Hitler used anti-Semitism to good effect but he hated Poles just as much. The Nazis killed 6 million Jews but their plan was to kill 30 to 60 million Slavs and to wipe Poland off the map. They actually killed 3 million Polish Jews and also 3 million non Jewish Poles. It is never about the Jews, because those who hate Jews will always turn to attack others as well. This used to be understood on the Left, but because of refusal to see Islam as it is, not any more.
The “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” approach is the core set of principles for good moral “liberals” these days. The problem is that this fantasy does not begin to erase all the evil among us humans, so the liberals have to scapegoat individuals and groups for causing the bad stuff to happen. Scapegoating white men, Jews, “transphobes,” and “Islamaphobes” also gives the liberals an approved outlet for the evil tendencies within themselves. As everyone on the right has accurately pointed out, the libs are actually a rageful, controlling, abusive mob.
Another great analysis, Frederick! I enjoyed the Youtube clip with Ben Affleck raving like a brainwashed lunatic and completely missing Sam’s point (well, maybe “enjoy" is not the right word!) And I liked hearing about Sam Harris’ “What If” scenario regarding Israel and the Palestinians. I think it is difficult for us Westerners brought up in liberal societies, (which strive for compassion and tolerance) to truly understand the committed destructiveness of radical Islamists. Death cult is the right word for it. It continues to be extremely disturbing to watch the political Left look away from this and blame those under continued threat of this relentless aggression. I think Trump, for all his massive failings, “gets” this in a way that most Democrats do not.
Thanks, Kim. Yes, Sam Harris has been the clearest voice on this for years, and Trump, for all his many faults, at least instinctively understands the threat coming from political Islam while the Left's delusions on this endanger us all.
I saw that post, which wasn't paywalled. I first discovered Harris in the days after 10/7 when I was incredulous about the response, and Harris was able to articulate my objections so well. I made my family listen to it. He is absolutely brilliant on this topic. But I disagree with him on so many other topics, I gave up being a listener. Which is a shame, because he made me think much more rigorously ... my failing is that I disagree with him, but mostly can't explain why he is wrong, and I don't have time in my life, nor the skill, to develop the counter arguments that match his precision and clarity. My fundamental disagreement is in the nature of reality itself, in the spiritual and supernatural (I am a Christian) and in the belief in free will, so I'm not sure we could ever agree on topics Sam is convicted, for reasons I perfectly understand, given his foundational beliefs.
But on the moral clarity with respect to Islam & Israel & a liberal West, there is no stronger and clearer voice.
That said, your voice is similarly clear and precise and persuasive. I'd love to listen to you and Sam talk!
Thanks, James – that's very generous. I have struggled with the free will question as well. Daniel Dennett put up a good defence when the two spoke on the topic, but I found it very hard to keep up in the end. One can spend years looking at the question, as each did in their own way.
I was a fairly convinced atheist for years, and a huge fan of Christopher Hitchens (mainly for his oratorical gifts), but lost patience with Dawkins long ago. These days, I think of myself as a cultural Christian rather than a believing one, as I haven't been able to overcome some of the philosophical objections.
I understand the rational hurdles. I spent almost 40 years passively rejecting because of them. I don't think faith can be rationalized entirely. But neither can our existence and human consciousness. Free will can't be explained by physics. Without free will, there is no responsibility or accountability. There really is no meaning. I choose not to live that way.
Science can't disprove a God that is supernatural and acts accordingly, other than by an absence of affirmative evidence. I believe He may act from time to time in ways that are observable - miraculous - but these are rare. If He created the universe, He certainly has the power. I think He withholds it because to show it would be tantamount to demanding obeisance, which would override the free will required to love Him freely.
Faith does not arise from the absence of all doubt. I have doubts about literacy and corruption of doctrine and absence of evidence. I struggled with the idea that my sins were bad enough that Jesus had to sacrifice Himself for me. So much doubt. But I believe in the possibility, and that is good, and hopeful. I choose to live this way.
There are so many "issues" in the world now that I cannot claim to understand so I basically leave the debates to those who do. I try to focus on the stuff that personally affects me. Otherwise, I am just another voice yapping about things of which I know basically nothing and for which I have no skin in the game. I liken it to never learning how to barbecue, i.e. that is a man's job, one of the very few domestic responsibilities that men from my generation took on. Why would I add another skill set to the already overloaded one I have when I can just plead ignorance and let someone else take it on? I consider myself intelligent and articulate - but sometimes ignorance is bliss.
Thank you, Frederick, for another thought-provoking piece.
Focusing on stuff that affects you personally is probably wise. We aren't built for the 24-hour news cycle, the constant antagonism of a culture at odds with itself. It's exhausting, and too many of us get drawn into it unnecessarily when we could be reading a good novel. Glad you found the piece interesting.
