printSome of the deficient comments that have poured into the blog in response to “Hornbeck & The Tyranny Of Low Expectations,” and “In Defense of Bill O’Reilly,” have, naturally, not been posted because their deficient originators have audaciously distorted not only my views, but the actual text of my columns on the topic. That’s a low that’s not tolerated on this blog. Disagreement is fine; any distortion of the opinion discussed is out of the question.
Others complained bitterly about the fact that this writer does work from first principles —always has, always will. Principled positions demand a theory of human nature.
And what would the “Idiocracy” be without those who’re filled with venom on encountering an English word they don’t know. (“What’s a dictionary, Butthead? Hehehehehe“) Dogmatic plebeians are always poised, pitchforks hoisted, to enforce the lowest common denominator. Really, save yourself the heartache; if you hate people who value first principles and utilize the English language to the best of their abilities —there are an infinite number of writers who don’t violate the tyranny of no expectation. Oh what would the Founders have said if they read my mail box! (Jefferson actually answered all his mail in beautiful longhand and in an English to which we can only aspire. And, woe is me, he was a First Principles kind of guy).
When interviewed for a Canadian men’s magazine, I said this: “When people are rational, they observe reality as it is, and are more likely to be concerned with justice and avoid misplacing compassion.” Indeed, rationality and reality are the enemies of the petty minded and the evil. Thus, because I have fought the pseudo-science of pop-psychology and believe that guarding liberty rests on upholding personal responsibility and combating the “diseasing of society” by the professional class and their patsies —I am viewed as heartless.
Speak to me about compassion when you’ve volunteered your time as an AIDS and HIV counselor in South-Africa, and held in your arms the newly diagnosed —just one of the things this heartless rationalist has done. But then the slobs that have written in have probably never been out of this country; much less acquainted themselves with the world out there —and some genuine sorrow.
And to the same weak-minded slobs I say, “Don’t dare to impugn my daughter’s kind, dear heart.” Like her mother, she doesn’t misplace compassion. In South-Africa, when she was a very small personage —five or six —her cruel and exacting mom would get her to make sandwiches each and every time we went out together on errands. She was to give the food to the street kids. In SA, they beg on every corner and at every traffic light. Yes, she was taught how to develop authentic empathy.
My greatest achievement is my daughter. Moreover, I consider being loved by my child both an honor and an accomplishment. Children should show their parents respect, but they are not obliged to love them, especially if parents have not inspired love. When you have earned the love of your child —well, then, you have surely ARRIVED.
I’m sure those of the “Idiocracy” who’ve written in response to my Hornbeck articles inspire great love— in their slobbering pets.
Updated: Michele Lowe (see Comments Section) was the only left-liberal who attempted some civility. (Yes, this is as good as it got. But, swearing like sailors, and leveling ad hominem, never argument —they all demanded to be published on my private property: this blog). She points out that my opinion is a minority opinion. Again, the sum total of my non-deterministic world view —to which Viktor E. Frankl, the existential philosopher and distinguished psychiatrist, would certainly not object —is an infuriatingly simple contention: Hornbeck, who was given ample freedom, was capable of contacting his parents, or muttering under his breath to the cops, who picked him up on numerous occasions, and with whom he even filed a complaint: “I’m that kidnapped kid.”
In any event, having a minority, or unpopular, opinion in no way invalidates it. I (and other libertarians) was in a minority when, starting in September 2002, I argued against a war many of the truly heartless lauded. It turned out my minority opinion was correct.
Incidentally, speaking of misplaced compassion: where is the sorrow for hundreds of thousands of Iraqis we’ve killed and caused to be killed and displaced? I bet none of the low-brow, frothing-at-the-mouth types writing in has shed tears for those who really need them: Iraqis. But poised they are to pounce like rabid hyenas if one so much as suggests that their prototypical indulged youths can phone home if abducted, and given considerable freedom (and a cellphone) to dick about at malls, on the Internet, at sleepovers, and so on.
Updated Again: I wish to repeat one of the comments with which I interspersed a letter hereunder. The histrionic hisser mistook me for someone who has “traveled to the ends of the earth to give aid,” and declared that “If you have never experienced abuse or control in a relationship, you truly do not have the perspective to make such judgemental comments on this subject.”
Such statements leave me marveling at the intellectual sloth and cultural insularity evinced by so many Americans on this matter, and in general. First, information about me is available on this site. I was born in South Africa; I didn’t travel there to give aid. If it were me writing to someone, I’d actually bother to make sure I was correct about their biographical details, rather than ass-uming a whole lot of stuff about her or him.
