printTHE EXCERPT is from “Is heartland America Ignorant And Gullible?”, my new WND.COM column, now (Sept. 12) on Taki’s:
“Given the perpetual parade of ‘intellectuals’ who are not intelligent in our media — Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, PBS and the ‘parrot press’ — I don’t expect you to be familiar with political philosopher Paul E. Gottfried. Nevertheless, Paul (he’s a friend) is one of the most important intellectuals in America.”
“Historian Eugene Genovese calls Paul incorruptible, ‘an American intellectual of superior talent.’ Author and historian John Lukacs praises Professor Gottfried as ‘a very profound thinker.’ And L. Brent Bozell III salutes his ‘amazing intellectual courage’ — courage in the face of the malign, philistine forces of the liberal and neoconservative mainstream.”
Over the years, I’ve interviewed Professor Gottfried pursuant to the publication of his many books. I do so again on the occasion of the publication of “Encounters: My Life with Nixon, Marcuse, and Other Friends and Teachers.”
READ THE interview, “Is heartland America Ignorant And Gullible?”, now on WND.COM. And on Taki’s Magazine on the weekend.
Update I (Sept. 11): Please note that the always-genial and brutally candid Paul Gottfried has replied to his detractors in the Comments Section. Some of the critics have been quite harsh (and this forum is moderated).
Update II: Randy, the war on Iraq is not going to be adjudicated again here, not ever. I chronicled the invasion of Iraq at great length, applying fact and every ounce of reason in my possession to repudiate and denounce that war crime. The case is closed! Neoconservative ideologues stand in the dock for aiding and abetting a war crime. Any reader is welcome to read my article archive on the topic (search the blog archives too). I can well imagine that many ideologues who supported the war urgently need to make peace with their maker, or consciences, for their role in a crime of such moral and material magnitude.
Update III (Sept. 12): Hayim, one doesn’t have to endorse everything Paul Gottfried writes or espouses to appreciate his contribution and steadfast principles. As someone who is ostracized by even more factions than Paul, I recognize the strength of character it takes to resist group pressure to conform and compromise one’s notion of right and wrong.
As to the article you cited, and which I skimmed: I have quoted Dershowitz on Israel and find his commentary worthwhile. I do not appreciate the dichotomy—or hypocrisy—the likes of Dershowitz evince in that they are hard-core rightists when it comes to Israel’s right to preserve its ethnic identity. But anyone arguing that the preservation of the historical America is essential to the preservation of freedom itself is a racist in Dershowitz’ books. That aspect of the Jewish Diaspora sickens me. Israelis are nothing like these American Jews.
In “Harvard Hucksters Hype Israeli Pseudo-Historians,” I expressed exactly what I thought of Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer, authors of “The Israeli Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy.”
Norman Finkelstein I include among “dwarfs standing on the shoulders of Jewish giants. Noam Chomsky (‘The Godfather’), Steven and Hillary Rose … Joel Kovel, Tanya Reinhart in Tel Aviv, and Michael Cohen in Swansea—these are but a few of the new anti-Semitism’s leading Jewish lights.”
Where I agree with Paul is in his assertion that there is among the anointed Jewish leadership a crass abuse of “the Holocaust for propagandistic purposes.” No doubt about it. And it’s repulsive. To the extend Finkelstein exposes this, to that extent he makes a valid point. The Holocaust industry makes even me turn away from a catastrophe that has truncated my own family tree.
I also find the premise of the Daniel Goldhagen book, Hitler’s Willing Executioners, appalling.
I think that on the whole Joan Peterson’s book is pretty good. If there are a few factual problems—and I don’t know that there are—they serve in this context as a fig leaf for those who would deny the central truth about the Jewish settlement of Israel:
“The territory within which the State of Israel was established did not form part of any larger state that opposed its creation. The territory was, moreover, one where Jews formed a majority on land they had purchased legitimately.”
Unanimously, this Jewish majority issued a declaration of independence promising that ‘the State of Israel will … foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants,’ not for the benefit of mankind. They promised that the country would ‘be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisioned by the prophets of Israel”; that it would ‘ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex,’ and ‘safeguard the Holy Places of all religions.”
It is a joke to claim, as the anti-Israel right does, that Israel doesn’t respect the rights of all its inhabitants, Arabs included. Let the Raimondos of this world—hopefully there is only one of his kind—go live/or vacation in the Palestinian Authority.
