Joe Klein was very angry last week at 'uncivil' bloggers, and in a storming fit of something that kinda looks like anger, only wimpier, came up with a list of attributes belonging to "left-wing extremists." I've gone through the list and added my own commentary.
Klein's list:
A left-wing extremist exhibits many, but not necessarily all, of the following attributes:
--believes the United States is a fundamentally negative force in the world.
Nope.
--believes that American imperialism is the primary cause of Islamic radicalism.
I think it is one cause. That's why cluster is in the word clusterfuck.
--believes that the decision to go to war in Iraq was not an individual case of monumental stupidity, but a consequence of America's fundamental imperialistic nature.
Again, there are multiple reasons, one of which is that we have practiced imperialism of a sort for a very long time (e.g., the Phillipines). We've become rather used to it. Also, the idea that, on the foreign policy front, we have engaged in serial "monumental stupidity" is not particularly reassuring. Of course, not all of us thought this was a good idea.
--tends to blame America for the failures of others--i.e. the failure of our NATO allies to fulfill their responsibilities in Afghanistan.
I don't blame the U.S. for the problems in post-invasion Afghanistan (the blame statement is actually so broad, it can't be refuted).
--doesn't believe that capitalism, carefully regulated and progressively taxed, is the best liberal idea in human history.
I'm actually pretty pessimistic about most things, so calling anything the 'best' is a pretty big stretch for me. I've never advocated overthrowing capitalism, though.
--believes American society is fundamentally unfair (as opposed to having unfair aspects that need improvement).
Why would I bitch about things if I didn't think they could be improved? This question is more of a Rorschach blot than one that can be seriously answered.
--believes that eternal problems like crime and poverty are the primarily the fault of society.
I would argue that's a liberal perspective, not an 'extremist' one. Like the others, it's so vague as to be ridiculous. I don't think we can make people better (or not very rapidly anyway), but we can create a society that is less conducive to crime and poverty. It's a matter of solutions--preaching better behavior hasn't typically worked out that well. Also, Klein's phrasing implies that poverty is primarily a moral failing, and not the absence of money. I don't agree--rich people can afford to be immoral (e.g., Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan), whereas the poor and middle class can't.
--believes that America isn't really a democracy.
I think our democracy is imperiled by some very authoritarian assholes. Consider vote caging.
--believes that corporations are fundamentally evil.
Nope. Just money-making entities to which the functions of governance should not be trusted given their raison d'etre.
--believes in a corporate conspiracy that controls the world.
No. I believe that we Jews control the world.
--is intolerant of good ideas when they come from conservative sources.
Nope.
--dismissively mocks people of faith, especially those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage.
'm one of the people who defends faith religion around these parts. However, I do mock intellectually inconsistent idiots, regardless of religion.
--regularly uses harsh, vulgar, intolerant language to attack moderates or conservatives.
Oh fuck. I'm in trouble. We all know the civilized thing to do is imply that someone isn't a patriot.
The whole exercise seems dishonest: most of the characteristics are so vague as to be meaningless. I guess that means I'm an extremist....
- Log in to post comments
I'm sort of puzzled by all the anger directed at "the Left" in America. When, exactly, has the Left ever been in power in the U.S.? Is there even a remote possiblilty that the Left will gain power? This anger at progressives from the likes of Klein or Christopher Hitchens seems to me to be completely out of proportion. America is the most conservative of the western democracies and that's unlikely to change (unfortunately). Look at the crop of presidential candidates. Where is the left-winger?
"-doesn't believe that capitalism, carefully regulated and progressively taxed, is the best liberal idea in human history."
Actually, I think he's got this one 99% backwards. Nearly all the liberals I know think that carefully regulated and progressively taxed capitalism is great. But what's all this "toss out the regulations" and "let's have a flat tax" we hear from conservatives?
It has really been amazing how the right-wingers have been calling all the shots, screwing everything up, and convincing a sizeable portion of Americans that all wrong is the fault of "liberals", and the gods help us if the people who have screwed everything up get tossed from power.
"Capitalism, carefully regulated and progressively taxed, is the best liberal idea in human history."
