Skip to main content

View Diary: American Taliban is an Oxymoron (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I didn't need to read the book... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, kurt, OHdog, Rich in PA, Recall

    to have and express the opinion that your diary reads just like you caught the same vapors aired in the Yglesias piece... with you yourself even making mild comparisons, but just unwilling to actually use the term.

    I'll leave you with this, which pretty much addresses it:

    Cenk: All right Markos now you had a number of critics here, the American Prospect or at least a writer there, writer at the Atlantic and Matt Iglesias of Think Progress, uh writer at Daily Beast, all who are liberals or claim to be liberals,  uh saying hey you know what this book is over the line. Iglesias said it was lying to the choir, and uh the American Prospect wrote that it was feeding into the same thing the right-wingers do calling our opponents terrorists, uh how do you respond to that?

    Markos: Yeah, I call these people weenie liberals. These are people who are afraid to throw a punch and sort of make very stark, what we're facing up against, I mean they think they're making a you know the well reasoned argument with the flow charts with the embedded excel spreadsheets, will somehow uh get people to understand. So they're talking about, uh you know health care bill and they're talking about exchange councils and you have the right-wing talking about death panels, right. I did not resort to lying about anything. Nothing in that book is false. You know I was very very, uh, careful with that because of course, uh, people on the left are held to a different standard than our right wing colleagues, right. They can lie with impunity, we can't. I don't want to lie, so it wasn't something I did that was very difficult to do but, uh, I was very very careful, uh, to be completely solid on the facts, and ultimately, I mean, even like Matt Iglesias who's got you know he's got the vapors because oh my God how dare you call them the American Taliban, concedes in his argument that yes there are similarities in their militaristic world view, and the way they treat women, and so on and so forth. But he says, and I I don't remember his exact argument, but it's Ann Coulter isn't cutting anybody's head off. Granted I will concede that right now but ultimately like I said this book isn't about how they're trying to accomplish those aims. The book is about what those aims are and how they share again that hatred of women and gays and science and in think that since the masses don't adhere to their ideology guns and violence are a way to impose on the rest of them.

    More and Better Democrats

    by SJerseyIndy on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 03:04:36 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  It's How You Throw the Punch That Counts (5+ / 0-)

      With all deference to Markos, he may like to throw punches but with this book he is doing nothing but flailing away, hitting nothing but open air.

      Without using epitaphs, but by employing skill and self-discipline, this is how you land a knock-out.

      •  How you throw the punch is... (0+ / 0-)

        with a fist full of facts.

        Do you contend Markos lies?

        I don't get that in your criticism.

        What I get is that you concede the factual grounds, but simply refuse to bring yourself to be able to cope with a simple three-word-used-for-effect title that results from the facts.

        Nevermind the entirety of the facts that lie behind the title.

        Again, unless of course you contend Markos uses falsehoods...

        More and Better Democrats

        by SJerseyIndy on Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 05:54:11 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I study this so-called "American Taliban"... (5+ / 0-)

      ...and I could have provided Marcos with many devastating quotes that would have backed up his book title but I don't feel using the term "American Taliban" is useful, helpful, or appropriate, for many reasons - not the least of which involves the fact that the movement I study is radically different from the Taliban.

      Leaders in the movement occasionally evince admiration for the dedication of the Taliban or Islamic suicide bombers, sure. But more often they hold up, as models for political dedication, the followers of Hitler, Lenin, and Mao.

      In my opinion, the very frame "American Taliban" is detrimental, especially because it distracts from observation of the thing-in-itself. In my experience many claim knowledge of the politicized Christian right, but few spend much time studying it (the movement is very complex) and even when such study occurs it tends to flow through research channels cut years if not decades ago. The American left is only now discovering the Christian Reconstructionist movement, which Frederick Clarkson helped pioneer researching two decades ago.

      Now there's a new game in town, off almost everyone's radar screen because it looks different, thinks different, and organizes in a different manner. And, unless more people pay attention this new iteration of the Christian right (call it the "American Taliban", call it Christian supremacy) this movement may well achieve new levels of political advance.

      •  I have found it interesting that (0+ / 0-)

        some people who have defended the book and its title have referred to your writings, and those of others who write on this subject, to back up their position.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site