Above all, it is undeniable that Arabs had trashed the Holy Land throughout their occupation of the place. It took Jews to dry the swamps—they died in droves of malaria doing so—to plant orchards, start industries, and generally build from a howling wilderness a prosperous country.
You won’t find me lamenting that wonderful achievement.
Yes. The Heartland is ignorant and gullible.
It is, however, growing angry. We have the internet, and we have a sizable minority of people who really dislike being pushed around and impoverished in the process.
Perhaps all societies are that way. Look what happened to Germany after hyperinflation destroyed their economy. There’s a big risk something similar could happen here.
Ilana,
Excellent interview. Paul has it right and should know about populist Meatheads in Middle America –he has the difficult task of teaching their children what their parents never learned — A little learning is a dangerous thing. Thanks for the interview. I hope folks will read his book.
Interesting interview. Could you please explain this item from the last paragraph, “I understand the total compatibility of the “people” with the leftist managerial regime that now rules us.” It would be great if you could expand on this in a future column.
Thanks.
Not to dampen excessively the above praise for Paul, whom I have met and do respect, but E. Michael Jones, in his review of Paul’s biography, “Encounters: My Life With Nixon, Marcuse, and Other Friends and Teachers,” in the latest issue of “Culture Wars” offers a slightly less glowing assessment of Paul. His review centers around the virtue of Prudence and is well worth a read.
“Its inhabitants, moreover, suffer from the vulgar eating habits and lack of cultural literacy that their critics often impute to them. However perverse in their political judgments these critics may be, they are right about the ignorance and gullibility of heartland Americans.”
The above statement by Gottfried illustrates the rift between the so-called academics (left or right) and the rest of us. Insulting the eating habits and lack of cultural acumen (as defined and approved by Gottfried) of millions of people seem very similar to the famous left leaning intellectuals who look upon us disdainfully as bottom feeders.
Gottfried’s insulting remarks illuminate the opinion of almost every leader of any political movement:
They are superior individuals, and the rest of us are just a singular blob of collective people, to be remade in their own “better and superior” image.
Gottfried has not improved my life one bit with his books and theories, while the plumbers, factory workers and farmers of the heartland have a tangible and beneficial effect on the lives of millions of other individual Americans everyday.
Conservative or Communist: The line is very blurry when a great conservative academic speaks of millions of Americans in one insulting very broad brush stroke.
Finally, a large portion of ignorance shown by American Heartlanders can be laid at the feat of failed conservative leaders who lost the hearts and more importantly the minds of ordinary Americans years ago when they abdicated their leadership on education issues.
“Its inhabitants, moreover, suffer from the vulgar eating habits and lack of cultural literacy that their critics often impute to them. However perverse in their political judgments these critics may be, they are right about the ignorance and gullibility of heartland Americans.”
Nice guy.
I guess the quip “God, guns and beer” is for real? The antonym for populist is “elitist”. Maybe, as some have suggested, it is time to “unsave” the Union and let it dissolve. There seems to be more irreconcilable differences now than there were when it was “saved”. The enlightened (“coastland”?) Americans would then be free to pursue their dreams as they see fit, and stop wasting their extraordinary lives trying to educate the ignorant heartland Americans.
I do hope they are OK with barbeque, though. If not, I understand; its for our own good.
With Scylla and Charybdis (Republicans/Neocons and Democrats/Left-Liberals) going at it in Mainstream Media space, it is hard to get ideas to the heartland. However, the booboisie is more into football, fashion, NASCAR, gossip, freebies from Uncle Sam, and vacations than into philosophy. While the heartland may have some worthwhile “instincts” (such as against complete gun confiscation), Homo Boobus Americanus has not thought through things much and even the bulk of those who supposedly pay attention just like the Kultur of a Hannity or a Maddow based mostly upon their frequency of church attendance.
The main flaw with populism is the same as the flaw with trusting “democracy” over that of a “republic” – that popularity equals validity and if 90% of the booboisie think 2 + 2 = 5, that makes it so! Those wishing to appeal to public opinion can trash Palins’ pregnancies or Rangel’s townhouses but trashing offers nothing in the way of a coherent philosophy of man’s relationship to his fellow man (and to the state). Gottfried understands this distinction and he is a paleolibertarian not a neoconservative.
Regarding Pat Buchanan’s screed on WWII – he took some valid historical ideas and drove them over a cliff.
I really dislike these lyrics: http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/worley-darryl/have-you-forgotten-3876.html of a very popular country-western song that I believe typified the “Middle America” response to the Iraq War–justified because of 9/11. Agreed with Gottfried that these folks provide the foot soldiers for McCain et al. They also provide many of the troops that serve, and were killed and maimed over there. They are not hypocrites.
