Idealism

It seems to me that leftists are almost invariably considered idealists. No matter how wrong they are about something people often excuse them by saying, "Oh, they're just idealistic." Perhaps the most egregrious example of this is communism, which, despite resulting in over 100 million deaths is often said to be "great in theory" but just bad in practise. Commies are just idealists. Perhaps this explains their embrace of Che.

<

Turning more towards the present day we find many of those same young idealists standing on the side of history that is against U.S. involvement in Iraq and, for a smaller minority, Afghanistan. Now, U.S. military action in both countries may or may not be wrong, but they certainly strike me as idealistic. What is more idealistic than spreading democracy and overthrowing dictators? Yet much of the left is against one or both of these enterprises.

<

On the economic front many of these same leftists also rail against globalization, an economic phenomenon that has lifted hundreds of millions of people in developing countries out of poverty. Don't believe me? Ask the World Bank:

The Bank's annual statistical report, World Development Indicators 2004 (WDI), released today, shows a drop in the absolute number of people living on less than $1 a day in all developing countries from 1.5 billion in 1981, to 1.1 billion in 2001, with much of the progress occurring in the 1980s. Between 1990 and 2001, the global decline in the number of extremely poor people slowed somewhat, falling by about 120 million -- from 1.2 billion to 1.1 billion people -- while the proportion of poor people dropped from 28 percent to 21 percent of the total population.

So, what then is an idealist? And looking at the political landscape today, who can really lay claim to that title?

<

Update: My friend Mike asks "What is so idealistic about going to war for oil?" While Mike is joking, I think, this is a point raised by much of the left. The war for oil argument, of course, makes little sense. If we just wanted it that bad we could have lifted the embargo and simply bought it -- sure would have been cheaper than the current effort there. But the war must be equated with oil, because to concede that it has a significant humanitarian aspect to it runs the risk of conceding the moral high ground -- something the left simply can not stomach. The political right in their eyes isn't simply wrong, it's evil.