Could the answer also lie in the oversimplification of typologies? The 2 (well, 2.5) party system, while quite effective, tends to unify groups with varying ideologies under the same political banner. Hence, we get 'traditional' liberals (champions of small government and the primacy of individual rights) in the camp with modern leftists (statist, collectivists). At the same time you get political Conservatives (dedicated to traditional Judeo-Christian values and Constitutional integrity) sharing an umbrella with Libertarians, Objectivists, and others. Many Libertarians view the Bush administration as the worst thing since Stalin. While the Objectivists rise to the level of their ideological integrity to recognize that the only two dishes on the table are food and poison... food being the rational choice for those that value life. Hence the overwhelming support for the
actions of this Bush administration from that end of the spectrum. Of that, I think Ms. Rand would approve.
Unfortunately the distribution of Americans underneath the out-moded definitions of existing political monikers is the likely culprit for so much ideological confusion. The only two choices on the table are Individual Rights versus Human Rights. (The ELF's attempts at terrorism notwithstanding there is no third choice, Humans Dead). Human rights (collectivism) favors the management of the population to their the greatest possible benefit for the maximum amount of people... often at the sacrifice of individuals to the benefit of tyrants (eh,Kofi!)
That should make it simple enough. Although I recognize (as do you) that it does not.
The only two choices on the table are Individual Rights versus Human Rights....
Human rights (collectivism) favors the management of the population to their the greatest possible benefit for the maximum amount of people... often at the sacrifice of individuals to the benefit of tyrants Good points. ZC may be witnessing the backlash that comes from one contry's utilization of the 'human rights' shield (appeal to the global village) while asserting it's 'individual rights' shield (we were here first) in it's affairs regionally. West Bank, East Bank, you've been to one bank you've seen them all.