RSS Feed MenuI have a lot of time for David Horowitz. He has written important books and a fine memoir. His organizational work on college campuses commands respect.
For those reasons, I am grieved to see that his attempted rebuttal of my post below on Glenn Beck conforms exactly to the pattern I described in my original piece.
My original piece observed:
When Glenn Beck made his Fox debut, some shrewd conservatives responded with a wink. Maybe the show was paranoid and hysterical. Maybe Beck was none too scrupulous about facts and truth. But why be squeamish? The other side did as bad, or nearly. And see how usefully he mobilized the base!
David’s response:
I don’t have a big quarrel with Frum’s view that Beck’s view of Cass Sunstein is “over the top” or off target. … Frum is right that Sunstein is not a raving leftist. … [But] Our country is under assault by a determined, deceitful and powerful left which will stop at nothing to realize its goals. Facing them, I would rather have Glenn Beck out there fighting for our side than 10,000 David Frums who think that appeasing leftists will make them think well of us. No it won’t. It will only whet their appetite for our heads.
In other words: Horowitz agrees that Beck’s attack on Sunstein was false. Yet that falsehood does not worry Horowitz. The country is “under assault.” (As the broadcaster Mark Levin has said, President Obama is “literally at war” with the American people.) In a war, truth must yield to the imperatives of victory. Any conservative qualms about the untruth of Beck’s defamation of Sunstein amounts to “appeasement” – an appeasement that will end with the left decapitating the right. This is the language and logic of Leninism. There is no truth or falsehood comrades, there is only service to the revolution or betrayal of the revolution.
Three thoughts in reply.
First, even in Leninist terms, Beck’s attack on Sunstein was stupid and counter-productive. Every legal conservative who cares about the issues of regulation and deregulation agrees that Cass Sunstein is the very best choice for the OIRA job to be hoped from a Democratic president. Had conservative opposition somehow derailed the Sunstein nomination, President Obama’s next appointment would almost certainly have been worse – very possibly, a lot worse.
Second, this right-wing Leninism exacts a terrible moral price. Notice that David Horowitz calls the left “deceitful” in his blogpost. Presumably that’s a bad thing. Likewise, when Rep. Joe Wilson shouted “You lie” at President Obama, he did not intend that as a compliment. So truth is important to conservatives, or at least we talk as if it were. Yet now David Horowitz tells me that it’s 10,000 times more important to “fight for our side.”
Third – how do we define “our side”? Horowitz harshly condemns Obama appointee Van Jones. Van Jones was eventually forced to resign not because of any of the allegations Glenn Beck hurled at him, but because the Gateway Pundit blog unearthed evidence that Van Jones had consorted with 9/11 denialists. So that’s the other side, right? Except… the American politician who most closely associates with 9/11 denialists is Congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul. And who acts as Paul’s chief TV enthusiast and publicist? Glenn Beck of course.
David Horowitz has strong feelings about 9/11 and the post-9/11 world. He helped to lead the campaign against Ward Churchill, the disgraced University of Colorado professor who argued that the United States had brought 9/11 on itself. Question for David: If Ward Churchill is “the other side,” on which “side” do we find Ron Paul? And isn’t that the same “side” where we find Glenn Beck?
Why would David Horowitz want to place himself there?
urban // Sep 16, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Please guys, just move to Somalia. It is the exact definition of how you wish the United States to be. No taxes, no governmental control…complete liberty! You are free to do whatever you want without socialists trying to regulate anything….they don’t bother to keep up transportation, food distribution networks, water safety, electricity or oil supplies. You can have as many guns as you want and do whatever you please!
Jim // Sep 16, 2009 at 6:19 pm
As soon as the socialists move to North Korea, Nicaragua, Venezuela or Cuba, urban.
Chris Balsz // Sep 16, 2009 at 7:27 pm
“So you are, by your definitions, a socialist. Just because you hate the idea of the private sector doing something doesn’t mean that it isn’t socialism if the public sector takes it over.”
But by your definition, I would not be a socialist if I sought government ownership and operation of every factory in town, except the florists. Because a “socialist” wants government ownership and operation of ALL means of production.
Most Communist states in the Warsaw Pact failed to meet your definition of “socialism”; they tolerated limited private agriculture.
“Do you think that Obama is a natural born American citizen?”
Probably. Hawaii is apparently pretty relaxed about helping anybody born there, prove it.
“Great. Then every Republican who is out there defending Social Security right now is a socialist. Enjoy your foxhole.”
Interesting point: how should political economists categorize putting over a Ponzi scheme, for the benefit of a state? Uberlumpenproletariat? It sure isn’t honest, or prudent.
agentprovocateur // Sep 16, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Even a mental health professional would never psychoanalyze anyone from a blog.
It is a pity that Charles Krauthammer has never learned that.
EscapeVelocity // Sep 16, 2009 at 8:55 pm
The greatness of this nation has always been dependent upon diverse opinion, open discussion without fear of the “thought police”. —txanne
Yes, now anyone who speaks out against the Left is a McCarthyist and Crypto Racist.
Thought police indeed.
Politically Correctness is running wild!
balconesfault // Sep 17, 2009 at 8:57 am
But by your definition, I would not be a socialist if I sought government ownership and operation of every factory in town, except the florists.
Interesting reducto ad absurdum. But meaningless to this discussion – because nobody could conceive of such a government, except for someone intentionally gaming the system to avoid the label of socialist. Clearly the intention of such a government would be complete ownership of all the means of production in society, with florists being a special exemption, so such a government would be socialist.
Most Communist states in the Warsaw Pact failed to meet your definition of “socialism”; they tolerated limited private agriculture.
There you have it – they “tolerated” this. The presumption was that ownership was by the state – with special permission granted for private ownership. I do not see any serious Democrat advocating such a position, or being anywhere near a slippery slope to such an argument.
Yes, now anyone who speaks out against the Left is a McCarthyist and Crypto Racist.
Nope. There are many serious conservatives who are neither McCarthyite, or racist.
The label is best saved for those who are.
As soon as the socialists move to North Korea, Nicaragua, Venezuela or Cuba, urban.
A reasonable point. Although Nicaragua and Venezuela both have active stock exchanges, which is a great indicator that a country is not “socialist” – but I’ll grant that Chavez is trying to move it to being a socialist country.
But anyone who would like government to completely own and control all property and means of production should look at North Korea and Cuba (and the former Soviet Union) as instructive.
Wonk Room » Irving Kristol And Conservative ‘Taqiya’ // Sep 22, 2009 at 3:12 pm
[...] that this approach is alive and well in conservative politics. Just look to David Horowitz’s response to David Frum on Glenn Beck’s hysteria, in which Horowitz concedes that Beck’s attacks on Cass [...]
Is Glenn Beck Good for Conservatives? Horowitz vs. Frum Round Two – By Jamie Glazov | FrontPage Magazine // Oct 18, 2009 at 2:03 am
[...] Frum disagree about whether Fox News’ Glenn Beck is an asset or a liability. From Frum’s New Majority blog and Horowitz’s NewsReal blog, the two have confronted each other directly on this issue. Now [...]
Beck Populist Revolution | The American Jingoist // Oct 29, 2009 at 12:29 pm
[...] Beck, according to David Frum, is “paranoid,” “hysterical,” “none too scrupulous about facts and truth,” and, perhaps [...]
NewsReal Vs. David Frum « NewsReal Blog // Nov 1, 2009 at 3:57 pm
[...] at New Majority, Whose Side is Glenn Beck on? by David [...]