James Wolcott calls the central theme of Dinesh D'Souza's forthcoming book, The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, "a sleazy, shameless, ignorant, ahistorical, tendentious, meretricious lie, one that was waiting for the right brazen liar to come along to promote it, and here he is, and his name is Dinesh D'Souza, who's fatuous and fuddy-duddyish enough to think that it's Britney Spears, the rap lyrics of 2 Live Crew, and the buggering photographs of the late Robert Mapplethorpe that have Islam in a tiz."

Wolcott calls D'Souza a "patronizing little shit...an odious shyster," and tells him on behalf of lefties everywhere, "We're not the enemy, and if you engage us as the enemy, all you'll be doing is starting yet another war you can't win."

Comments

[Lex]

Shorter Dinesh D'Souza: "They attacked us because they hate our freedoms — and they were totally justified in doing so."

[Jeffrey Sykes]

Glad to see D'Souza's depth of intellect reviled in puerile terms by the usual suspects.

Where is the ability to counter his arguments without name calling and 8th grade schoolyard tactics?

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

I second that question.

[Ed Cone]

One of the key points of Wolcott's post (which at 1,560 words deserves to be judged on more than my excerpts) is that an idea as hateful and stupid as D'Souza's deserves a reply in kind.

[Jeffrey Sykes]

I don't find D'Souza's thesis hateful or stupid. I likely don't agree with it in its entirety, but at some point, someone needs to adress the impact of our trash/sleaze culture on the larger society.

I'm not the person to do it. As someone who prefers the cannon, I exercised my right to isolate myself from pop-culture long ago.

[Ed Cone]

Recognizing problems with popular culture, at home and abroad, requires only that one pay fleeting attention to it; saying "the cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the nonprofit sector and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world" [emphasis added] is, well, stupid and hateful, and arguing that it's not requires a moral relativism and lack of real-world perspective that does not demand serious rebuttal.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

"A reply in kind"? I thought we were looking for more civility in the blogosphere.

Where "hateful and stupid" are concerned, I prefer to judge for myself. Sounds like there's another book to read on my hiatus.

[Ed Cone]

Wolcott's post makes it clear why he thinks civility is ill-advised in this instance.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Ah yes, throw away civility. Declare "war".

By God, it's a bumper sticker!

[Ed Cone]

Wolcott's not the one who wrote a book blaming 9/11 on liberals.

That's the declaration of war.

Wolcott is saying that it's easy to ignore many of the vile things brayed in the name of partisan politics, but this one is too vile to let stand.

He's saying there's a level of exploitative bullshit that requires a strong response.

If you don't like his response, don't read it.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Ed, get a grip. YOU reprinted Wolcott's "response". It was YOUR POST.

A couple of points. First, I'm a big fan of free speech - may not like what you say (or draw or paint or whatever), but, alas, in this country you've got the right to say it. The post was odious because it resorted to puerile name-calling (as Jeffrey pointed out).

Second, I'm not a liberal. So I'm gonna throw out a softball here, and say I'm not "at war" with the "patronizing shit".

Third, I'm probably going to read the "odious shyster's" book now . . . and develop my own opinion about the merits of his arguments.

Fourth, I very much prefer civility.

[Dave Dobson]

Jeff - I think you got your link wrong - it just went to a bunch of books. Here's a real western Cannon.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Too funny.

[Danny Torrence]

"the cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the nonprofit sector and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world"

Yes, this is stupid because everyone knows that this anger was caused by George W. Bush, not only in the Islamic world, but in Europe, too.

The part about moral relativism makes no sense, please explain how it applies to this conversation.

The statement "Recognizing problems with popular culture, at home and abroad, requires only that one pay fleeting attention to it" also makes no sense in the context of this discussion.

It sure sounds like Mr. Cone thinks he has said something important and profound when in reality he hasn't said much at all. Maybe he should go back an read what he writes for clarity and logic before he posts it. It's also apparent that he hasn't read the book, so maybe he shouldn't be commenting on it.

[Michael]

D'Souza's is spot on and the left can't stand it because..At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child - miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.

We've been nice to the liberals for too long. They're thugs. The liberal dream is to control people, to oppress and exploit them for some 'higher' goal. ... liberals are always championing laws and social programs which are theoretically good for a class of people while being provably disastrous for people themselves: racial quotas, busing, welfare, my goddamned taxes. ... The core of the liberal belief is that the mass is more important than the man.

The principle feature of American liberalism is sanctimoniousness. By loudly denouncing all bad things - war and hunger and date rape - liberals testify to their own terrific goodness. More important, they promote themselves to membership in a self-selecting elite of those who care deeply about such things... It's a kind of natural aristocracy, and the wonderful thing about this aristocracy is that you don't have to be brave, smart, strong or even lucky to join it, you just have to be liberal.

[Bubba]

Money Quote of the Day:

"It's a kind of natural aristocracy, and the wonderful thing about this aristocracy is that you don't have to be brave, smart, strong or even lucky to join it, you just have to be liberal."

They needed to hear that, Michael.

Thanks.