I’ll be on The Bill Meyer Show, AM-1440 KMED, Tuesday, January 14, at 8:10AM until 8:30AM.
Topics: drug decriminalization (good), and, if we get to him, Mandela (not so good).
Writes Robert Wenzel, editor of Economic Policy Journal:
“Earlier this week EPJ contributing columnist Ilana Mercer appeared on RT’s show “Crosstalk,” which is hosted by Peter Lavelle. After seeing an earlier edition of “Crosstalk,” I gave Lavelle and the show an enthusiastic endorsement. But, a funny thing happened on the way to Ilana’s participation on the show.
Lavelle provides brief but detailed background introductions of the two other guests appearing on the show with Ilana, when he gets to Ilana, he merely states that she is a paleo-libertarian journalist and writer. He fails to mention her important book …”
Here’s what happened on the way to the show: Participants are required to return brief answers to questions to indicate their positions. I complied promptly and with brutal honesty. As did I twice provide producers with a bio.
At the studio, I was told by Mr. Lavelle not to worry. He had prerecorded our credentials. Right away I suspected the worst when he proceeded to wax about the other two’s affiliations (but not mine), and their yet-to-be published books (but not my own published work). I have some experience with media’s reaction to my opinions. This is precisely why I mentioned my book first up. I had the feeling that it would go unmentioned.
Except for the “paleo” appellation, 100% of my bio was left off.
As I mentioned in discussion with Robert, it is not my affiliations RT had a problem with (WND, Economic Policy Journal, Jerusalem Institute for Market Studies), but my position and book (published in 2011) on the topic.
Mr. Lavelle intended to present me as a voice from the (Pacific Northwest) wilderness. Had the other two panelists not been the unsharpened pencils they were—I would not have gotten to speak up about the little I did.
The TV embed is reproduced in this EPJ article.
Not that I want feminists on my side, but were they in the habit of standing up for ALL women, they might have protested the marginalization of the only woman on this panel (even though my gender had nothing to do with my marginalization, not that that would have mattered to these generally intellectually dishonest fems, provided I was parroting politically pleasing opinion).
UPDATE: Granted, Mr. Lavelle may never intend to invite me on “Crosstalk” again for reasons noted above. However, he risks not getting controversial guests with whom he disagrees to revisit his set. Who would go through that exercise again for such shoddy treatment? Not me. It is, moreover, dishonest to lure guests to a studio (at the early AM), when there is no intention to treat their work with respect. When you make the effort, you expect that your work, which has gotten you the invite, will be at the very least mentioned.
Why would a consummate narcissist snap a “selfie” of himself at the funeral of Nelson Mandela?
How was it that a random gesticulator—and a very cool, creative guy, if you ask me—officiated as a sign-language interpreter at the Mandela memorial?
What could possibly have driven the handshake between dictator numero uno (the uncrowned king of the killer drones) and dictator No. 2 (Raul Castro)?
These are some of the weighty—evidently inexplicable—questions with which mainstream media are currently preoccupied in their ongoing Mandela monomania.
My homeland South-Africa is a dominant-party state where might makes right. However, due to the same malfunctioning media’s remedial revisionism, a “Rambo Nation” has been marketed to the world as the mythical “Rainbow Nation.”
To the American media, mining Mandela’s legacy has meant repeating the man’s fortune-cookie profundities and warmed-over wisdom.
RT TV, however—“Cross Talk,” in particular—has endeavored to dig deeper into the deceased leader’s legacy. The price I paid this week for smashing RT’s “Cross-Talk” set, so to speak, was this:
Despite twice providing producers with the necessary biographical details, my authorship of “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa,” chronicling “The Heart of Darkness” that is Mandela’s South Africa, was kept under-wraps. Concealed as well was my WND affiliation. (Having no make-up is plenty punishment to any woman, however, the duty to bear Christian witness trumped vanity.) The other panelists you are about to watch—Mandela hagiographers both—had their credentials, affiliations, and yet-to-be-published books advertised.
When truth is smuggled onto television, it is rationed.
Since WND has never rationed the truth, what follows is an excerpt from the book that dare not speak its name on Russia Today, much less on American Big Media.
“Mandela, Mbeki, And Mugabe Sitting In A Baobab Tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G” is the title of Chapter 4 in “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa.” It analyzes the significance of the unqualified support Mandela and his predecessors have lent to the Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe over the decades. The chapter includes a historic corrective to the glitterati-created myth that is Mandela …
JOIN THE CONVERSATION:
• At the WND Comments Section. Scroll down and “Say it.”