Next, how insular and stupid must one be to believe that a woman with an adult daughter, who is from South Africa, and who grew up in Israel, having lived through a few wars in that country, has never known trauma and tragedy? Only in America! My background alone and life experience make it highly probable that I’ve experienced far more than have the pop-psych fetishists writing in to fulminate. See, the thing is, I don’t go telling everyone about my past traumas. And if I were so tacky, I would never demand special breaks for them. Try it: such conduct was once known as dignity and grit and formed the foundation of this now-crumbling soft society. As my mother would say, when pushed to “share” things she was too much of a lady to share: “I have my pride and my privacy, respect those, please.”
I can imagine the disapproval you’ve received about your views on this subject (and others). Those self-appointed standard bearers of morality tolerate no dissent, as tyrants seldom do. When I earn the disapproval of these tyrants, I know I’m on the right track.
Beware of those who club other people over the head with their own compassion. I remember way way back when I was a wee lad who’d made the mistake of majoring in English at the State University of New York at Buffalo. Pseudo-radical central. Dimwit professors whose closest encounters with suffering might have been writers’ cramp let me know all about the evils of our society, the racism, sexism, classism, homophobism, lookism, obesism, ad nausie-ism (it’s so hip to be oppressed!), and the common denominator there was that none of these dimwits did a damn thing for anyone except themselves. But hey, they knew all about what would make the world better, it was just a matter of helping other people become as wise and noble as they were. Yuck! I find much more compassion among the normal workaday folks these professors held in such contempt.
Sorry for rambling. My last comment: sometimes I enjoy getting pseudo-radical eggheads riled up into seizures. It’s fun! Hee hee. [You call sharing these experiences and attendant insights rambling? More of the same, please.]
Years ago, when I was taking a bonehead English class, they had us do writing assignments. Then they had everybody trade papers and write comments. The guy who got my paper (he raced cars on the weekend) made some comment to the effect that I must be deliberately using big words in my writing. No, I just read a lot, I have a fairly large vocabulary, I can spell, and I know how to use a dictionary!
When I was in sixth grade, I thought I’d end up with a bunch of degrees… the academic world, at that time, was my salvation from a not-so-great home life, and I thought I’d stay there forever (my father, especially, deserved neither love nor respect).
But now, at the ripe old age of 53, I have less and less respect for academia in general, a lot of it because of the ossified twits with Ph.D. (and other advanced) degrees, no principles at all, little real-world experience, and no common sense whatsoever.
Oh, yes, and in my old age I am beginning to see what a real accomplishment it really is to have the kind of family life you describe, and to have earned the love and respect of your daughter. That’s something I missed out on while growing up. Bravo to you, Ilana! [53 is not old age; it’s the new 43. I got a little heated in this post, but when people attack The Kid, as they did–well, then, I get cross. Glad you are back; we missed you, your big words…and your spellcheck.]
Hi, Ilana, and thanks. I’ve mostly been lurking. Couldn’t think of all that much to add to the comments, for a while.
People tell me that I don’t look 53, and I intend to go on fooling ’em as long as possible. 😉 (Just kidding.)
Hey, I think it’s great that you and your daughter stick up for each other. That’s what it really means to be a family, in the best sense of the word. [Well, we’ve been through our share of troubles.]
Hi, Ilana… I have no doubt that your family has had its share of troubles. As you told me once, we all have our demons. But I admire you and your family for the fact that you all have stuck together and worked through the troubles… that when all is said and done, your family members still love and respect one another instead of what many of us do.
It’s one thing to talk about sticking up for one another; your family actually walks the walk, and for that I salute you all.
[Thanks]
Ilana,
I’m not going to attack you for your viewpoint on the case of Shawn Hornbeck. Everyone has their opinion of this perplexing case. It seems you do have those who agree with you, but I would guess they are in the minority.
I agree our society has gone overboard with victimization on some aspects. But when it comes to children, and something like this happens, they truly are VICTIMS. [But I said so; what part of this don’t you get? “Shawn’s poor response to his predicament does nothing to change that he was a victim of a craven criminal.” Why are people incapable of rationally evaluating the wiggle room a teenager has to act as a responsible agent? Shawn was a victim, but this does nothing to change that he could have sought help.—ILANA]
You can’t blame the child for not thinking rationally and logically. They are not adults and don’t think in an adult manner as you know. That’s why we don’t let them drive, we don’t allow them to drink alcohol and we don’t allow them to vote or make important decisions. [But you do all give them cellphones and say, “Call home if you are going to be late.”]
I dare say that Shawn’s ability to think logically was stripped from him by abuse and domination by a stranger. Something you and I cannot fathom because it didn’t happen to us. It’s easy to judge what someone should have done or could have done, when you’re on the outside looking in.
After visiting your blog and reading your posts regarding Shawn Hornbeck, I have drawn two conclusions:
1. Regardless of your dexterous use of multi-syllabic words, you clearly do not understand the definition of ‘compassion’ if you think it extends to the victims of AIDS, but not the victims of kidnapping and sexual abuse.
[Some people with AIDS/HIV are responsible for getting infected–in fact, very many are. They infect others too. Some victims could have sought help. Both deserve sympathy, but are not totems immune to criticism.]
