Monart: "It's a Conspiracy" reminds me of the many anti-Rand articles, whose authors read very little of Rand, but who try not to refute her ideas, but to misrepresent, smear, and ridicule them so as to discourage people from reading her works for themselves. That the "...Conspiracy" article was written by an objectivist intellectual and published in an objectivist magazine is either a huge unfunny joke, or is a sign of incipient corruption that truth-seekers should expose and condemn before it spreads.”

Monart, and fellow truth-seeker, truer words have never been spoken - nor ever as eloquently. And the method you used to identify and accurately compare Bidinotto's "It's a Conspiracy" article, to the articles written by anti-Rand authors - that was positively brilliant. 

But you have to ask yourself, if an incipient, ridiculing, smear-merchant - which you infer Bidinotto is, if this person publishes an Objectivist periodical, then - what is he after? This is even deeper than you think, Monart. And there’s more to this than just a single mistaken article. Let me tell you that, after years of reading and closely scrutinizing this man’s writings, that there is a definite pattern that can be discerned. Monart, and fellow truth seeker, we need to take a deeper look at Bidinotto, as well as all of his closest associates. Obviously, this man poses a serious threat, not only to Objectivists, but to all of our fellow truth-seekers (you know, people like: Michael Moore, Louis Farrakhan, and the fans of LewRockwell.com).

Monart: “An article like Bidinotto’s “It’s a Conspiracy”, in an objectivist magazine, can only be taken seriously if it were intended as a parody — a parody of an article written with unchecked premises and unexamined prejudices, aiming to dismiss rather than dispute, to intimidate rather than inform, to ridicule rather than reason.”

Monart, and fellow truth seeker, that was very well said, and right on the mark. In fact, it was quite understated; Bidinotto is far worse than that, he's positively evil. Of course there was a time when this charlatan had me fooled, but no longer. And if anyone has any doubts on the depth of his depravity, one need only read a recent film review he wrote.

It's too bad, Monart, that your post could not be set to music; for a post like that is deserving of its own unique and original musical score. And properly, that score would be titled: The Concerto of Ridiculousness.

Sincerely,

Your fellow truth-seeker.

(Edited by George W. Cordero on 11/20, 5:05am)

June 3, 1997

 
American foreign and defense policy is adrift. Conservatives have criticized the incoherent policies of the Clinton Administration. They have also resisted isolationist impulses from within their own ranks. But conservatives have not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America's role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.
 
We aim to change this. We aim to make the case and rally support for American global leadership.
 
As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's preeminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?
 
We are in danger of squandering the opportunity and failing the challenge. We are living off the capital -- both the military investments and the foreign policy achievements -- built up by past administrations. Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal with potentially greater challenges that lie ahead.

We seem to have forgotten the essential elements of the Reagan Administration's success: a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States' global responsibilities.

Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership or the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of this century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.
Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw their consequences for today. Here are four consequences:

• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global
responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

• we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;

• we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Elliott Abrams    Gary Bauer    William J. Bennett    Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney    Eliot A. Cohen    Midge Decter    Paula Dobriansky    Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg    Francis Fukuyama    Frank Gaffney    Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan    Zalmay Khalilzad    I. Lewis Libby    Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle    Peter W. Rodman    Stephen P. Rosen    Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld    Vin Weber    George Weigel    Paul Wolfowitz