Osama and Dinesh plot America’s downfall

Guest Post by Morbo

As the Carpetbagger noted on Wednesday, Dinesh D’Souza’s new book, The Enemy at Home, is out. In a NUTshell (pun intended), D’Souza in this book asserts that al-Qaeda hates America because liberals insist on exporting a crude and sexually charged popular culture to the world. Thus, you see, the 9/11 can really be blamed on liberals.

The book, according to a reviewer in The Washington Post, is a stinker that is completely disconnected from global realities. Warren Bass, an editor of the Post’s Book World, wrote:

For a Stanford fellow, D’Souza shows a surprising ignorance of the growing literature on jihadist ideology. One has to ask which is more likely: that such authors as Steve Coll, Lawrence Wright, Peter L. Bergen, Marc Sageman, Jessica Stern, Richard A. Posner and Bruce Hoffman could have scrutinized al-Qaeda ideology and somehow failed to notice that bin Laden’s main beef was with America’s corrupt cultural left, or that the grinding sound you hear off in the distance is D’Souza with an ax.

Bass asserts that the incendiary tome was written in a deliberately over-the-top style to generate controversy and sales. He asserts, “This sort of scam has worked before (think of Christopher Hitchens’s gleeful broadside against Mother Teresa or the calculated slurs of Ann Coulter), but rarely has the gap between the seriousness of the issues and the quality of the book yawned as wide. This time, let’s just not bother with the flap; this dim, dishonorable book isn’t worth it.”

There’s a lot to be said about a book this offensive, but I’ll limit myself to two thoughts:

1. Even if there were a kernel of truth in D’Souza’s claim that al-Qaeda is reacting to our popular culture, my response to bin Laden & Co. would be, “Get over it.” Are we supposed to change the books we read, the movies we watch and the clothes we wear because a bunch of religious fanatics don’t like them? So bin Laden gets offended when men and women in the West wear shorts? I say that’s all the more reason for busting out the shorts. Pardon my bluntness, but screw him.

But D’Souza can’t even get this right. The left did not bring about current pop culture. The policies of the right did that. The right’s precious free market subjects everything to the same blunt instrument of market forces. Thus, Shakespeare is on the same level as Stephen King in a battle royale for sales. Yes, low quality often triumphs over high quality, and crass beats class.

This is not the fault of liberals. Despite the wild-eyed conspiracy theories of people like D’Souza, Hollywood did not make “Hostel” or the “Saw” series because film producers seek to corrupt the nation. These movies were made in the hopes they would return a profit. Isn’t this what conservatives want? Is not their cry, “Let the market decide?”

2. I am going to refrain from allowing D’Souza to make me turn purple this time. As far as I’m concerned, his book should be promoted far and wide. Although I don’t want the book to sell well, I do hope D’Souza is given plenty of opportunities to push it. I hope he is on every talk show in the nation. His appalling argument is one of blaming the victim. D’Souza would tell a rape victim, “It’s your own fault. You should not have dressed so provocatively. You asked for it. You deserved it.” Let him defend that twaddle.

If this is the conservative response to 9/11 and Islamic terror, let them say it. Let them shout it out loud and clear. Let them take it to the American people. D’Souza’s argument is disgusting, and it will repulse most people. The more it is identified with conservatism the better.

And if sensible conservatives don’t want D’Souza’s “blame-the-victim” book to be associated with their movement, let’s hear them say so. Now.

For a Stanford fellow, D’Souza shows a surprising ignorance

He should have stopped right there, because that’s all he needed to say.

A fun (or disturbing) party game is to pass around a D’Souza book. Each person has to open to a random page and try to read outloud an entire paragraph without laughing at the absurdity and/or lousy writing.

  • Yes, and Doubleday is looking for a profit which is why they publish this blatant bullshit.

    I guess as bad as the free market is, there is no smaller number of people worthy to control what we get than everybody. That’s the bind.

  • Isn’t this what conservatives want? Is not their cry, “Let the market decide?”

    You’re confusing fiscal conservatives with social conservatives (radical loony bastards). Your average social conservative’s understanding of market forces is limited to: “Let’s boycott X because it does/encourages Y and we don’t like Y.” Now days the fiscal conservative (as CEO) often responds: Screw you. P.S. Thanks for the free advertising, slobs. Even Wal*Mart gave the rlbs a half-hearted finger recently.