As this is 9/11 and I don’t know who is reading this, I’d just like to say I’m really sorry for those who conflated a sincere desire to get the bad guys in that incident with going to war in Iraq. They’ve been so duped.
My response to jingoistic country songs:
some questions for neocons
So, they hate us cause we’re free?
(Free? If this would only be!)
No, they hate us cause we’re there.
Just how is this unfair?
And what if some come here
with troops in battle gear?
Would you greet them all as friends
or your native soil defend?
Does the Golden Rule apply?
If not, please tell me why.
Free, you ninnies? Did the Russians walk around in chains all day? Do you think that because you are not locked up that you are free? What need is there for chains or prisons when the whole country becomes a prison?
Get a clue.
Some of my critics imagine that “the people” have nothing to do with empowering our present leaders. It just happens that the “people” vote for them because no one else but fools or knaves aspire to leadership positions. For those who may have noticed our last presidential race, most of the hundred million or so voters who went to the polls opted for candidates and parties that those who read this website would probably not care for. They also had the opportunity to vote for other types of candidates whom readers of this website would like better but chose not to. The “people” I encounter are cultural illiterates who consider Burgerking to be haute cuisine. While I would never take away their right to eat fast food or to watch Paris Hilton as a cultural experience, I see no reason to glorify those who do these things. In our political and cultural life we are reaping the fruits of mass democracy.
Prof. Gottfried – In North Korea, people “vote” for the Dear, Great, or Sweet leader as they are told. Here, there is a basic “choice” of Pepsi McCain and Coke Obama but I am not certain how many people really DESIRED either or voted for some strategic reason for one of the odious ones to stop the other odious one. 3rd parties are basically one step removed from writing in Donald Duck in terms of effectiveness. And even if one doesn’t vote, one still gets into the game by paying taxes, registering for the draft, taking shoes off at the airport [though I watched this gigantic black TSA goon scream at a 3 year old who went through WITH HIS SHOES ON – yesterday at O’ Hare! – then screamed at Mommy when the kid cried]. Short of massive civil disobedience – which may happen if the economy completely tanks – I see nothing for either the educated or ignorant masses to do against “the system”. Voting or not voting – plus ca change, c’est le meme chose.
Maybe that 3 year old “shoe bomber” is the smartest person in America.
[I don’t see the logic of this post: everyone could have voted for Ron Paul. That was a choice. It would not have delivered nirvana, but it would have indicated that the voter had a conscious mind.]
I’m glad Paul got on and explained his comments he had made to Ilana, because he was sounding like the liberal elitists he decries- painting with a broad brush is never a good practice- it is hard to be very accurate with broad brushes. I am not an educated man by scholastic standards, but consider myself a thinker, and I do live in the Heartland (aka fly-over country), and have to confess I get teary-eyed on this date when I hear reruns of the old sound bites from 9/11. I’ve been considering what happened that day, and our response to it, and I can’t think of what else we should have done. Nothing, and just let the backers of this atrocity go unpunished? I would sincerely like to hear from someone with a libertarian viewpoint explain their thoughts as to what the “right” thing to do was. I know Ilana and Ron Paul and others of the libertarian bent condemn our actions in Iraq- does that apply to our actions in Afghanistan also? I’m confused…
Randy, please
“[I don’t see the logic of this post: everyone could have voted for Ron Paul. That was a choice. It would not have delivered nirvana, but it would have indicated that the voter had a conscious mind.] ” Ilana
And this: Suppose 25% of the population ignored the lesser of two evils and wrote in Ron Paul? Would the main stream media be able to ignore him the NEXT election? Would Obama have any kind of mandate?
Sorry Ilana, I’ve got to go with Myron on this. Ron Paul was not presented as a viable option. Especially in Oklahoma. Maybe if I changed my registration from Libertarian to Republican. He might have been on the primary list, but I doubt it. Right now, we can’t even get recognized in OK. Nationwide, the Libertarian party can only muster maybe 400,000 members. The major thing is as Mr. Gottfried said, the people are ignorant. But lack of education is not their fault. He needs to write to fewer intellectuals and more common people. Glenn Beck and Ann C. sell off the shelves, but they are Republican pushers. The liberals have their guns too, where we Libertarians can only boost John Stossel’s “Give me a break” Plus the R & D have radio and television too. A little less blame and a little more help would be appreciated.
