There was an interesting lil screed in yesterday’s WSJ. At the risk of being considered a “spoiler,” I’m only going to quote the last paragraph:
In the end, we have to face the fact that political intolerance in
As with most things in life, it ain’t the destination…it’s the journey. And so it is with this particular article. It goes without saying (yet I will say it)… “Read The Whole Thing.” The methodology used to reach the conclusion stated above, as well as comparative samples of intolerance and perception on both the Right and the Left are much more than interesting…they’re instructive.
My personal experience leads me to believe intolerance on the Right is increasing, rather than
decreasing. I’ve long ago given up on Liberals and their intolerance…which was one of the principal reasons for my conversion from moonbat Liberal to conservative politics over 25 years ago. While Ronald Reagan was the catalyst for my political conversion he also brought my uncomfortable feelings and thoughts about Liberals into razor-sharp focus, partly because of his optimism. Another factor was the oft-related tale about how he and Tip O’Neil, his political nemesis, could sit down at the end of the day and have a couple of drinks together, regardless and in spite of their political differences, which were as significant in their time as the differences that exist between our current president and Speaker. But…outside the realm of science fiction or satire, can you seriously envision SanFranNan and Dubya having cocktails at the end of the day? Dubya, yeah.
But. Let me go back to intolerance on the Right. Ann Coulter is my lightning rod in this space. Coulter routinely demonizes the Left, insults them, slanders them, etc. etc.. And she’s quite good at what she does…her use of language is excellent, her metaphors and analogies are well-crafted, but in the end? Her message only widens the political divide, it doesn’t do a thing to narrow it or reach some sort of consensus. I suspect her intent is to incite, rather than inform. And entertain, of course. It helps me to think of her as an entertainer, rather than a serious commentator. I feel essentially the same way about Michelle Malkin. Ms. Malkin is every bit as good as Ms. Coulter, and every bit as annoying, in my book. And lest you think I’m only bashing women conservatives, I’ll add Michael Savage and Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs…just for balance.
Why isn’t it enough to point out the inconsistencies, illogic, and lack of success in the Liberal approach to something, anything? Lord only knows there are enough facts on the ground to discredit most Liberal cant, and one can offer up alternative arguments…cogently and dispassionately…without resorting to insults and demonization. Demonization is what the Left is (very) good at and from my quite possibly naïve POV, we conservatives should be above that shit…waaay above it. But we’re not, unfortunately. At least in my experience.
I need more Victor Davis Hansons, Christopher Hitchenss, and Mark Steyns in my life, and much less of the Coulters and Malkins. Yeah, Mr. Steyn can be insulting as Hell when he wants to be, as can the others. But insult isn’t the stock in trade of the three pundits I’ve cited. You may not agree with their politics, but at least they don’t consider you an evil being. Stupid, perhaps, but not evil. Stupidity, after all, can be cured, and Lord knows those guys are trying.
So. I wish we, as a people and a culture… on both the Right and the Left… would start trying to see people as people. We all differ from time time, but MOST of us aren’t evil, and MOST of us want what is best for the
One other thing before I go: stop sending me all that insulting and lowest-common-denominator humor shit about the other side. I’m sick of it, and I don’t want to get sick of you. Coz I really like you when you’re not so intolerant. If the shoe fits, and all that.
And let me add: there's a difference between political humor, which can be pointed yet funny (e.g., political cartoons), and insulting, demeaning crap. There is a difference. If you don't understand that difference...or, in other words, if there's any doubt in your mind... then don't send it. To me, anyway. Thank you.
/rant
Understood, Buck. That's why I Left a certain blog - the beginning of "my new life," so to speak - and hung out here.
ReplyDeleteI miss the old days in politics, too. The Congress members had much better manners back then and genuinely respected each other. I was so impressed by that part of our political heritage. I hear it's really poisonous there now. And you're right, it isn't that the issues today are so much more dire than they were in, say, the 1930's. Or in almost any other time in other places around the world. Although maybe going through WWII bound us closer together after such a scare.
But now we seem continually to be exasperated that the other side doesn't see what is so obvious to us - and we have so little patience or energy to listen or debate our points respectfully. And this is at a time where we need to be especially clear.
We take ourselves so darn seriously, too. We've turned into those old cranks that used to sit on the front porch and carp about every little thing. Where are the grownups these days?