• On my Facebook page.
• By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” this week’s “Return To Reason” column.
If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive paleolibertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact email@example.com.
“Into the Cannibal’s Pot,” wrote Jan Mickelson, on November 6, 2013, “may be the most important book I’ve read in a decade. Just the insights in the introduction are worth college credits. Scary good.”
Mr. Mickelson is talk show host at News Radio 1040 WHO, out of Des Moines, Iowa. As we did once before, Jan and I will do some Mandela myth-busting tomorrow morning (Monday, Dec. 9), at the ungodly hour of 9:07 AM, Pacific Time, on Mickelson in the Morning.
UPDATE: Jack Kerwick: “… To cut to the chase, American ‘conservatives’ claim to prize the Constitution and the ‘limited government’ that it enshrines. But the vision of liberty for which the Constitution’s Framers seceded from England, a vision for which they pledged all, is antithetical to that of Mandela. … Mandela’s presidency launched his country on a trajectory that has resulted in making the new South Africa a place in which ‘more people are murdered in one week under African rule than died under the detention of the Afrikaner government over the course of roughly four decades. … ”
Bring back the vomitorium says I (I am well aware that the concept is misrepresented, but the misrepresentation is worth retaining. It’s a good one).
I have been able to avoid some of the solipsistic orgy over Obama—to say nothing of the obscene platitudes and paradoxes: The Ass With Ears spoke of “Preserving our individual freedoms” through “require[d] collective action.” Moron.
This morning, I gave a prerecorded interview to RT (Russia Today TV, where my Paleolibertarian Column features). It was a pleasant, polite, intellectually stimulating, and professionally conducted exchange.
Ideas were the focus, not personalities. It always is this way with RT.
My RT experience has been vastly different from my experience with American hosts. How? Well, the RT producer’s starting point is a familiarity with and interest in some of the work written by the interviewed individual. She’ll point out which aspects piqued her curiosity, what she’d like to explore on air, etc.
Wow. Intellectual curiosity and courtesy: What old-fashioned concepts!
On the other hand, inquiries stateside invariably begin with the host’s persona and perspective. As follows:
US host: “Like, hey, We want to interview you.”
Ilana: “Sure, what about?”
US host: “Check us out on YouTube. We don’t read.”
You are expected to come on a show and rap, move your mouth. If you’re as chatty and as self-absorbed as your hosts invariably are, then all’s copacetic. But if you’re a person who tends to use words sparingly and with attempted precision, you’re out of luck.
When my daughter was seven-years old, her school assigned her the task of describing her parents. On her father, daddy’s darling heaped unrealistic praise. For her devoted mother, this perceptive chatterbox of a child reserved a matter-of-fact appraisal. “My mother,” she wrote in her girly cursive, “is a quiet woman who speaks mainly when she has something to say.”
To that my friend, writer Rob Stove, responded: “If everyone rationed speech thus, the entire mainstream punditocracy would cease to exist.”
If he’s having a good day, your host may just exhibit a limited interest in you, not in your output, by sending you some obscure link or file that has caught his attention. The idea is that his inner world and current preoccupations should become your own.
In any event, if you want to interview me, do as RT does: Check out and choose a topic from my weekly output.
UPDATE (Jan. 21, 2013): The interview was on RT’s “The Truthseeker.” The process was fun and professional. The end result not ideal, as the sound conked-out on me and only a short snippet was harvested from the lengthy interview. There’s always a next time.
I will be a guest on The Jay Taylor Radio Show (“Turning Hard Times into Good Times”).
Date: Tuesday, June 26, at 3:30 EST.
Topic: Into the Cannibal’s Pot, as it applies to private property rights, gold in South Africa, and the backdrop to the establishment of Apartheid.
Jay Taylor is a New-York based investor and broadcaster, who invests and broadcasts in the intellectual tradition of Austrian economics. We met at the New York Junto gathering, where I was the month of May’s featured speaker.
I was delighted to hear that the topic of the talk—”Natural Rights in ‘Into the Cannibal’s Pot’: Abstractions or Facts of Life?”—resonated with Jay.
Jay is a treasure. Tune in to support his work. (And, it goes without saying, go easy on me.)
UPDATE I (June 26): You can listen to the show here.
UPDATE II (June 27): An MP3 of my segment is here.