2. You must enjoy the thought of a 300 pound sodomite as a bed partner.
I will rethink my self-classification as a liberal [I’m a classical liberal, silly; look it up. It’s a Jeffersonian] from this point forward. Your blog contains the most disturbing ‘mainstream’ content I have ever read.
Marlayna Brown
Genita Love (genitaks@sbcglobal.net) here demonstrates the racism the typical left-liberal resorts to when crossed. The letter, typical of most, contained cusswords such as “bitch, “your bastard spawn,” and other demonstrations of the woman’s breeding. The grammar and syntactical infractions are entirely her own:
I didn’t believe my mother when she told me there were such critters as educated idiots!! Personally, to me, either way? Both of the above are idiots with out the brains God gave a piss ant! (Meaning you’re BOTH an Educated Idiot that lacks the Brains God gave a piss ant…- in addition to if you HAD a heart it would be a block of ice, and the blood nothing more than trickles of water from the block of ice melting!)
At least I have a heart and can hurt for that innocent kid that sexual predator took and harmed in so many ways!!! – Then again, Mom always told me that there are SOME people that are Poor White Cracker Trash…you’re their poster child for this year, thank you very much!
Ms. Mercer,
I’m probably what you’d call a left-liberal. In these days of polarization, it seems only the opinions someone disagrees with identify your political and social leanings.
However, I disagreed with Mr. O’Reilly’s position on the Hornbeck situation, and apparently yours as well.
I was an abused child, who knew something wasn’t right about my father’s interest in me, but still never locked my door at night, because HE told me not to.
I can feel true empathy for the Iraqis, and even the Afghanis for the war we’ve laid on both their doors, all because of the actions of a fraction of their population. [The Iraqis did us no harm] I have never felt the war in Iraq was acceptable, and I’m still trying to position myself regarding Darfur. [Out government is not allowed to use our tax dollars to police the world–not if the Constitution matters. Oh, I forgot, it doesn’t matter–not to today’s liberals and “conservatives.”]
None of this relates to Hornbeck though, who was horribly abused, many times a day, for the first month and more. [Naturally, this has already been PROVEN in a court of law. Left-liberals, like their nanny/police state conservative buddies, don’t really believe in the rules of evidence] I believe this child was conditioned to accept orders from his captor. I also believe he felt his own shame, even without true responsibility, for what happened to him. I believe that is what made escape impossible. [And a phone call–and e-mail; a word to the cops he interacted with? Out of the question according to the tyranny of pop-psychology and reductionism. You “believe”: now that’s a great foundation for a just prosecution.]
I accept that children did and often do amazing things under horrendously stressful situations. I applaud those children. However, I also know it’s wrong to imply that a child who didn’t escape his captor was willingly enjoying his situation.
For someone so “compassionate” as to travel to the ends of the earth to give aid [the intellectual sloth and cultural insularity evinced here, and in general, is truly amazing: information about me is available on this site. I was born in South Africa. If I write to someone, I actually bother to make sure I’m not ass-uming a whole lot of stuff about her or him], I implore you to show some compassion in this case. If you have never experienced abuse or control in a relationship, you truly do not have the perspective to make such judgemental comments on this subject. [How do you know I haven’t? More ass-uming? My background alone and life experience make it highly probable that I’ve experienced far more than the pop-psych fetishists writing in have ever undergone. See, the thing is, I don’t go telling everyone about my past traumas. Nor do I demand special breaks for them.] Yes, under normal circumstances most people could be rational in their thinking and know who to trust and who not to. But these were not normal circumstances. Devlin could have told him any number of things to keep Shawn under his control. Including that the police were friends of his – they did know Devlin from the pizza place. Shawn may have considered letting others know who he was, only to think better of it when he considered what the consequences might be IF things went wrong with the attempt. Devlin may have convinced Shawn that he (Devlin) had the apartment bugged so he would know Shawn’s every move. You cannot truly believe that there is no chance this boy HATED what was happening to him, but felt he had no choice. He obviously was convinced that there was no way out. It is shameful to blame this child. He deserves the same compassion you have shown the SA children. [The same admiration as kids who live on the streets, have nothing, and fend for themsleves? I dont think so, but then we have different values] Reactions like yours may be another reason he didn’t come forward…he felt shame for the things that happened to him and did not want to be judged because of them. [Judged for not e-mailing his folks?]
Ahhhhh, now THAT takes me back. The post by Marlayna Brown is rude, but the one by Genita Love is pure pseudo-radical gold! Everything about it takes me back to the atmosphere of my undergraduate days in the halls of pseudo-radical central. And I mean everything – the stupid fake name (heaven help it if it’s real), the shrill self-righteousness, the idiotic grammatical errors, the meanness, the frothing-at-the-mouth contortions – man, it’s all there! It wouldn’t surprise me at all if it’s a professor of “womyn’s” studies.