64 of 76 people found the following review helpful
Insightful analysis, --- both riveting and frightening,
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The New Hate: A History of Fear and Loathing on the Populist Right (Kindle Edition)
Bigotry and ignorance. They are joined at the hip. They never die, and they never go away. They are shape-changers, always adapting and disguising themselves with new rhetorical garments to match the latest, shifting fashions in intolerance. Arthur Goldwag does a great job of tracking these beasts through their many incarnations over the past two centuries or so. Goldwag's narrative of those who have made an art of exploiting all that it is the worst in the American psyche brings to mind H.L. Mencken's famous quip: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." THE NEW HATE is a very important book - also beautifully rendered.
Tracked by 1 customer
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-10 of 10 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 18, 2012 9:49:12 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 18, 2012 9:53:41 AM PST
Stephen T. Squires says:
While it is spitting into the wind to say so, a biased book such as this is its own form of "conspiratorial" hate-mongering which turns the wheel, ...now however against what the author defines as the "populist right" so it appears. This book cannot begin to imagine the other side's arguments, at least what little I could wish to read of this for its ranting, all too apparently demagogic self-promotion. This book to me, seems far more about lefty agenda exaggeration of history, and left-wing "category" condemnations (alike with the left's "class warfare" demagoguery now). I have been increasingly wondering in recent years to what depths gay activists will sink in order to achieve their agenda of gay marriage at any cost (from glitter-bombing, to the very noteworthy recent obscene deconstruction of Rick Santorum's surname, for example), here apparently also to that level of projecting onto the "populist right" (whatever that is!) the very same behaviors as those they practice here.
To be fair, I would finish this book but for its own too screaming headlines. I have always been very sympathetic to gay activist agendas until now. But on this occasion, too angry activists like Goldwag may have overlooked one salient fact of hetero-marriage which forever sets such apart from gay domestic partnerships: the biological procreation of children. It is otherwise entirely unclear to me just why marriage should ever be governed by any laws from the state at all, but for protecting dependent biological children in the months-long process of pregnancy and then years-long rearing of them, and around whom so much of kinship & human relations have always depended. This being so when churches, not merely those "open & affirming," may otherwise suffice to sanctify any such unions, last I looked. No gays should ever be denied religiously "sanctifying" their own very loving partnerships, but why then also as a matter of state law pervasively (beyond their guaranteeing of partnership contract rights)? The fact of hetero-marriage as written into law on behalf of those dependent sudden little "blessings" is very much another question not precisely equivalent.
In reply to an earlier post on Feb 20, 2012 9:13:17 PM PST
Last edited by the author on May 27, 2012 9:56:24 PM PDT
Stephen Squires produces a prime example of libertarian stream of consciousness bill-schutt. He says nothing about the substance of the book. BTW, answering Squires, the populist right are: fundamentalist Christian nationalists, gold-standard libertarians and crypto-racists (Obama can't be an American!).
What "other side's arguments" did Goldwag not comprehend? Let's confiscate Mr. Squires's keyboard.
P.S. An A-com scan of Mr. Squires's book wish list reveals numerous conspiracy-oriented, anti-semitic and Civil War revisionist (Neo-Confederate) titles.
In reply to an earlier post on Mar 18, 2012 7:00:46 PM PDT
In reply to an earlier post on Mar 19, 2012 8:53:23 AM PDT
I was speaking figuratively and for rhetorical effect -- lost on you. OhGosch, you also missed the point about "The New Hate." This book is a documented survey of right wing demagoguery in history, citing numerous examples over time, and sadly, like hurricane season in the Gulf, keeps returning.
I don't merely disagree with Stephen Squires -- he is very wrong about the book, obsessively and unevenly nattering on about gay rights. This means he is not a serious discussant of TNH nor is his opinion relevant. If you want to disagree with an author, do so with a substantial rebuttal. Moreover, arguing with people holding a wrong or inaccurate perspective is rarely productive. They get threatened and just dig themselves in ever deeper, and claim, like you, OhGosch, that we are merely trying to shut them up. Not all opinions are equal, but like noses, everyone has one!
