Spencer
I just listened to another of Robert Spencer’s cliched speeches, this time at the Young America’s Foundation’s 2009 conference.
I don’t think he’s ever made a reasonable argument about anything. Much like Brigitte Gabriel and others of their ilk, Spencer never has anything to say that hasn’t been said a hundred times before.
And, he never has anything to say that would sound even half-way reasonable to any sensible, educated individual.
For instance, he talks about how it is okay to criticize Judaism in the West. Is it really?
Apart from the United States and Canada, anti-Semitism is illegal and punishable by imprisonment in almost every single country in Europe. Holocaust denial is illegal and punishable by imprisonment in most of Europe. That’s the bulk of the West.
The only exception, perhaps, has been the Netherlands, where there is a culture of tolerance. The recent persecution of Gert Wilders, regardless of the actual content of his works, is an unfortunate situation and runs counter to the institutionalization of diversity and multiculturalism.
Coming back to the topic at hand, a 2005 State Dept. report describes the situation in Belgium:
Anti-Semitic acts or speech are illegal.
And, in Germany:
Distribution of the propaganda of proscribed organizations, statements inciting racial hatred and endorsing Nazism, and denial of the Holocaust are illegal
Of course, we have Freedom of Speech and Expression in the United States, but is anti-Semitism tolerated anywhere? No.
Anti-Islamic speech, however, is perfectly acceptable almost everywhere, under law and in public. I am not saying that we ban anti-Islamic speech. Nor am I saying that anti-Semitism is acceptable.
But when Spencer claims that it is okay to criticize Judaism in the West, he is clearly lying. It isn’t acceptable anywhere, not in Europe, not in the US.
When Spencer talks about an attempt by the OIC to ban Anti-Islamic speech, how is that different from the bans on Anti-Semitism?
If the ADL can sue anyone for Anti-Semitism or Austria can imprison authors for holocaust denial, how is the same not acceptable coming from a Muslim organization?
Spencer’s hypocrisy in this matter is just astounding. The fact that he presents it as intelligence discourse is not at all surprising, but that conservatives are enamored by him is.
The fact that the Young America’s Foundation, an organization that claims to protect Ronald Reagan’s legacy, would invite him to talk at its conference is even more surprising. Is the organization trying to foster healthy conservatism among our youth or right-extremism?
Spencer hardly represents Reagan-ism. Spencer’s speech hardly fits in with what the RightPundits describes as Reagan’s:
optimistic resonating conservative message
Does Spencer’s anti-Islamic speech resonate with the majority of Americans? Is it even optimistic? Do conservatives want to continue alienating the majority with their bigoted obsessions?
Further, Reagan felt:
conservatism is a broad appeal when appealed broadly
Spencer hardly appeals to anyone but Islamo-phobes. Bravo, YAF.
