Get PJ Media on your Apple

Roger’s Rules

Sam Tanenhaus’s ‘Original Sin’

March 5th, 2013 - 9:09 am

The second point revolves around the ideology for which Tanenhaus has been cheerleading: the big-government, stick-your-nose-in-everyone’s-business version of bureaucratic leftism that defines the Democratic (and, alas, much of the Republican) party’s elite. “The progressives’ case for entrusting government with more and more power,” Berkowtiz observes, “depends in part on the trustworthiness of government officials. If the editor of the New York Times Sunday Book Review and the editors of The New Republic can’t be trusted to present history and restate their political opponents views without flagrant distortion, why should partisan politicians on the left (or the right, for that matter) be trusted to exercise responsibly ever-expanding government power?” Good question.

But as I observed in my note for The New Criterion,

“historical accuracy is not part of Tanenhaus’s brief. Like ‘The Death of Conservatism,’ ‘Original Sin’ is an attempt at political demolition masquerading as journalism. It tells us a lot about The New York Times in its present configuration that the editor of its book review should be the author of such an intellectually dishonest, politically mischievous, and morally repellent essay.”

****

Cross-posted at PJ Lifestyle – Visit for another thread of comments

<- Prev  Page 3 of 3   View as Single Page

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (6)
All Comments   (6)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Republicans do have two interrelated problems. They do discriminate, picking ideas that numerically favor whites, but only coincidentallly so. It looks like racism to the mere blind when in fact it is a behavior selecting for personal success. The other problem is how difficult it is to seperate the plain to see advantages whites enjoy by embracing those ideas from the outward appearance that those ideas disfavor non-whites. An argument could be made that non-whites disdain those ideas because they would upset the minority cultural paradigm. IOW, race would lose its place in our political and cultural narrative if Republican ideas were given free reign. Upon a realization of that, the only defense is to keep the charge of racism alive, even if the polar opposite is true. The challenge is to find Republicans brave enough to say that.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
....and now I know those ancient tags don't work anymore.

How about these?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
The reasoning goes something like this: Calhoun supported states’ rights and limited government. He worried about the tyranny of the majority. He also supported slavery. Conservatives support states’ rights and limited government, they worry about the tyranny of the majority, ergo they are racists.

Cum hoc ergo propter hoc, in other words. Correlation is not causation.

Of course, don't try asking Tanenhaus to establish such causation. Ideological causation, really? He'll just blink dumbly at you. Unfortunately, so will pretty much anyone these days with pretenses to being qualified to handle ideas.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
In the 90's, Michael Ramirez noted the resegregation of America in one of his cartoons called IIRC "The Dis-United States of America".
It is a classic of his work in the way it not only slams the Multi-Culti Cult, but notes some good old-fashioned American regional differences.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
that happened to my comment?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It is so true that multiculturalism is the strategy for false antiracism, but is a form of resegregation. I should have added it to my blog on the fashion for "mean" that pervades our political culture. See http://clarespark.com/2013/03/04/romney-v-the-cultural-politics-of-mean/.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All