself the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea. Similarly, the Muslim Brotherhood stooge running
Egypt doesn't care about free speech or tolerance; he cares about his own
theocratic will to power — and making Americans grovel.
There are more practical reasons not to allow our
liberties to be held hostage to the blood lust of a foreign mob, but underneath
them all is the instinctual tribal refusal to let marauders tear down what we've built.
Jonah Goldberg is the author of the new book The
Tyranny of Clichés. You can write to him at JonahsColumn@aol.com, or via
Twitter @JonahNRO. © 2012 Tribune Media Services, Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment