Vdare reader supports Roberts

Yesterday Vdare ran a letter from a reader named Sean who says that Paul Craig Roberts “is not a crackpot. Nor are his writings bizarre.” Instead, Sean writes,

I applaud Paul Craig Roberts as a true American. It is refreshing to find there are still real, old school conservatives left.

Now let’s see, what “old school conservatism” could that be? The old-school conservatism of insane conspiracy theories charging that the president and vice president of the United States in league with Muslim terrorists orchestrated the biggest terrorist attack in history against New York City and Washington, D.C., and that the same president and vice president are currently planning an ever bigger terrorist attack against our country? Or is it the old-school conservatism that would like the entire population of Mexico to immigrate into the U.S., if only said invasion would result in the expulsion from the U.S. of a small group of mostly Jewish journalists and intellectuals?

I’ll lay 19-1 odds that, for Vdare reader Sean, the “old-school conservatism” he finds so bracing is old-school anti-Semitism, and a particularly vicious and paranoid version of it at that.

Joe Guzzardi of Vdare notes that Sean’s letter is “one of dozens we have received both in support of and opposed to Paul Craig Roberts. Over the next few weeks, we will post as many as possible.” Vdare would not like to acknowledge the fact, but this flurry of controversy was probably generated by what I have been saying about Roberts at VFR. This is especially likely since Robert’s most outrageous statement from an immigration restrictionist point of view, his welcoming of all of Mexico to move to America, was published on May 28 and did not receive any notice until I wrote about it last week. See links to the VFR articles here.

However, while Sean’s letter is certainly enlightening, there is a downside to it. By encouraging debate about Roberts among its readers and running letters like Sean’s, instead of simply doing the right thing and ceasing to run Roberts’s hate-mongering columns, Vdare is going to taint itself and the immigration restriction movement even more with Roberts-type madness. After all, the people who write to Vdare in defense of Roberts will not just be saying, as Peter Brimelow says, that Roberts should be published because Roberts is Brimelow’s friend and because Vdare has paid for all of Roberts’s columns. No, they will be saying that Roberts’ insane conspiracy theories are correct. A principle of serious conservatism, and of civilization itself, is that you do not allow flagrantly irrational people to participate as equals in public debate.

- end of initial entry -

James M. writes:

“The old-school conservatism of insane conspiracy theories charging that the president and vice president of the United States in league with Muslim terrorists orchestrated the biggest terrorist attack in history against New York City and Washington, D.C., and that the same president and vice president are currently planning an ever bigger terrorist attack against our country?”

It’s seems to me that you are so sensitive to 9-11 conspiracy theories because you believe that, if ANY conspiracy exists, anywhere in the world, it must be Jewish in origin. Do YOU believe that, or are you projecting that on ANYONE who says that there are many unanswered questions about 9-11? Having read your blog for months now, it seems incongruous that you don’t believe Bush on immigration and various other topics, but, when it comes to 9-11, the federal government’s version of events is equivalent to holy writ. I’m not trying to get into a pissing match with you on this topic—but your blindness on this issue is off-putting. It doesn’t require him to be “in league with Muslim terrorists” in order to turn a blind eye to intelligence that clearly said Muslims were planning on using planes as missiles. That’s a really flimsy straw man, and is beneath you, IMHO.

I ask you once again—if Bush REALLY believed that 19 men could bring down the WTC, would he allow MILLIONS of illegals into the country, totally unfiltered?

LA replies:

Sorry, James M., but for Bush to bring down the World Trade Center with planted explosives one hour after the WTC was hit by hijacked planes certainly does require Bush to be in league with Muslim terrorists.

I also direct readers’ attention to the device used by James M. which I discussed the other day as a device constantly used by the conspiracy mongers. James M. points to something rational-seeming about his/Roberts’s position: hey, he’s just “asking questions” about 9/11. And to attack people for “just asking questions” is obviously a species of PC, anti-anti-Semitic bullying. But of course Roberts is not just “asking questions.” James M., like all conspiracy mongers piggy backs his conspiracy theories onto rational statements.

Another example: Because I’ve said that Bush has lied about many things, therefore I’m irrational and inconsistent in not believing that Bush was behind the 9/11 attack.

Another example: since Bush is in favor of illegal immigration, therefore it’s likely that he was behind the 9/11 attack.

This way of thinking can also be analyzed in terms of tribalism and magical thinking. Since Bush is pro-illegal immigration, he’s an enemy of America; since he’s an enemy of America, there is literally NOTHING he wouldn’t and couldn’t do against America. The enemy is the enemy. If a person is the enemy, then anything one can imagine an enemy doing, that person is capable of doing.

Also, be sure to see the e-mail to me from a Vdare supporter that was provoked by this present blog entry.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at July 24, 2007 06:48 PM | Send