EVENT
Picking this up from both Milligan and Gemma, based on a set of (now pilloried, at least among People I Know) criteria laid out by Time magazine blogger Joe Klein. The question being, does he think I’m a left wing extremist?
Let’s find out:
A left-wing extremist exhibits many, but not necessarily all, of the following attributes:
believes the United States is a fundamentally negative force in the world.
What a fundamentally stupid statement, if only because it’s impossible to measure or gauge. I can’t put myself on one side or the other, because it doesn’t engage actions or relationships but the very fact of existance. I understand that, in some sort of a sense, the issue is whether it “would the world be better if the U.S. weren’t here at all?” but that requires a level of speculation such that I’m not willing to risk. In short, I want to say “no, it wouldn’t be better,” but I can’t really answer, because the statement doesn’t make any sense on an analytical level. Verdict: Hung jury.
believes that American imperialism is the primary cause of Islamic radicalism.
Milligan and Gemma say: No, it’s one of three main causes, alongside Israeli imperialism and oppressive Middle Eastern governments. I want to add to that British and Soviet (and to a lesser extent, French) imperialism, a big source of the original mess, and a lack of responsible religious leadership on the part of Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus. Verdict: 20% guilty.
believes that the decision to go to war in Iraq was not an individual case of monumental stupidity, but a consequence of America’s fundamental imperialistic nature.
Whether or not we’re monumentally stupid is of nominal relevance to our intentions in the first place. Our conduct during the conflict (evidence #1 – no bid contract to Halliburton) suggests an imperialistic arrogance and greed, not simply stupidity. Verdict: Guilty!
tends to blame America for the failures of others—i.e. the failure of our NATO allies to fulfill their responsibilities in Afghanistan.
Whether or not we’re guilty for complete failure, we’re certainly responsible for the actions or efforts we make. Shifting our resources from an important front to a non-front is stupid. And of course, the U.S. had both the greatest commitment to and debatably the most to gain from involvement in Afghanistan. So we have the lion’s share of responsibility. Verdict: 80% guilty.
doesn’t believe that capitalism, carefully regulated and progressively taxed, is the best liberal idea in human history.
Guilty as charged. Capitalism is an economic system built on recognition of property rights. It’s a limited (and limiting aspect) of Representative Democracies, but is not necessarily “integral.” Now Representative Democracies are better than monarchies and theocracies. And they were, in many cases, better than the preliterate chaos. I suspect that whatever follows will be even better. I like Milligan’s answer, to the effect that “liberalism is the best liberal idea in human history.” That, and good sanitary practice. Verdict: Guilty.
believes American society is fundamentally unfair (as opposed to having unfair aspects that need improvement).
Society in general is fundamentally unfair. But every society and institution has a responsibility to redress unfairness as best as possible. In the case of the U.S., these efforts are almost always delayed and compromised, and that is a complicated issue. However, I feel fair in saying we haven’t done nearly enough. To address the comment directly, we have been frequently inattentive to those “unfair aspects that need improvement.” Verdict: 50% Guilty.
believes that eternal problems like crime and poverty are the primarily the fault of society.
Most of the time, they are. As above, government and society have to address crime and poverty. Take a glance a Canada’s track record. Verdict: 80% guilty.
believes that America isn’t really a democracy.
We’re not a democracy. We’re a republic. Verdict: 50% guilty. (Is there an echo in here?)
believes that corporations are fundamentally evil.
Aw, shucks. Verdict: Guilty.
believes in a corporate conspiracy that controls the world.
No. There’s nothing conspiratorial about it. Verdict: 80% guilty.
is intolerant of good ideas when they come from conservative sources.
Actually, I endorsed a couple Republicans for local office last year. Verdict: Not Guilty.
dismissively mocks people of faith, especially those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage.
Well, I’m a practicing Catholic and not thrilled with abortion, so I’d have to say that out. I certainly mock sanctimonious hypocrisy, but pardon me for not thinking that counts. Verdict: Not Guilty.
regularly uses harsh, vulgar, intolerant language to attack moderates or conservatives.
I don’t think so. I think today’s conservative philosophy is inherently inconsistent and logically flawed (note how I cleverly avoided the word “fundamentally,” unlike Joe Klein). I think often these oversights are the result of a lack of perspective and judgment that could be avoided through circumspection. But I also think we’re all human and essentially in this world together. And I don’t think anyone has the answer. Verdict: Not Guilty.
RESULTS: 6.1 / 12 (I disqualified the first question due to its unanswerability) or 50.83% left extremist.
IN SUM: While I agree with Milligan that the criteria were sometimes too vague to be useful, I tried to answer based on their meaning as much as I could. I suspect that, to many moderate conservatives, I would seem “extremist” in my actual stances on issues: universal health care, welfare, first amendment rights, and so on. I think that few would find me closed minded, however, and that’s the other side of that equation.
What do you think?
Where are you?
END OF POST.