Personally, I'm rather fond of free speech and democracy. Well regulated and taxed capitalism comes in maybe third with me. I guess that makes me an extremist.
As to who really rules the world, are the Freemasons a cat's paw for the Jews, or is it the other way around?
having unfair aspects that need improvement
This claim in particular is one I've alwasy found amusing, in that sad sardonic way. Progressives are the people who believe this; conservatives, OTOH, believe we passed our peak some decades ago and have to return to that point because otherwise it's all downhill. The last thing they believe in is improving things.
I think capitalism was a thing long before it was an idea. The ideas about capitalism are many and varied, and I wouldn't know which one Mr. Klein was referring to.
Ah, straw man stereotypes of the ever-looming imaginary "left". The stock in trade of modern politics.
So does this article mean that we can drop the pretenses and finally just plain start classifying Joe Klein as a "right-wing pundit" now? Because seriously, you could have slapped Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly's or Michelle Malkin's name on this, and I don't think anyone would have really noticed the difference.
A few short comments: First, Joe Klein's list of left-wing extremist attributes was from back in March, not last week. Second, I think the list was mostly satirical, although he certainly does openly hold contempt for more liberal viewpoints. Third, in order to put that list in a better context, he did post a similar list of traits of right-wing extremists. Seeing both lists side-by-side helps reveal the hyperbolic nature of the attributes. The right wing list can be found at
http://time-blog.com/swampland/2007/03/because_i_promised_and_you_see.h…
Harry, thanks, that clarifies things enormously.
Though I still think that these lists say more about Joel Stein's state of mind and perspective of the world than they do tell us anything interesting about any supposed political "spectrum".
Richard:
To hate and despise the powerless is a hallowed American tradition. Actually, it's not unique to America; the Russian Czars hated Jews, who were largely powerless. The powerless, you see, can do little to fight back against anger. They are a safe target.
is intolerant of good ideas when they come from conservative sources.
Good ideas are good ideas. Klein needs to explain a method one could use to recognize the good ideas among the large majority of psychomarketing [school vouchers], base- activating [Shaivo], idealogical [laissez fair solves all -- health savings accounts] and out and out prostitution of our ancestors' brilliant creation for votes [unrelenting and dishonest crapping on the judiciary].
Oh yeah, almost forgot the lies [biggest hoax in American history]. A modest suggestion for Klein: let's see your list of good and bad conservative ideas.
Different camera angle, same scene.
and convincing a sizeable portion of Americans that all wrong is the fault of "liberals"
Good place to start, in general, not Science Advisor but abstractly. So, this will stop...when...by whom? In essence [I'm not blaming the left] they are being allowed to do this.
If one surveyed the left asking how Right Wing, Inc went from an extreme, minority wing of a minority party to control all three federal branches, a majority of state legislatures and governorships in 3 decades, I suspect the most common response would be "by lying".
No, that's the content. The methodology works with truthful content also. They have to lie -- Americans won't buy the actual goods they offer.
The actual campaign is, unfortunately, probably the greatest politcal coup in U.S. history. If that characterization makes sense to you, here's the next hurdle. Doesn't that strongly suggest there is something new to learn about how to do politics by studying how they did it?
"convincing a sizeable portion of Americans"...convincing is the key. What happened? The answer lies in data, not clever politcal debate about the subject.
and . . .
Richard & llewelly
What llewelly points out is generally true, but I think misses the point.
1) Anger against the left is carefully manufactured for the same reason that . . .
2) The war-on-another-Christian-fill-in-the-blank of-the-month club was instituted and . . .
3) The Discovery Insitute was founded and does what it does.
Getting their people into voting booths casting ballots. It's been extremely successful so far.
I see hardly anyone note that in order to successfully operate on their base via media, they have to reveal their tactics. There's data in their madness.
So, this is a big arrow pointing to at least one counter-strategy. A fundamental built-in weak point in their foundation, hidden in plain sight.
.
.
I'll stop the piecmeal. If I could upload a graphic here it would be the classic PLAN AHEAd.
If one surveyed the left asking how Right Wing, Inc went from an extreme, minority wing of a minority party to control all three federal branches, a majority of state legislatures and governorships in 3 decades, I suspect the most common response would be "by lying".