Anyway, your humor is one of the many reasons I enjoy reading you, Buck. You have a sort of gentle, wry understanding of human nature. And you're a heck of an analyst, too. :)
Good point, and easy to act-upon, until you perceive the following to be taking place:
ReplyDelete1. Harm being done where good is intended;
2. A misunderstanding of cause-and-effect and/or human nature that consistently leads to #1;
3. The process repeated a few times, with significant cost to all.
Now to be fair about it, about a generation ago this is what led a lot of intolerant liberals to become intolerant liberals. They saw some Christian conservatives as racists, bigots, chauvinists, and later on homophobes. They saw racism as a product of a world view that was fundamentally wrong. Once you recognize that, it seems there's a moral obligation to be "intolerant" of it. Otherwise, injustice results. That's what "To Kill A Mockingbird" is all about.
Well, now we have the same silly world view going on the left side, just under a different flavoring. Some of yesterday's conservatives thought people inferior if they had darker skin; a lot of today's liberals think something is hideously wrong if we don't all have the same amount of money and income. What's even worse, is I'd say nine out of ten of those equal-pie people don't even understand that this is what their philosophy is (even though, when you inspect their positions on the issues and look for an all-encompassing theme, that's the only one that is sustained).
It's just as foolish and dangerous as racism ever was, for ultimately it seeks to diminish and extinguish the human species.
Another problem with liberalism nowadays is that frequently whatever principle is involved, is jettisoned in favor of advancing the political agenda. I would cite as examples...the feminists backing Bill Clinton, at a time where he became the very picture of what they are supposed to be opposing -- a white male in a position of great power, bullying, intimidating, and silencing women in order to hang on to that position. Or...labor unions taking membership dues from "workers" who wouldn't be in favor of the left-wing legislation or candidates the union supports, and using that money to provide support to those items.
I guess the point I'm coming to here, is that it's not that rare an occasion that too much tolerance might be regarded as dangerous. Or, at least, injurious. Sometimes, a little intolerance can be helpful in figuring out what's going on. Blocking off certain bunny-trails that have been demonstrated by history to be wasteful of time and resources, and harmful to people.
Besides, isn't it inherently self-contradictory to be intolerant of intolerance? :-)
Now that having been said, I'm with you in ranting against the naked childishness. When it goes on and on, solely for the purpose of a "Who's With Me?" kind of a thing rather than to offer new information, or a new way of looking at it. You say you hate X, I know I hate X, we agree that X is a loathsome thing, there's not a whole lot more to be said. Some folks labor under the delusion that there still is a great deal more to be said, and scribble away and jaw away about it all day & all night long. This generates a great deal of heat and very little light. It's the dark side of blogging.
Bec: First: thanks so very much for the kind words.
ReplyDeleteSecond: Agreed on the importance of taking the time to understand and being especially clear. The issues we face are daunting, especially the intersection of terrorism, multi-culturalism, and our "rights." If I read you correctly, you're using Maha as an example... and she and her audience are way too busy Hating the opposition (loudly, shrilly, and vociferously) to acknowledge or even hear any points we might make. And if conservative points are made in her space, one is likely as not to be banned in short order. After being shouted down and insulted, of course. I don't comment any longer in the Fever Swamps of The Left. It's useless to try.
OTOH... Liberals receive exactly the same sort of treatment at some Righty-Blogs, as Our Friend calls them. I abhor that phenom equally, and that was the point of my rant. Lex runs a pretty good shop in the "let's all be adults" category and visiting Lefties ALL seem to notice. There's dialog and debate there, not insult hurling, with the exception of trolls, who are called out and usually slink away after figuring out their tactics don't work in that venue. So...we can get along, if we want to. And therein lies the rub, methinks. A lot of folks simply don't want to get along. Fighting is more fun, innit?
Morgan sez: Besides, isn't it inherently self-contradictory to be intolerant of intolerance? :-)
The answer, of course, is "Yes," handled strictly as a logic problem. But I'm not gonna go there... ;-)
Interesting points, especially where racism is concerned. I'm not sure that racism was a product of a certain world-view, though. I think racism was a world-view all its own, once upon a time. And still is, in certain quarters... here and abroad.
The point I'm on about, though, is the abandonment of Classical Liberal Values on both sides of the aisle. "Abandonment" may be too strong...perhaps "diminished" is the word I'm looking for. One can readily and easily see the symptoms on the Left , but when the symptoms appear on the Right... things like gay-bashing (physically or verbally), the harassment of women outside of abortion clinics (and the murder of doctors practicing abortion), and the application of universal epithets towards those we differ with ("dirty, smelly hippie")... I get pretty danged UPSET. Most of these things aren't "bunny trails," they're a matter of LAW (abortion), nature (being gay ain't a "choice"), and opinion...just to expound upon my three examples. Classical Liberalism, as I interpret it, encourages the individual to be just that: an individual, free to choose and live as he pleases. Hopefully with respect and understanding from his fellow individuals.
