The difficulty of intellectually engaging the left

World Net Daily Dennis Prager

One of the more appealing aspects about being on the Left is that you do not necessarily have to engage your opponents in debates over the truth or falsehood of their positions. You can simply dismiss your opponent as “anti.”

Anti-worker: It all began with Marxism. If you opposed communism or socialism, you were not merely anti-communist or anti-socialist, you were anti-worker. This way of dismissing opponents of leftist ideas is now the norm. Anyone, including a Democrat, who raises objections to union control of state and local politics is labeled anti-worker: “anti-teacher,” “anti-firefighter,” “anti-nurse,” etc. This is how the unions are fighting California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s attempts to rein in unauthorized union spending of members’ dues to advance leftist political goals. He is depicted as an enemy of all these groups.

Anti-education: Those who object to the monopoly that teachers’ unions have on public education and to their politicization of the school curricula are labeled “anti-education.” Of course, the irony is that if you love education, you must oppose the teachers’ unions.

Anti-intellectual: If you object to the dwindling academic standards at universities, or to the lack of diversity in ideas there, you are dismissed as “anti-intellectual.” Given the universities’ speech codes, the intellectually stifling Political Correctness that pervades academia, and the emotionalism that characterizes most leftist views on campus (American “imperialism,” Israeli “apartheid,” “war for oil” are emotional outbursts, not serious positions), if any side seems to express anti-intellectualism, it would be the Left.

Anti-Semite: Leftists who attack Israel frequently claim that they are shut down by irresponsible charges of anti-Semitism. The claim is that people who criticize Israeli government policies are labeled anti-Semites. I have never come across a normative conservative or any other pro-Israel source that has labeled mere criticism of Israel as anti-Semitic. It is those who single out Israel of all the nations of the world for intense criticism, those who argue that Israel has no right to exist as a Jewish state (that it is, by definition, a “racist” state) who are sometimes charged – and sometimes validly so – with anti-Semitism.

Read the entire article.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

2 thoughts on “The difficulty of intellectually engaging the left”

  1. As a Californian I find Prager’s comments grossly misleading and offensive: “This is how the unions are fighting California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s attempts to rein in unauthorized union spending of members’ dues to advance leftist political goals. He is depicted as an enemy of all these groups.”

    First, California public employees already have the option not to have their dues used for political or campaign spending. Today, 25% of state employees contribute no money to their unionâ??s political activities. They have the right not to join the union and they have the right to vote out leaders who they believe are spending their money unwisely.

    Schwarzenegger’s proposal would force them to give written approval to use their dues for specific ads. This would force public employees to put their political preferences in writing. Prop. 75 only restricts public employees. It does not restrict corporationsâ??even though corporations spend shareholdersâ?? money on politics. The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics says corporations already outspend unions in politics nationally by 24 to 1.

    In the past two weeks Schwarzenegger has vetoed legislation opposed by corporate interests on the SAME DAY he accepted checks from those interests.On the same day he accepted a check from an auto insurance group Schwarzenneger vetoed a bill that would require the auto insurance industry to pay the claims of Medicaid beneficiaries injured in car accidents, and covered by the liability portion of their own policies. Medicaid pays those claims now and it amounts to a $250 thousand subsidy.

    In the last several years Schwarzengeer has proposed measures that would inflict tremendous economic harm on state and public employees. He has proposed abolishing the public employees pension system, and eliminating survivors benefits for the widows and families of policemen and firemen killed in the line of duty. He has slashed funding for public schools and has proposed that public schools be able to fire teachers without a cause or a hearings. Is it wrong for the unions to oppose this?

    Opposition to schwarzengger is not about a “leftist agenda” That is an outrageous LIE. It’s about preventing people trying to protect their rights and the public good from being gagged and silenced.

  2. I think this article is certainly out-of-date given our recent experience with Harriet Miers. The White House labeled those who opposed her as ‘elitist’ and ‘sexist’ and much more besides. Name calling is alive and well on both sides of the political divide.

    Though I do agree with Prager that it is a left-wing tendency. What does that say about the White House?

    In addition, Prager is also dead wrong on the subject of Israel. I am opposed to all foreign aid on principal. I can say that and get no hate mail. However, if I say that I am opposed to all foreign aid, including the billions every year to Israel, then I will instantly be branded anti-semitic. No if’s, no and’s about it. That is going to happen. No rational discussion of foreign policy concerning Israel is permitted. Give it a shot, and you will find out quickly that it is a taboo topic.

    I’d love to move past all this, but with the Republicans taking pages out of the SDS handbook, I don’t think we ever will.

Comments are closed.