Mainstream sources for rebuttals of Neocon sophistry

Last updated on: May 7, 2013 at 6:47 pm by Svend White

Mainstream sources for rebuttals of Neocon sophistry 2013-05-07T18:47:29-05:00 Svend White

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Recently someone on a mailing list that I’m on asked for suggestions of American media or thinkers who challenge the Neocon world view that makes Muslims the root of all evil today. He was especially interested in sources coming at it from the right and that themselves had solid pro-Israeli credentials.

What follows is the gist of my response.

——————–

There was a time when this task wouldn’t have been quite so difficult, but now that we’ve replaced for most of the American Right the Reds as the Bogey Man/Anti-Christ/Raison d’etre/Justification-for-endless-Defense-pork I think you’ll be hard pressed to find a single person with widespread credibility on the Right who’s publicly refuting this Islamophobic nonsense while still being in the pro-Israel lobby’s good graces. These maladies tend to go hand in hand.

Of the big names on the Right, Robert Novack and Pat Buchanan are probably the only major pundits that could be said to be remotely pro-Arab or pro-Palestinian, but I don’t think they’re likely to critique Islamophobic myths except indirectly when they happen to shoot down these myths’ purveyors.

The simplest thing is probably to buy the person a subscription to The American Conservative , a fascinating paleocon publication that bluntly challenges the Neocon world view (including
uncritical support for Israel), and from a conservative perspective. While it’s not necessarily pro-Muslim in its outlook–its editor has said some rather problematic things about Islam and Muslims–it’s certainly an enemy of our enemies that calls into question the legitimacy of key
assumptions behind Islamophobic discourse today.

One refreshing recent example of dissent about Islamophobia on the Right (and in the New York Post of all places) was Ralph Peters’ couragous column, "Islam-haters: An Enemy Within", about which I’ve blogged previously.

I’d also recommend Charlie Reese, a rare conservative columnist who’s been courageously talking sense about Muslims and the Middle East for years, and no doubt paid a heavy price professionally for it.

I wouldn’t be surprised if considerably more conservative dissenters were to be found among other contributors to LewRockwell.com, which is a lively forum for libertarian debate.

There’s the Independent Institute in California, a libertarian think tank which seems to live up to its name and which has had the vision and courage to work with an up and coming Muslim organization ISPU. It has at times provided a platform for truly radical critiques of the tired post-9/11 Beltway thinking on defense and foreign affairs. Its Ivan Eland has been a particularly articulate critic of War on Terror hysteria and sensationalism.

Speaking of Eland and the Independent Institute, I think they illustrate the truth of the old business mantra, Location, location, location! Except with the twist that when it comes to political engagement and integrity in American politics today, you’re best off being away from where the "action" is:

Perhaps their secret is being in California, beyond the crushing gravitational pull of that intellectual black hole known as the "Beltway Consensus".

In an incisive essay after the 7/7 attack ("Why did terrorists strike London?"), Eland cut through the conventional weasel words and rationalizations and pointed to the elephant in the room so stuidiously ignored inside the Beltway, the inevitable radicalization caused by blatantly partisan and self-evidently immoral American foreign policy:

Anytime non-combatants are purposefully killed, a monstrous moral crime has been committed. But in the United States, no one ever seems to ask why the attackers are motivated to commit such horrendous acts. Much of the U.S. public seems to believe President Bush’s erroneous claim that the Islamists are attacking the United States because it is “free” instead of honestly examining the history of the U.S. government’s profligate meddling in the affairs of other countries.

There’s good old antiwar.com. Especially Justin Raimondo, who is a tiger who ruthlessly punctures Washington complancency and sound-bytes on the Middle East . (Would love to see him get into the ring with Christopher Hitchens.)

None of these tackle the pseudo-academic attacks on Islam of propagandists-in-historians-clothing like Robert Spencer or Daniel Pipes. (I should note that I do not categorize Bernard Lewis thus, even with his many faults and evident bias.)

That’s a different type of scholarly endeavor that will only (and, I suspect, can only) be done by Muslims. It’s happening piecemeal all over the place, but it’s much harder to come up with a "one-stop shop" for talking points in those equally critical debates.

Any suggestions?

Washington and the Middle East

Previous Post

January 13, 2007

"Little Mosque on the Prairie"

Next Post

January 14, 2007 A different kind of storm

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category American Politics Animals in Islam Anti-Semitism Christian Jihadism Christianity Culture & the Arts Current Affairs Denmark Dogs in Islam Family life Film Gender Great MP3s Hate in America Imam W.D. Mohammed Interfaith Dialogue International Affairs Islam and the Left Islamic Thought Islamophobia Jihad Judaism Legos Link of the Day Marriage Misc Modernity/Post-Modernity Mormonism Multiculturalism Music Muslims in the Melting Pot Must-Listen Podcasts Non-Muslims and Islam Pakistan Pictures Pigs in Islam Polygamy Pork Progressive Muslims Race Relations Really Important Stuff Religion Required Reading Robert Spencer Scandinavia Science Science Fiction Sex in Islam So-called Globalization South Asia Star Trek Strange but True Studying Arabic Stupid Muslim Tricks Sufism/Tasawwuf Television The "Miami 7" hoopla The Corporate Media The Danish cartoons The GWOT The Jihad against Islam The Middle East Vikings! Wahhabism/Salafism Washington and the Middle East Web/Tech Women in Islam

Select a Month March 2014 February 2014 November 2013 September 2013 July 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 September 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does "Abba" literally mean?

Select your answer to see how you score.

My God Parent Father Lord