All that said: I'm NOT a frickin' Utopian. Just a former moonbat who wants to live in peace and have the occasional conversation where we can examine our differences... respectfully... and point out stupidity and ignorance when we see it. Respectfully, of course. Except, perhaps, for Heidi. ;-)
Liberals have made their own beds(and they still own the majority of the press)...I salute Ann, Michelle, and Radio folks like Glenn Beck and Mike Savage...without a doubt if Libs had their way we would all be gun free, speech free, and sent to re-education camps.
ReplyDeleteYou have to fight fire with fire....
You bring up some excellent points. Most conservatives tend to see themselves as above the ad hominem attacks that their liberal peers delight in. When liberal positions on such topics as global warming can be so easily defeated on the basis of faulty logic and less than rigorous scientific methodology there is little need to question the parentage of their chief proponents. In fact, to do so only serves to undermine our own position. Attacking an individual causes them to stiffen their position - right or wrong. Mark Steyn is an excellent example of a political commentator whose stock and trade is attacking the position not the individual - but then again he is a Canadian and our neighbors to the north were raised to be more polite that us arrogant Americans.
ReplyDeleteYes, intolerance on the right is increasing but in some respects that is not necessarily a bad thing. As Barry Goldwater famously remarked during his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in 1964: "I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." But we must remember that it is the deed that is intolerable not the individual promoting it.
Liberals are often misguided by the media or their peers or just haven’t shed the idealism of their youth – or to quote Winston Churchill, “anyone who isn’t a liberal by age 20 has no heart. Anyone who isn’t a conservative by age 40 has no brain.” Our task, therefore, should be to enlighten our confused and befuddled liberal acquaintances rather than ridicule their ignorance of the true nature of the world around them.
But we also need to keep our guard up against those that argue for a more bipartisan approach to governing the nation. Bipartisanship means compromise and there are some fundamental tenants of our government, such as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, that should never be bargained away.
Mark (from up the creek with Lin)
I like what you say, Mark. And your references (i.e., the Goldwater/Churchill quotes) are impeccable! ;-)
ReplyDeleteThere are degrees of extreme, though. Reagan is my role model here... While the man may have lost his optimism and sunny disposition in private, he never showed it in public. And he was a past-master at skewering people effectively with all the ad hominem krep. He was also relentless in pursuing his objectives. It's the tone of our political dialog that I find offensive these days.
But then again, there haven't been any fist-fights on the floor of the House or the Senate within my memory, unlike other days. So perhaps it's not as bad as I make it out to be, eh?
One of my favorite political sayings is "Conservatives look for converts while liberals look for heretics." S'true, that.
Dang. Typos 'r' Us. When I said ...people effectively with all the ad hominem krep. I meant people effectively withOUT all the ad hominem krep.
ReplyDeleteSheesh.
I am so torn on this.
ReplyDeleteI want us to fight back and defend ourselves.
But on the other hand, I don't want to see us stoop to their level and use their tactics in getting our message out.
For that reason ... I can see both sides of this ... and that alone makes me uncomfortable. I want to think there is a right way to do this .... and the other way, which is what the liberals do.
*sigh* I don't think I am making any sense. However, I DO adore Victor Davis Hanson and Mark Steyn and Charles Krauthammer (I don't have Christopher Hitchens on my list.) However, at times I can agree with Ann Coulter and Michael Savage and Michelle Malkin too.
I don't want to see us limit ourselves and how we are going to fight. But ... if we can do it while taking the high road, then I think we prove that we are just a little better than they are.
However, my problem is .. do we have to prove we are just a little better than they are? Or is the goal for all of us to find a way to live together before we rip each other to shreds and mess up our country in the process?
Heck, I don't know .... I only have questions, not answers.
Thanks for letting me participate in this discussion. There are some very bright people posting here.....
Sharon sez: However, my problem is .. do we have to prove we are just a little better than they are? Or is the goal for all of us to find a way to live together before we rip each other to shreds and mess up our country in the process?
ReplyDeleteI think it's a given that we, as conservatives, have the better approach and prescription for "what ails us" as a nation. And there's anecdotal evidence that we ARE, in fact, better people... for the most part... when it comes to a civilized level of discourse.
That said, I think you've hit the nail on the head, Sharon. We MUST find a way to live together. IMHO that begins with respecting the other. There's precious little respect on the Left these days, but as Mom used to say... "If Johnny jumped off a cliff, would you jump, too?"
And what's that other saying? Something like "Love your enemies... It drives 'em nuts!"
You're right about bright folks posting here... my commenters provide all of the intelligence to be found on these pages. And for that I'm eternally grateful.