    However, your main point is well taken. D’Loza wants to lay the blame squarely on the “liberals.” But in doing so he has obligingly placed his nuts on the anvil. “We have to reshape our society to suit to the Islamofascists or they’ll kill us,” sounds a lot like “We have to surrender,” and that won’t go over well with his target audience. Especially if it meant no more World Wrestling Federation. And what is the radical islamic take on basketball? Can you imagine telling residents of Indiana no more b-ball? Yikes.

    But perhaps a few rlbs will hear about this book and think “Gee, maybe we ought to stop demanding that people do everything our way.” (It could happen.) Or maybe they’ll call for a boycot of his book.

    Mmm. Delicious irony!

  • D’Souza is playing the infamous “Emperor’s Clothes” gambit. Millions will buy this book, or borrow this book, or listen to someone who has read this book. They will be fed the line of clap-trap, and they will buy it—hook, line, and sinker—because they will not have the courageous merit to admit that they wasted their time and money on a line of claptrap.

    It would be humorous, however, if the public libraries of America were to catalog this piece of reality-twisting in its proper place—the Fiction shelves….

  • D’Souza is a Fellow at the Hoover Insitution, which is quite physically prominent on Standford’s campus, but independent of Stanford. A quick scan of the list of Fellows is interesting.

  • Funny that D’Souza is a fellow whose area of specialization includes “social and personal responsibility.”

    Another angle to look at this book is D’Souza is pointing at Hollywood and telling any future terrorists, “Bomb those guys, not me. I didn’t do it.” Personal responsibility my ass.

    The enemy (liberals) of his my enemy (al Qaeda) is D’Souza’s friend. Dinish and Osama –BFF.

  • First, the ignorance isn’t all that surprising when you consider D’Souza likely considers himself “the” expert on whatever he is writing about and that all those that disagree get ignored, reviled, or dismissed with a sneer. He doesn’t care about all of these writers, they don’t give him something that he can use to prop up his rather lame point.

  • Why don’t you make up your own minds and read the book for yourselves?

    Not necessary. And do you know why? The basic premise is terribly, horribly flawed. Like my mother told me when I was learning to cook, “Don’t use rancid olive oil when making a stir-fry. If you do no amount of spices will make it taste like anything but rot.” D’Souza’s book is like that. It is based on a rotten idea; it can’t be anything but rot.

  • SF Bay Area readers: the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco has a talk by D’Souza on its schedule for Tuesday, January 23, at 595 Market Street. More info here. For those of you not “lucky” enough to see him in person, the Commonwealth Club programs are podcastable.

  • Under Random Acts of Activism
    When you see right wing books at your library, reshelve them somewhere in the wrong sections.

  • Listened to D’Souza on Colbert (good grilling by Stephen) and was immediately offended. Apparently since I am a liberal, I am godless, have no morals, am anti-family, etc.

    The guy’s premise is totally off base, which makes his book a piece of cr*p.

  • Under Random Acts of Activism
    When you see right wing books at your library, reshelve them somewhere in the wrong sections.
    ———————————-Dale

    Actually, the “Friends of the Library Book Sale Table” works rather nicely for that….

  • “We have to reshape our society to suit to the Islamofascists or they’ll kill us,” sounds a lot like “We have to surrender,” – TAIO

    Right on the mark as usual. And BG2 has obliged on more than one front. He’s surrendering our freedoms left and right. He’s pulled troops out of Saudi Arabia. He’s overthrown the Baathist regime in Iraq, the only force keeping the Islamists out of Baghdad and their dream of a re-established Caliphate (the capital of which is supposed to be Baghdad).

    In short, time and again BG2 has done everything necessary to advance the agenda of the Saudi Wahabists who bankroll Osama bin Laden. Would this not obviously be regarded as treason?

  • One can only wonder, mouth agape in awe, at the the hacks
    (DD, Armstrong, Jeff Gannon) promoted by conservatives as
    intelligencia. DD’s scratchings have always been suspect and
    as an academic, consistantly fall short of critical review.
    The institutions Double D attended should be embarrassed at
    the very public display of the academic shortcomings of
    their graduate. One can only agree with the Free Market argument
    as there is no intellectual discussion here. The only motive is
    profit and an weak entry into the popular culture. Adam Smith
    would be proud with the naked self serving nature of these endeavors.

  • Comments are closed.