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 4, 2012 8:24:21 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 4, 2012 8:29:00 AM PDT
No, I didn't miss the point. Figuratively speaking or not that is an all to common response of the left. "Just shut up!" And/or respond with a condescending tone, as you did.
For the title of Mr. Goldwag's book to be accurate you must redefine the word hate. To be a "fundamentalist Christian nationalist, to favor the gold standard, or to doubt O's citizenship has nothing to do with hate.
"arguing with people holding a wrong or inaccurate perspective is rarely productive." All too true.
Yes, I am a "right winger fundamentalist Christian Obama doubter but none of that indicates hate of any kind. The caustic tone of your response on the other hand .............
In reply to an earlier post on Apr 4, 2012 6:32:02 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Apr 5, 2012 9:07:33 AM PDT
OhGosch, we've come to truth telling time here. Go to Goldwag's book, and click on the cover, the "go inside this book" option. You can read parts of the introduction and first chapter. As you can see, Goldwag is citing specific articles, books and radio/tv broadcasts. The authors of these outrageous and false comments do so out of their hatred for Pres. Obama and liberals in general. If hatred is not their motive, then they must be mentally unstable.
I started tracking the rise of conspiracy theories among the white far right wing in 2009. This behavior has only gotten worse. When Glenn Beck gestures to a photograph of Pres. Obama and tells his viewers "that is why I need a gun," that is a hateful and violent remark. Indeed, Glenn Beck's lies about the Tides Foundation prompted a mentally unstable white far right wing conspiracy theorist to arm himself and try to go to the TF to do violence. A shoot out with the Oakland, CA, police prevented him from doing this. Hatred is what drives people to violence, nothing else, and nearly all the current spate of political hatred comes from the white far right wing.
I am glad you are the kind of fundamentalist Christian who does not hate. And I am not telling you to shut up.
As for being caustic when faced with lies, bigotry and malevolent stupidity, of the kind Goldwag chronicles, or Squires' off-the-point agenda-izing above, I make no apology. I stand with the Hebrew prophets, John the Baptist, Jesus, St. Paul & Martin Luther -- also known for THEIR caustic remarks.
AS A POSTSCRIPT, I went to Goldwag's website. Here he lists comments from listeners to mega-conspiracy theorist and radio broadcaster Alex Jones, commenting on the Trayvon Martin shooting:
1) The Florida police set Zimmerman up as a patsy, in the hope that the ensuing scandal would get the Stand Your Ground law revoked and restrictions on gun freedoms passed into law, thus increasing their power;
2) Obama arranged to have Martin killed so he could demagogue against white people and revive his presidency;
3) The Jews are "a pack of deranged lunatics hell bent on world domination through the power of their god Satan";
4) "True patriot white Americans know that setting up negroes as our equals, since they clearly are inferior (just look at everywhere they live!) is foolishness. We need to put negroes back in their place though overturning civil rights, and denying them full rights as our founders intended";
5) "There's some decent, upstanding blacks, but far fewer these days as they slide deeper into the gutter - fostered by the gradual destruction of our morals and Christianity by Jewry. No doubt at all. Blacks also have built-in social pressures that reward degradation, helped along by greedy Jews in the media. Who do you think really owns the hip-hop music industry...."
I REST MY CASE, BUT I DO TELL T-H-E-S-E JONES LISTENERS TO "SHUT UP!"
In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 8:30:11 PM PDT
Lyla Diaz says:
We tell them to shut up because nothing they ever say is rational or reasonable. They can't speak to the question. They have no facts. Or if they have them, they can't articulate them.
Posted on Jul 3, 2012 3:16:29 PM PDT
I am not a fan of Obama's....but I do not believe this stuff from the extreme right wing. Its all garbage. Anyone with any intelligence can figure this out.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›