The question asked was what should America do about ISIS?
I prefer not to be negative, but it’s required here. If you are old enough, you may remember an idea. It was held in the free world, in the decades before the break up of the Soviet Bloc, by a limited number of people who understood the philosophical foundation beneath the political ideas of freedom and liberty.
This idea expressed a concern that citizens of totalitarian countries would cease to be inspired to desire change because countries like America were steadily losing their image as the beacon of liberty and opportunity by slowly adopting policies in line with the fascist and socialist tendencies at the economic base of their totalitarian homelands. I’m wondering, especially with the availability of information on the internet, whether this idea is even more true today as relates to things like ISIS?
Let’s say you’re a normal young person living in a Muslim community almost anywhere. Your parents are just trying to make a living, support their kids, and enjoy their lives (the world is populated primarily by these people, not by Bin Ladens, the Saudi royals, or the political elites in America or elsewhere). You’re maybe between age 16 and 25 and you’ve been raised with few ideas outside of your religious life, even if they are the mainstream, non-violent, ideas. You believe there’s got to be more to life and you search the web about liberty and freedom in America and about the struggle of disenfranchised people, loosely of Arab and Islamic heritage. You are looking for meaning in life.
Today, for the average person, what would be so different about America if you didn’t know or understand the founding principles, basing your view on the speeches of current newsmakers, political or otherwise - or basing your judgment on the interpreted history of Carnegie, Morgan, Rockefeller, etc. and the modern history of decisions, personal and public, of leaders like Bill Clinton and George Bush?
In the wider conceptual sense, ISIS is the current result of the skepticism that develops among average citizens after a period of new philosophical development that has failed to provide opportunity for those willing, able, and interested in living life by seeking happiness through supporting their own values. Other examples of this in history are the rise of Roman Catholicism after ca. 500AD, the Reformation ca.1500AD, and the American experiment based on ideas ca. 1700AD. The current crisis is related to the failure of communism and socialism, with a background of America no longer providing a clear alternative. (This is not an academic paper, it was not edited, and these observations are not meant to represent the total of historical cause and effect, they are examples of one overlooked influence used here to make a point).
Yes, we have to protect our concrete and current interests as relate to the activities of ISIS and the activities of recent past, and future movements. But these challenges will never stop as long as America bases its policies, domestic and international, on principles inconsistent with those upon which the country was based.
The philosophical foundation of those principles in ethics and law do not need to be internalized by all citizens, but they do by people like those attracted to this site. Those principles are based in the metaphysics of Aristotle as extended by Ms. Rand and others now and in future, and by epistemological principles developed by Ms. Rand and others now and in future. We don’t all have to know about and agree on the axioms in meta/ep, but some of us must be able to reduce the concepts of liberty and freedom epistemologically to metaphysical axioms when the debate requires foundation. The founding fathers did some great things, but the previous part of this paragraph is the basis of their failure and the legacy we deal with today. Thanks, Jack