Jonah Goldberg, writing in the conservative National Review Online, attacks the left’s
post-election lament that those that voted for Bush are religious idiots. He invokes Nietzsche’s Will to Power and dismisses Marx’ idea of ‘false consciousness’. Check out this paragraph:
What Maher, Raines, and Smiley fail to grasp is that all morality is based upon transcendence – or it is merely based on utilitarianism of one kind or another, and therefore it is not morality so much as, at best, an enlightened expediency or will-to-power. It is no more rational to vote based on a desire to do “good” than it is to vote based on a desire to do God’s will. Indeed, for millions of people this is a distinction without a difference – as it was for so many of the abolitionists progressives and civil-rights leaders today’s liberals love to invoke but never actually learn about.
So, the left is the kettle calling the pot black. All systems of morality (e.g. religion or liberalism) are of equal dubiousness, but as Nietzsche argues, “they make life worth living.”
Mr. Goldberg goes on to say that he’s not very religious (and he obviously doesn’t “fall for” liberalism, either). My question is shouldn’t we be able to qualify different systems of morality? Aren’t some better than others (i.e. liberal utopianism vs. Christianity)? It seems like we HAVE to chose some system else chaos would ensue. Does Nietzsche, or anyone subsequent to him, help us make this decision?