I get a kick out of people declaring opposition to Islam racist. About half of all Muslims are Indonesians, not Arabs. And a lot are Africans and some are Asians - I'm thinking of the Uyghurs in China. Accusations of racism are the cries of the feeble-minded. And malicious. Always malicious.
This is a brilliant article Frederick! I know how much time and energy is required to create a piece of this scope and depth, and appreciate your efforts.
A respected friend drew my attention to Sam Harris some years ago, when I first learned that DEI existed and that they were after me. I subscribed to his podcast only to learn that I don’t like to listen to podcasts unless I am doing a prolonged manual task at the same time. So unfortunately, I am not familiar with his ideas.
Your points about the relationships between moral clarity, honesty, and courage under pressure to conform, speak to the central values of my life.
I am on vacation and my phone is the only digital device I brought with me. I pledge to repost some quotes from this article when I am back on my computer.
I'm similar – I can only really listen to podcasts while commuting or driving, neither of which I do anymore, so I rarely listen the way I used to. As for those values, yes, they're very much mine as well.
Many thanks for the kind words, Sandra. Have a great vacation!
Excellent assessment of the Harris piece, Frederick. Well done. I’ve been following Harris since the days after 9/11 and my take on him is the same as yours. He can have a bit of a dog-with-a-bone quality sometimes, but even so, I don’t doubt his rigor and honesty about what he really thinks. As a thirty-plus year meditation practitioner, I’ve found his guidance on Waking Up really illuminating. A true constellation of good teachers there, too. His clarity on this issue has real value, and your further takes do too. I felt the same as you describe after 10/7, but was immediately confronted with the counter-narrative on 10/8, and it was a shock, namely the reaction of the progressive left. Even given the obvious acknowledgment of Israeli failures, the moral inversions are the craziest thing I’ve ever witnessed, and that’s saying something.
Thirty years practising meditation – I'm in awe. I've tried so many times to make a habit of it and have his app (which is wonderful), but somehow lack the discipline. As for October 7, yes, that's exactly how it was for me. Thanks, Tony.
Thanks, Paul. I used to read Sullivan all the time. I just don't recognise him any more. As you say, another broken brain on this issue and there are so many examples like it, alas.
Hitler used anti-Semitism to good effect but he hated Poles just as much. The Nazis killed 6 million Jews but their plan was to kill 30 to 60 million Slavs and to wipe Poland off the map. They actually killed 3 million Polish Jews and also 3 million non Jewish Poles. It is never about the Jews, because those who hate Jews will always turn to attack others as well. This used to be understood on the Left, but because of refusal to see Islam as it is, not any more.
Good point. The Left's dishonesty on these issues has become everybody's problem.
Very well written, Frederick. I have read Harris' books and I much admire him.
Thanks, Bob. Same here. He's so lucid and always a pleasure to listen to and read, even when I disagree with him (which is rare).
The “see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil” approach is the core set of principles for good moral “liberals” these days. The problem is that this fantasy does not begin to erase all the evil among us humans, so the liberals have to scapegoat individuals and groups for causing the bad stuff to happen. Scapegoating white men, Jews, “transphobes,” and “Islamaphobes” also gives the liberals an approved outlet for the evil tendencies within themselves. As everyone on the right has accurately pointed out, the libs are actually a rageful, controlling, abusive mob.
Another great analysis, Frederick! I enjoyed the Youtube clip with Ben Affleck raving like a brainwashed lunatic and completely missing Sam’s point (well, maybe “enjoy" is not the right word!) And I liked hearing about Sam Harris’ “What If” scenario regarding Israel and the Palestinians. I think it is difficult for us Westerners brought up in liberal societies, (which strive for compassion and tolerance) to truly understand the committed destructiveness of radical Islamists. Death cult is the right word for it. It continues to be extremely disturbing to watch the political Left look away from this and blame those under continued threat of this relentless aggression. I think Trump, for all his massive failings, “gets” this in a way that most Democrats do not.
Thanks, Kim. Yes, Sam Harris has been the clearest voice on this for years, and Trump, for all his many faults, at least instinctively understands the threat coming from political Islam while the Left's delusions on this endanger us all.
I saw that post, which wasn't paywalled. I first discovered Harris in the days after 10/7 when I was incredulous about the response, and Harris was able to articulate my objections so well. I made my family listen to it. He is absolutely brilliant on this topic. But I disagree with him on so many other topics, I gave up being a listener. Which is a shame, because he made me think much more rigorously ... my failing is that I disagree with him, but mostly can't explain why he is wrong, and I don't have time in my life, nor the skill, to develop the counter arguments that match his precision and clarity. My fundamental disagreement is in the nature of reality itself, in the spiritual and supernatural (I am a Christian) and in the belief in free will, so I'm not sure we could ever agree on topics Sam is convicted, for reasons I perfectly understand, given his foundational beliefs.
But on the moral clarity with respect to Islam & Israel & a liberal West, there is no stronger and clearer voice.
That said, your voice is similarly clear and precise and persuasive. I'd love to listen to you and Sam talk!
