« Gaddafi's latest, greatest idea? Islam should become the religion of all Europe | Main | Rep. Steve King (R., Iowa): Obama "Nationalized Your Skin and Everything Inside" »
August 31, 2010
Why do Prominent media hosts equate Christian and Muslim violence?
Topics: Political News and commentariesWhy is it and how is it that liberals, especially prominent media hosts, equate Christian violence with Muslim violence. While I've often wondered this myself, but have always placed the blame on stupidity and an extreme application of moral equivalence run amuck, Denis Prager offers an answer today over at NRO. However, according to Prager, it narrows down to "Leftism":
[...] So how did Tavis Smiley, Michel Martin, and Chris Cuomo make such morally egregious statements?Read it all ...The answer is not that these are bad people, or that they are not repulsed by terrorist violence.
The answer is leftism, the way of looking at the world that permeates high schools, universities, and the news and entertainment media. Those indoctrinated by leftist thinking become largely incapable of making accurate moral judgments. They once regarded America and the Soviet Union as morally similar. Today, they claim that the people they call Christian "extremists" (who are they?) and Islamist terrorists and their supporters pose equal threats to America and to the world.
That is how bright and decent people become moral relativists and thereby undermine the battles against the greatest evils -- Communist totalitarianism in its time, and Islamic totalitarianism in ours.
The only solution is to keep exposing leftist moral confusion. One problem, however, is that in countries without talk radio, an equivalent to the Wall Street Journal editorial page, conservative columnists, and a vigorous anti-Left political party, this is largely impossible.
The other major problem is that the media that dominate American life have little problem -- indeed, they largely concur -- with the foolish and dangerous comments made by their mainstream-media colleagues. That is why these comments, worthy of universal moral condemnation, were ignored by the mainstream (i.e., left-wing) media. Instead, they directed mind-numbing attention and waves of opprobrium toward Dr. Laura.
Those who don't fight real evils fight imaginary ones.
After reading Prager's entire article, then reading through John J. Ray's (M.A.; Ph.D.) exhaustive article on the topic, "The Motivations of Political Leftists," I'm inclined to beleve that Prager is on to something. According to Ray, Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists (and the media socialists/liberals) to this day, and as Ray reminds us, it was Hagel that said, ""All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State" (and we all know how much leftists love the state - and big government) If this doesn't remind you of the ideology of Barack Obama, his fellow liberal Democrats, the prominent media hosts, and much of the mainstream media, you just haven't been paying attention.
Among many other things related to Leftism, Ray writes that U.S. Democrats HATE Bible-believing Christians:
I look at that question at some length here. But briefly, there are 3 interrelated reasons:And then there's the matter of the Left's support for Islamic extremism, and how it fits in with their hate of Christianity:1). Real Christianity (as distinct from the social Christianity that denominations such as the Episcopalians are known for) and Leftism are rival religions. That explains both the historic Soviet Communist opposition to Russia's strong traditional Christianity and the opposition of the U.S. Democrats today to the still strong following for traditional Protestantism in America.
2). Real Christians favour the GOP very strongly in their votes. Although conservatism and evangelical Christianity are far from the same thing (otherwise there would not be -- say -- Catholic and atheist conservatives), there are two major ways in which evangelical Protestants and conservatives share a basic philosophy. They both believe that man is "fallen" and imperfectible and they both believe in the importance and supremacy of the individual in finding his own salvation and welfare. With such basic beliefs in common, the wonder is that the alliance between Protestant Christians and conservatives has not historically been stronger.
3). Leftists need to feel superior to someone else in order to boost their own ego. But being "superior" can only be relative. Superior to whom? So the Leftist always needs to feel superior to particular people or groups. There has to be some group that they don't need to pander to and which they are free to put down and hate. But Leftists are not supposed to feel superior to those people they could most easily feel superior to (homosexuals, blacks, poor people etc) so Christians, conservatives and others whom they see as permissible targets "cop the lot". All their hatred is poured out through the openings that their poses do allow. And Christians are one of the permissible targets. Though that old standby -- the Jews -- also seems to be making a comeback. And the fervour of hatred towards Christians that the Leftists currently pour out reflects both how limited their opportunities for preening themselves now are and how badly in need of propping up their egos are after their many defeats from the fall of the Soviet Union on.
Anyone who doubts that Leftists do see themselves as superior beings should trawl through the archives of my LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS blog for a while. That will set any doubts completely at rest.
The Left of the Western world seem unable to find a bad word to say about, or any will to resist, what has widely come to be known as "Islamofascism" -- the revival of Islamic supremacist thinking that became so influential among Muslims in the late 20th century and which graduallly impacted more and more on the Western world as time went by -- with the attacks on New York and elsewhere on 9/11/2001 being the most spectacular example of that.And as for moral equivalence itself, Ray aptly refers to it as "moral imbecility":Islamic thinking has always included major themes that Leftists have campaigned against to the point of hysteria in the Western world -- the belief in killing homosexuals, subjugating women, extreme sexual puritanism, theocracy, unconditional obedience to a divine being etc.
So how come such beliefs are anathema to Leftists in the Western world but evoke no protest if Muslims are advocating them? The Leftist failure to oppose reactionary Islam certainly puzzles many (including a small group of sincere Leftists and at least one feminist) but in fact it provides a good test of the account given here about what Leftism really is.
And the reason why the Left are friendly to Islam could hardly be simpler: As I pointed out in the beginning above, hatred of the world about them is fundamental to Leftists. They are people who are consumed by and fundamentally motivated by hate. And that is also true of the Islamofascists. Both groups are great haters. And they hate the same thing. They hate everyday Western culture. They hate the "system" of Western capitalism.
So what the Left advocate in the Western world is merely instumental to their desire to attack the prevailing culture. It is not fundamental to Leftism in any way. It is the underlying hate that is fundamental and they recognize as brothers in arms the haters of the Islamic world.
Another illustration of the quite foul depths to which the equality doctrine can sink is the repeated claim by Leftists of "moral equivalence" between very disparate people and groups. For instance, at the height of the Cold War, Leftists would routinely claim that Communist regimes and the economically successful "Western" democracies such as the United States were morally equivalent -- that neither was more blameworthy or praiseworthy than the other. When President Reagan called a spade a spade and described the USSR as an "evil empire", this was regarded as shocking and ignorant by US liberals. How anybody can see any equivalence between systems that murder millions without trial because of their suspected political views (as Stalin did in the USSR and Pol Pot did in "Kampuchea") and countries that either have no death penalty at all or agonize over every such penalty that they inflict (even when the penalty is for the most heinous crimes) defies imagination. Such "moral imbecility" is startlingly reminiscent of the psychopath and the role of psychopathy in Leftism will therefore be taken up later.Hating Christianity, loving Islam, unable to refrain from politically correct moral equivalence because of "moral stupidity" - all more or less fits like OJ's glove. But do yourself a favor and take the time to read Ray's entire piece - and you'll find yourself fully agreeing with Prager.
Suggested reading: The Psychology Underlying "Liberalism"
Posted by Richard at August 31, 2010 10:31 AM
Articles Related to Political News and commentaries:
