Thursday, March 20, 2008

Really Stupid FSP Tricks

Not that Martin Watcher needs any help from me, but Isaac Smith's ninnyish attempt to allude that MW is a racist needs to be addressed.

It is an article of the progressive faith that conservatives are by their very nature racist. However, anyone at least remotely hinged to reality knows that this isn' t case. For Isaac and his progressive comrades, the word racism, like fascism, has no meaning other than as a label for people with whom they disagree with on policy. Sadly, Isaac has a history of doing this.

Isaac's smoking gun of racism is a Youtube mash up of Obama and Jeremiah Wright mixed in with Malcolm X and Public Enemy's Fight the Power. Salem Radio official and former producer for the Laura Ingraham Show, Lee Habeeb created the video. Any reasonable person watching the video will not see any racism in it. In fact, it is a novel example of a point many have made that Obama's speech did not sell. But in the progressive mindset, to point that out is... racist.

Isaac also points to a McCain campaign staffer, Soren Dayton, who has been suspended for disseminating the video on his blog, as another example of racism. However, Drayton was fired not for promoting a racist video (which it clearly is not) but, for running afoul of McCain who said that Obama should not be held liable for Wright's views. This is an obvious tactic given that he can't call out Obama for Wright after not disavowing anti-Catholic bigot John Hagee's endorsement (he should have). Then again, Hagee wasn't McCain's spiritual mentor.

Getting back to my main point, this is the same old trick. Progressives label their opponents as racist to paint them outside the realm of legitimate discourse, thereby absolving themselves of having to make an argument.

I guess they don't teach argumentation in bureaucrat school.

Isaac's chickenshit post is more proof that Trilling's assessment now applies to progressives. They do not, "express themselves in ideas but only in action or in irritable mental gestures which seek to resemble ideas."


Martin Watcher said...

I know politics bore you, but I feel like a hypocrite talking to you, you and your racist friend.

I don't think he can call me racsist, but maybe he is trying to say They Might Be Giants are racist. I mean, they wrong the song about the exact situation being described by Barack Obama's speech the other day.

Isaac Smith said...

Mark: your attempt at high dudgeon is sad, really. My post wasn't directed at MW specifically, but at Republicans generally: You guys have a long way to go before you can claim the moral high ground on race relations. No, not all conservatives are racists -- far from it -- but it's pretty well established that the Republican Party owes much of its success in the last 40 years to stoking racial division, from opposing desegregation to demonizing Latino immigrants. (Yes, I know, it's illegal immigration that the GOP wants to eliminate, but a lot of Latinos can't tell the difference; hence their enormous swing to the Democrats in '06.)

To get down to specifics, if you don't see why a video portraying Barack Obama as a dangerous radical in the mold of Malcolm X could be intended to play on white fears of angry black men, you need to get out more. It's a very old story in America. The fact that this video, along with the Obama-is-a-secret-Muslim whisper campaign, comes from conservatives is only going to cement the impression that Republicans have nothing to say to black America except dredging up old stereotypes.

I mean, why is Obama's relationship to Jeremiah Wright being subjected to such scrutiny, something neither John McCain nor Hillary Clinton have had to face? Even Mike Huckabee recognizes that churchgoers don't necessarily subscribe to everything their pastors say. And I think it's abundantly clear that Obama has a far more conciliatory view of race in America than Wright. The fact that some conservatives continue to conflate the beliefs of Obama and Wright says more, I think, about their motivations, than about either of Obama or Wright.

I must say, BTW, that it's fascinating to read your stuff: It's a world where up is down, liberalism is fascism, and Exxon-funded non-peer-reviewed "studies" of global warming is science.

Mark Newgent said...


I was not trying to claim any moral high ground. I was merely pointing out that you did and have in the past slurred those who differ on policy, which is what you did today. You admit that yes the GOP wants to stop illegal immigration yet you slap them with the label of xenophobe. Well which one is it?

The comparison was of Wright to Malcolm X, and Obama’s equivocations and evasions of the issue, not a comparison of Obama to Malcolm X. That is pretty important distinction. Second you totally ignored my main point that the video was one example of many as to why Obama’s speech didn’t sell. You can’t see past your own progressive tropes to notice that. Your link that supposedly confirms conservatives having nothing to say to black America, rebuts assertions, which were never made.

Of course Obama has a far more conciliatory view on race than Wright. You can play the straw man game of “some conservatives” conflating the views of Obama and Wright, but as I said earlier you are essentially responding to an assertion no one made. Show me where in the examples I linked to that make this conflation.

You think conservatives can’t get past old prejudices (real and imagined) because we can’t or don’t want to embrace a post racial America. The truth is that we share a vision of a post racial America along the lines of Shelby Steele, Ward Connerly, and Tom Sowell, who have been arguing for a post racial America for decades. The problem lies in that Obama used this post racial rhetoric to argue for conventional leftwing big government agenda that will do nothing more than re-entrench liberal racialism and the racial spoils system that Steele and Sowell have fought against. But that is not an argument you are willing to deal with either because you can’t see it or don’t want to see it.

As far as your up is down assessment of my world, it really confirms what I’ve been saying about how the left uses the false consciousness.

I do not equate liberalism with fascism. I simply agree with Jonah Goldberg’s thesis in Liberal Fascism that modern day liberalism, which is progressivism, shares many traits with fascism. If you read the book you might know what I’m talking about. But you wouldn’t judge a book by its cover now would you?

You can cry Exxon-Mobil all you want; it just shows that you would rather paint those you disagree with as outside the realm of legitimate discourse than engage the subject. After all in your world, I “don’t meet the basic threshold for participating in the climate change debate.” Going by your logic then you are a tool of General Electric, Goldman Sachs, British Petroleum etc…

Also it might help your argument if you actually linked to a report that I cited, which was actually funded by Exxon-Mobil. Economic analysis of proposed legislation doesn’t need to be peer-reviewed by scientific journals. If that is your standard then explain the Naomi Oreskes debunked “peer-reviewed” study that supposedly claimed that no scientific literature contradicted the so-called consensus.

streiff said...

Actually, Mark, what Isaac said was that yes the GOP wants to stop illegal immigration but Latinos are just too stupid to differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants. This goes back to the plantation mentality that infests the left and the Democrat party. They have "black leaders" (Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and Heaven knows there is little if anything the Rev. Wright has said that Al Sharpton hasn't. At least Wright hasn't precipitated mob actions akin to lynchings resulting in deaths).

The notion that the Republican party, which provided the votes to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 opposed desegregation is just egregious nonsense especially when "massive resistance" to desegregation was carried out under Democrat governors and some of the most violent opposition to desegregation occurred in that Republican stronghold of South Boston.

When you don't have ideas, slurs are your best friend. When your readers are historical illiterates, then revisionism is a viable strategy.

P. Kenneth Burns said...

true...but let's be fair though. Everything withstanding, Issac would still be the pot calling the kettle black.