Nimrod Gently | Sep 8, 2006 4:29:51 PM
No, you’re just really, really stupid or really, really desperate.

The exact same point I was making on another thread. Funny how consistent Dugger proves to be.

Funny how these folks always bring up the 60’s as the beginning of our moral decay. Any coincedence that it is when America started treating minorities and women as real people?

I’d revise Oliver’s final sentence like this: “We must do everything THE WAY radical Islam wants us to.” Because what D’Souza is really (apparently!) talking about is how liberal success in the culture wars is what has really incensed the Islamists, and if America had merely enforced rigid Judeo-Christian lifestyles (whatever that means) on everyone in the West they’d be more willing to live and let live. It’s BS, of course.

D’Souza has excerpts from his various books on his website, http://www.dineshdsouza.com/. I just hit the first one, “letters to a young conservative”, and immediately saw all I need to know about Mr. D’Souza’s viewpoint:

“Before the sixties, most Americans believed in a moral order in the universe that is external to us, that makes demands on us. Our obligation was to conform to that moral order. Earlier generations, right up to the “greatest generation” of World War II, took for granted this moral order and its commandments: work hard and try to better yourself, be faithful to your spouse, go when your country calls, and so on.
[...]
Liberals tend to believe in Rousseau’s proposition that human nature is intrinsically good. Therefore they believe that people who fail or do bad things are not acting out of laziness or wickedness; rather, society put them in this unfortunate position. Since people are innately good, liberals hold that the great conflicts in the world are not the result of good versus evil; rather they arise out of terrible misunderstandings that can be corrected through ongoing conversation and through the mediation of groups like the United Nations. Finally the liberal’s high opinion of human nature leads to the view that if you give people autonomy they will use their freedom well.

Conservatives know better. Conservatives recognize that there are two principles in human nature—good and evil—and these are in constant conflict. Given the warped timber of humanity, conservatives seek a social structure that helps to bring out the best in human nature and suppress man’s lower or base impulses. Conservatives support capitalism because it is a way of steering our natural pursuit of self-interest toward the material betterment of society at large. Conservatives insist that there are evil regimes and destructive forces in the world that cannot be talked out of their nefarious objectives; force is an indispensable element of international relations. Finally conservatives support autonomy when it is attached to personal responsibility—when people are held accountable for their actions—but they also believe in the indispensability of moral incubators (the family, the church, civic institutions) that are aimed at instructing people to choose virtue over vice.
”

At least he’s consistent, and I agree with his description of the differences between Liberals’ views and Conservatives’; but I think he’s the one on the wrong side of history. And I’m not going to be buying his books.

Wow, look who’s talking.

Did you notice that you can add tags to describe the book?

Do you think the cultural left bears some responsibility for 9-11?

My guess is that if your answer to that question is “No” you’re next step would not be to write a 304 page book explaining why.

Now what’s your answer to that question, Dugs?

Me? As a former bookseller, I’m confident that the good folks at Doubleday know their business.

“The Enemy At Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibilty for 9/11″

Nice. Dugs, you’re total idiot.

Full disclosure: when I was a Republican, I sent D’Souza’s “The Virtue of Prosperity” to all of my family as a Christmas present. It was particularly ironic because the book extolled the virtues of the dot-com extravagance about six months before the market disappeared. I still get shit for that.

But as Quaker points out, WTF is up with that title, The Enemy At Home? Obviously, D’Souza is not talking about terror cells in the United States, unless you think that the publisher is misrepresenting the book that seriously. Do you think that’s possible.

I highly doubt that the book’s central argument will be any different than what is presented in the press release.

And that they asked someone who hadn’t actually read the book to write the press release.

I suppose that the book, titled “The Enemy at Home” could really be about a visit with Mr. bin Laden at his mountain hideout.

But then, there might really be alligators in the sewers of New York City too.

Stoopider and stoopider.

Dugs, the press release is a summation of the book’s central argument to entice people to read it. Do you think that the publisher is deliberately misrepresenting the views of its own author? That would be rather surprising don’t you think?

Are you saying I’m wrong and D’Souza wrote that instead of Doubleday?

I believe I would see what the book itself says or the author himself (to evaluate it) rather than promo material from the publisher. To each his own, but if we take your position then there is no need to read any book is ther. We can just read a ten second blurb from the publisher and be done with it.

Apparently you haven’t bothered to read the press release:

D’Souza shows that liberals—people like Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Bill Moyers, and Michael Moore—are responsible for fostering a culture that angers and repulses not just Muslim countries but also traditional and religious societies around the world. Their outspoken opposition to American foreign policy—including the way the Bush administration is conducting the war on terror—contributes to the growing hostility, encouraging people both at home and abroad to blame America for the problems of the world. He argues that it is not our exercise of freedom that enrages our enemies, but our abuse of that freedom—from the sexual liberty of women to the support of gay marriage, birth control, and no-fault divorce, to the aggressive exportation of our vulgar, licentious popular culture.

The cultural wars at home and the global war on terror are usually viewed as separate problems. In this groundbreaking book, D’Souza shows that they are one and the same. It is only by curtailing the left’s attacks on religion, family, and traditional values that we can persuade moderate Muslims and others around the world to cooperate with us and begin to shun the extremists in their own countries.