[This doesn’t make sense either: “wasn’t presented as viable…”; what does that mean? Ron Paul ran as a Republican. Meathead American could have elected him at their convention, and not McCain. Instead, they spent their time getting hot for Palin. Paul G. is right.]
Conservative: The frog in the pot of water on the stove who is content with the current temperature of the water.
From what I read in WND, Mr. Paul won just about every ‘debate’ and captured the hearts of many ‘young Republicans’; however the Republican National Committee wanted McCain. The RNC ignored Ron Paul in favor of McCain and it is the RNC that has the final say in their endorsements, newsletters, etc. The whole federal election process is a sham with smoke and mirrors, in my opinion. The only way to break the establishment is to have a massive revolution from the rank and file. A fifty percent write in so to speak, which comes from an educated public. Mr. Gottfied writes ‘intellectual books” to be read by other intellectuals. I and others like me, are more interested in restoring good government. Recently I took a break and read John Ringo’s “The last Centurion.” The book is a ‘down to earth’ primer on modern government in the US. He classified Libertarians as impractical and though he didn’t say it, endorsed the Republicans. The Last Centurion, will sell over a half a million copies, at least. Think of how many new Republicans that he will politically educate, while we contemplate our navels intellectually.
Dear Ilana, do you agree with what Gottfried says regarding Finklestein? I have heard Finklestein speak about Israel in ways that would do Hamas and Hezbollah proud. Unless I am missing something – and I am not knowledgeable about Gottfried at all – I am no friend of anyone who has kind words for Finklestein. Am I misreading his praise?
http://www.takimag.com/site/article/a_tale_of_two_normans_podhoretz_and_finklestein/
Haym.
Ron Paul, before dropping out of the Republican primary for the 2008 presidential election, came in second place in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Oregon, Nevada, Montana, Indiana, Nebraska, South Dakota, New Mexico, and the Marianna Islands. He placed third in Maine, Washington, Vermont, Rhode Island, Washington D.C., Alaska, North Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin, Ohio, Texas, Mississippi, West Virgina, and Kentucky. He did not place first in any state.
John McCain came in first in all of the East Coast and West Coast states except for Maine and Massachusetts (they went for Romney). He won only two states in the Midwest (Nebraska and South Dakota), swept the Mideast except for West Virgina, and took only Texas and Louisiana in the (non-East Coast) South.
In the 2008 presidential election, Obama took all of the states on the East and West Coasts except North and South Carolina, all of the Mideast plus Minnesota and Wisconsin, and two states in the West (Nevada and Wisconsin). Ron Paul took no states; he was not on the ballot.
Whatever support Ron Paul enjoyed, much of it came from the heartland. In the general election, the highly cultured States went for Obama. McCain lost; mission accomplished. As the saying goes, “you can have anything you want, but you cannot have everything you want.”
I gave $ 2300 to Ron Paul early in 2007 and of course I voted for him in the Republican primary.
But he was not on the ballot in the general election.
I paired for Obama (with a friend hopefully voting for Chuck Baldwin in the district). Since 1988, Ron Paul’s Republican primary campaign was the only elected run for the Presidency by an advocate of limited government with a modicum of credibility, media coverage, and financing.
But for the general election – or for example Bush vs. Kerry 2004 (my daughter cast a vote for that clown Badnarik) – what to do? Look, the majority of Americans are not libertarians – but even if 10% – 30% are, there is not much to do in an election but vote for a lesser evil, not vote, or vote for someone who will get no notice and the usual .5% – either way, we still have the Warfare-Welfare state. Unless one lives in a cave, Unabomber style, we have to live in this mess.
Ilana, thanks for your response regarding Gottfried. I can understand that we can agree with much of what another writes or says without agreeing with everything. And I do agree with you regarding the “Holocaust industry”. But I would just point out that some beliefs can destroy an otherwise harmonious relationship. Again, for example Hamas, an apparently good provider of services to Arabs in Gaza. On the bad side, they lob rockets into Israel at civilian targets.
Haym.
“Look, the majority of Americans are not libertarians – but even if 10% – 30% are, there is not much to do in an election but vote for a lesser evil, not vote, or vote for someone who will get no notice and the usual .5% – either way, we still have the Warfare-Welfare state.” Myron
Yes, but only necessarily for the next four years. I doubt this country could be destroyed in four years even if we elected Adolph Hitler or Joe Stalin.
Don’t be panicked into violating your principles.
Finally, there is no debate about evolution. Evolution is supported by the entire scientific community, and by not just some, but all the evidence there is.