Category Archives: Media

Updated: Manners As Virtue

Ethics, Etiquette, Media, Morality, Pop-Culture

George Will once wrote that “manners are the practice of a virtue. The virtue is called civility, a word related—as a foundation is related to a house—to the word civilization.”

Will’s column, “Manners and virtue in a modern world, suggests that the ability to be courteous, kind, and mindful of etiquette in dealing with others is a reflection of something far more meaningful: one’s mettle.

Maybe this is why, other than hate mail, I respond to all letters I receive—to each and every one. Due to time constraints, my replies are laconic. But if someone bothers to read and comment on what I have to say, then it’s only decent to acknowledge the gesture. I haven’t always been firm in this resolve, but I try my best. If colleagues write, I always reply, whether I like them and their stuff or not.

Most pundits, however, don’t reply to their mail. That smacks of hubris and pride, almost always unwarranted. The younger sorts are plain punks. Since most are so uninspiring and mediocre, one wonders what they’re playing at, and why they’re not more modest.

Golda Meir’s zinger, “Don’t be so humble, you’re not that great,” is a relic from a time when false humility was at least still practiced. We’ll have to settle for something less clever. Can’t be bothered to answer your mail? “Don’t be so arrogant, you suck.”

P.S. The very popular and busy Dr. Daniel Pipes is polite. If you write to him, he’ll find the time to answer your questions. If I think of anyone else who rates a mention, I’ll update the post.

P.P.S. Pipes, ever the gentleman, sent this note: “What a nice refuge from the usual vulgarity! I completely agree with you that correspondents deserve a reply, even if a short one. And the quote from Golda Meir is beautifully apt.”

Update: I promised above to remind myself, as a “refuge from the usual vulgarity,” to use Dr. Pipes’s words, of the fine—and refined—individuals I do encounter along the way. Television ensures that the brainless, loud, airheads, whose intellectual output is as significant as a foghorn’s, loom large. They should not. So here’s a low-key shout-out to the brilliant and nice people I’ve had the pleasure to e-meet since I penned this post: Robert Spencer, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades),” Andrew Bostom, author of the Legacy of Jihad, and historian Bat Y’eor of the Eurabia fame. And yes, on the entertainment side, the irrepressible Michael Musto of the Village Voice. Nice people all.

Surprised By Hamas’ Victory?

Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Media, The Zeitgeist

A consensus has emerged according to which no one predicted that the “Palestinian People” would elect Hamas as their representatives—democratically.
It shows you what little attention I pay to the talking titmice out there, because I thought that when I called the elections, I was merely stating the obvious. I believed that a consensus existed according to which there would be no other outcome.
I foresaw both the victory in the municipal elections of 2005 and in the general elections of 2006. On January the 7th this year, I called Hamas “the Palestinians’ unofficial representative,â€? and spoke of a shoo-in for the terrorist organization. Apparently the precious few who read the forecast viewed it as comic relief. What are you going to do!
Isaiah Berlin said that an ideologue is someone who is prepared to suppress what he suspects to be true. Those who fetishize the Palestinians are ideologues who’ll put a spin on reality so that it’ll comport with their ideology.
To foresee the results of the recent elections in the Palestinian Authority, all that was required was a commitment to “unvarnished objective reality.” But no one wants to take an honest, hard look at the cruel complexion of Palestinian society—unless, of course, it is to blame the liberal, orderly commonwealth adjacent to it: Israel.

Surprised By Hamas' Victory?

Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Media, The Zeitgeist

A consensus has emerged according to which no one predicted that the “Palestinian People” would elect Hamas as their representatives—democratically.
It shows you what little attention I pay to the talking titmice out there, because I thought that when I called the elections, I was merely stating the obvious. I believed that a consensus existed according to which there would be no other outcome.
I foresaw both the victory in the municipal elections of 2005 and in the general elections of 2006. On January the 7th this year, I called Hamas “the Palestinians’ unofficial representative,â€? and spoke of a shoo-in for the terrorist organization. Apparently the precious few who read the forecast viewed it as comic relief. What are you going to do!
Isaiah Berlin said that an ideologue is someone who is prepared to suppress what he suspects to be true. Those who fetishize the Palestinians are ideologues who’ll put a spin on reality so that it’ll comport with their ideology.
To foresee the results of the recent elections in the Palestinian Authority, all that was required was a commitment to “unvarnished objective reality.” But no one wants to take an honest, hard look at the cruel complexion of Palestinian society—unless, of course, it is to blame the liberal, orderly commonwealth adjacent to it: Israel.

Talk-Show Host Bill Meyer Discusses Boys

Education, Feminism, Gender, Ilana On Radio & TV, Media

I’ll be discussing “Shafting Boys” on The Bill Meyer Show, Monday, January 30, at 8:35 am.

An aside: I don’t usually write about feminism; women are not my thing. I wasn’t even especially pleased with “Shafting Boys.” It just goes to show I am no good at predicting what readers care about. And they care deeply about this topic. A well-known Canadian libertarian (well, I think he should be well-known) explained to me why this column resonated:

— This is a topic 60% of the population can relate to: the 50% of men and the 50% of women who have boys.
— It illustrates vividly the effects of four decades of state intervention favoring peaceful, naïve women.
— It is very politically incorrect.
— It is written by a woman.
— It contains useful information on what is happening.
— There is a devastating joke in each sentence. [Yeah; I can never read to completion columns by The Other Women Who Write About These Issues—Cathy Yawn comes to mind. They’re all so boring, passionless, prim and proper, not to mention grim. To bore the reader is a stoneable offense.—ILANA]

More insights come from an American champion of freedom. Brian D. Ray, Ph.D., President of the National Home Education Research Institute, reminds us that the main impetus of any struggle for the betterment of boys—and for education—is the removal of the state:

Dear Ilana,

Wow, well done in “Shafting boys” today on WND! Upon a first reading, I agree with the vast majority of what you wrote.
As a former boy, young man, public and private classroom teacher, professor of science, and professor of education and current researcher, I can say that your description and analysis presents one more argument that the state should have never been allowed into the private and philosophical realm of the education/indoctrination/discipleship of children. And it is a fine argument that every freedom lover and person who recognizes that there are natural differences between men and women, boys and girls, should urgently and rapidly move—and encourage others to do the same—to private, parent-led education/indoctrination/discipleship rather than allow the state to do so to their children.

Keep up the great work.

—Brian

This is not to say that schools free of federal interference would not have experimented with whole language and new math; or that countless private schools will not continue to replace Madison with Mumia Abu-Jamal and defer to Oprah’s book club for a literary canon. But competition will effect quick corrections in the market for education. Competition will ensure that the non-hierarchical, progressive, child-centered adulation currently posing as schooling is eclipsed, as paying parents patronize teachers who teach and schools that foster virtue, not vacuity. Staying stupid is a perfectly valid choice, so long as it’s not a government-enforced status quo.