Great comment and I particularly agree with your last two sentences.
Thanks, James – that's very generous. I have struggled with the free will question as well. Daniel Dennett put up a good defence when the two spoke on the topic, but I found it very hard to keep up in the end. One can spend years looking at the question, as each did in their own way.
I was a fairly convinced atheist for years, and a huge fan of Christopher Hitchens (mainly for his oratorical gifts), but lost patience with Dawkins long ago. These days, I think of myself as a cultural Christian rather than a believing one, as I haven't been able to overcome some of the philosophical objections.
I understand the rational hurdles. I spent almost 40 years passively rejecting because of them. I don't think faith can be rationalized entirely. But neither can our existence and human consciousness. Free will can't be explained by physics. Without free will, there is no responsibility or accountability. There really is no meaning. I choose not to live that way.
Science can't disprove a God that is supernatural and acts accordingly, other than by an absence of affirmative evidence. I believe He may act from time to time in ways that are observable - miraculous - but these are rare. If He created the universe, He certainly has the power. I think He withholds it because to show it would be tantamount to demanding obeisance, which would override the free will required to love Him freely.
Faith does not arise from the absence of all doubt. I have doubts about literacy and corruption of doctrine and absence of evidence. I struggled with the idea that my sins were bad enough that Jesus had to sacrifice Himself for me. So much doubt. But I believe in the possibility, and that is good, and hopeful. I choose to live this way.
*literalism
There are so many "issues" in the world now that I cannot claim to understand so I basically leave the debates to those who do. I try to focus on the stuff that personally affects me. Otherwise, I am just another voice yapping about things of which I know basically nothing and for which I have no skin in the game. I liken it to never learning how to barbecue, i.e. that is a man's job, one of the very few domestic responsibilities that men from my generation took on. Why would I add another skill set to the already overloaded one I have when I can just plead ignorance and let someone else take it on? I consider myself intelligent and articulate - but sometimes ignorance is bliss.
Thank you, Frederick, for another thought-provoking piece.
Focusing on stuff that affects you personally is probably wise. We aren't built for the 24-hour news cycle, the constant antagonism of a culture at odds with itself. It's exhausting, and too many of us get drawn into it unnecessarily when we could be reading a good novel. Glad you found the piece interesting.
Thank you, Frederick. You help bring clarity to things I wonder about.
Thanks, Helen. That's really good to hear.
I get a kick out of people declaring opposition to Islam racist. About half of all Muslims are Indonesians, not Arabs. And a lot are Africans and some are Asians - I'm thinking of the Uyghurs in China. Accusations of racism are the cries of the feeble-minded. And malicious. Always malicious.
There's a great deal of malice there, I agree.
This is a brilliant article Frederick! I know how much time and energy is required to create a piece of this scope and depth, and appreciate your efforts.
A respected friend drew my attention to Sam Harris some years ago, when I first learned that DEI existed and that they were after me. I subscribed to his podcast only to learn that I don’t like to listen to podcasts unless I am doing a prolonged manual task at the same time. So unfortunately, I am not familiar with his ideas.
Your points about the relationships between moral clarity, honesty, and courage under pressure to conform, speak to the central values of my life.
I am on vacation and my phone is the only digital device I brought with me. I pledge to repost some quotes from this article when I am back on my computer.
I'm similar – I can only really listen to podcasts while commuting or driving, neither of which I do anymore, so I rarely listen the way I used to. As for those values, yes, they're very much mine as well.
Many thanks for the kind words, Sandra. Have a great vacation!
Excellent assessment of the Harris piece, Frederick. Well done. I’ve been following Harris since the days after 9/11 and my take on him is the same as yours. He can have a bit of a dog-with-a-bone quality sometimes, but even so, I don’t doubt his rigor and honesty about what he really thinks. As a thirty-plus year meditation practitioner, I’ve found his guidance on Waking Up really illuminating. A true constellation of good teachers there, too. His clarity on this issue has real value, and your further takes do too. I felt the same as you describe after 10/7, but was immediately confronted with the counter-narrative on 10/8, and it was a shock, namely the reaction of the progressive left. Even given the obvious acknowledgment of Israeli failures, the moral inversions are the craziest thing I’ve ever witnessed, and that’s saying something.
Anyway, thanks for your observations.
Thirty years practising meditation – I'm in awe. I've tried so many times to make a habit of it and have his app (which is wonderful), but somehow lack the discipline. As for October 7, yes, that's exactly how it was for me. Thanks, Tony.
This is such a rare evenhanded treatment of Harris. In fact, I haven’t seen anyone dissect his views with this much good sense and close attention.
As for Andrew Sullivan, I know it’s a cliche to say Gaza broke some people’s brains, but in his case it truly has.
Thanks, Paul. I used to read Sullivan all the time. I just don't recognise him any more. As you say, another broken brain on this issue and there are so many examples like it, alas.