Good Men, Bad Men and Loyal Opposition
Patterico has some thoughts about Obama and Good and Bad Men:
Obama talks about spreading the wealth around. It’s class warfare and I disagree with it. It’s a point of view that has its roots in socialism and Marxism. But you can say that it’s a bad set of policies, or you can say that everyone who agrees with him about these policies is a Socialist and a Marxist and an Other, and say that nobody can be a “good man” if they believe such things.
We don’t have to write off people who believe in spreading the wealth around as Bad People. We can persuade them that they are wrong in that belief.
…
I’m sick of people who want to write off entire groups of people as Bad People because of what they believe in. I’ve watched the left do that, and I’m seeing a lot of people on the right doing that now as well.
These things are not mutually exclusive. Yes, I believe that people who truly, with full knowledge of history and consequence agree with Marxism and Socialism are Bad People. Anyone who approves of -isms that caused the deaths of millions and wants to see those -isms put in place is a Bad Person. They are wishing for the deaths of millions. People who don’t know any better, who adopt these causes as bumper sticker slogans are not Bad People. They are ignorant, ill informed and foolishly blind people. But yes, they may be persuaded that they are wrong in their belief. I’m not sure how much more persuasive one has to be than to point to Stalin, Hitler, Mao and company and the results of their policies. Maybe some people won’t be convinced until the cycle repeats itself. Are they Bad People because of that? No, but they are people I would never depend on in a crisis. They are people who have no intellectual honesty, critical reasoning skills, or maybe they just don’t have any care for their fellow human beings. If the latter is the case, then yes, they are Bad People.
I’m not writing them off as Bad just because of what they believe in, nor am I writing off huge swaths of people as Bad. I’m writing off as Bad the people who choose to do bad things in pursuit of their beliefs. Keying cars, defacing property, threatening with violence those who oppose you, encouraging others to take these actions… none of these things are hallmarks of Good People. I don’t think those people make up the majority of our opposition. But I do think that Obama, for whatever reasons, also has chosen to be associated with, get benefit from and give aid to those who – by their actions – are Bad People. People who bomb police stations, for example. If he chose to be associated with these people for political expediency, then that doesn’t make him a Bad Person. It makes him a shallow, empty, pandering, fickle person obsessed with power at any ideological cost. In my mind, such a person is skating up to the edge of Bad Person-ness and peering over. It means they can be bumped over the edge to Bad actions pretty easily because they have no core principles or values.
While I agree with what a lot of the big dog bloggers are saying – be courteous, be civil, don’t be a raving loon like the lefties have been for the last 8 years, oppose on substance, etc. – I’m tired of people telling me that I have to ignore things that go against my principles. That I have to make nice with people who violate what I believe in out of respect for what they believe in. Do my beliefs have less weight than theirs? People make judgements about others based on their behaviors and publically stated beliefs. By saying that we shouldn’t make judgements about these people based on those things we are falling into the multi-cultural trap where every culture has equal weight – even those that advocate violence against The Other. If we stand for nothing, we won’t stand at all.
I don’t want a nation in lock step, thinking alike, acting alike, for any side of an argument. I do believe that being able to voice differences lets us come to the best decisions possible. But don’t tell me that what some people advocate and believe in doesn’t make them Bad People. Sometimes it does. They need to be allowed to voice those Bad things so that other people will see the full bore crazy and rethink being in league with those folks. But I don’t have to respect them.
Respect is earned, not handed out. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If yours is based on fiction and not fact, then I don’t have to respect that opinion. Doing so devalues the other half of the discussion.
[C]ongratulations to Barry O on a race superbly run and to our country for not having let the wrong reasons deter it from making the wrong choice. I’ll never be a fan, but I swear I’ll never take a nutroots posture either in relishing his failures because it helps my party. Like it or not, he’s my president. As a great man once said, country first. -Allahpundit
Country first, indeed. That doesn’t mean ignoring violations of the law just to make a point that you are superior to the nutroots. There’s a couple of sayings: Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. And It ain’t bragging if it’s true. I’d apply those to this situation. Calling something what it truly is isn’t relishing failure. Saying that Obama, at the very least, turned a blind eye to illegal activities isn’t being a moonbat. If we aren’t allowed to point out legitimate arguments because that would be disrespectful, then our loyal opposition isn’t gonna be much of one, is it? I don’t know if that is really what Allahpundit, Patterico and the others are saying or not. It seems like it is. That any criticism that isn’t couched in the civilest terms shouldn’t be used. It’s rude to point out that someone may be a criminal (not Obama necessarily but certainly some who worked for him). It’s rude to point out that Democrats had a huge hand in causing the financial crisis. Rude to point out that the policies he supports have historically lead to deaths of millions. Hm. Isn’t that part of what the right-o-sphere bloggers were criticizing McCain for doing? Not being willing to be rude and impolitic? Not being willing to coarsen the discourse by stating fact? So is that the road we want to travel? The one we think will get us back on course? Civility at all cost? I hope that isn’t what they are saying. If I have gotten the wrong take on this, I do apologize and am fully willing to admit I am wrong.
Nobody ever stays clean while pig wrestling and those who try end up losing the match to the pig.
Is he my President? Of course he is. I’m not going to start shouting “stolen election” and going all froth at the mouth. But suggesting that we shouldn’t do anything disrespectful is ridiculous and I’m pretty sure these bloggers can’t stick to that over the next 4 years either. Part of why not is that we have let the other side define “respectful” and dictate what is acceptable dissent – for us, not for them. For them, anything seems to be acceptable.
Judge him based on his actions and the result of his policies. But not judging at all and awarding respect before any has been earned is a disservice to what we said we stood for during this campaign. Treat him with the same courtesy you should extend to every other human being. Give respect when it has been earned. Respect the office, yes. But the man himself has so far done nothing worthy of respect.
