The conservative media and the trial of Geert Wilders
Note (Feb 3, 11:30 a.m.): As several readers have informed me, after this entry was posted last night, in which I said that National Review Online had had no articles on the Wilders trial, NRO posted a symposium on the Wilders trial. This VFR entry was posted at 2:12 a.m. The NRO symposium was posted at 4 a.m. Is VFR on the cutting edge of societal evolution, or what?
Update: However, since, as A. Zarkov points out below, the NRO symposium adds nothing new to the debate on the Islam problem but just repeats the usual complaints about Islamization with no idea of what to do about it, it appears that in this instance VFR was on the cutting edge of societal stasis.
Apart from the anti-Islamization websites, which are of course intensely interested in the Wilders trial, how has the trial been covered by the establishment conservative magazines? I did some Googling to find out. The results are stunning.
National Review Online, apart from a few mentions at the Corner in January (and none in February) has had no articles on the trial.
site:nationalreview.com wilders trial
The Weekly Standard has nothing.
site:weeklystandard.com wilders trial
Commentary has nothing.
site:commentarymagazine.com wilders trial
Human Events has nothing.
site:humanevents.com wilders trial
The American Spectator had a reader’s comment last September on the upcoming trial, and a significant article about the trial on January 22, in which it brought out the fact that the Dutch judicial system, by punishing criticism of Islam, was in effect the enforcer of Islamic law. Thus TAS is the only establishment conservative publication with an article about the trial.
site:spectator.org wilders trial
Of course the Wall Street Journal criticized the trial, but only because the trial threatened to bring out negative truths about Islam, not because it was an act of tyranny exerted on behalf of Islam.
What about the paleocons and Buchananites?
Chronicles has nothing.
site:chroniclesmagazine.org wilders trial
Indeed, Chronicles has never published anything on Geert Wilders at all. The other magazines mentioned above have had numerous references to Wilders, just not anything on the Wilders trial. But the name Wilders has never appeared at the Chronicles site.
What about The Paleostinian Conservative, laughably known as The American Conservative?
TAC has nothing on the Wilders trial.
site:amconmag.com wilders trial
Apart from the trial, TAC has had some references to Wilders, most or all of them (based on a glance at the Google results), negative. No surprise there. TAC is pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel. Wilders, markedly unlike most European politicians, is very vocally pro-Israel.
Mike Berman writes:
Thank you for the effort you made in preparing this information. What a sorry state of affairs it reveals. Here is still another reason why your site is so valuable.A. Zarkov writes:
I have not read the whole of the NRO symposium, but I’ve read enough to say that I don’t see any solutions, only the usual complaining and whining about what’s happening to Europe and what might happen to America. It’s a little like hearing the politicians warn us about the impending shortfalls in Medicare and Social Security. They tell us we can’t keep this up, but I don’t hear any solutions. Go ask them, as I have, and all you get is a blank stare. I have also asked Republican politicians face-to-face why we need to fight the Muslims in Afghanistan when we could simply keep them out of the U.S. by not letting them immigrate here. I point that Al-Qaeda has no air force, no intercontinental ballistic missiles, and no navy. I ask how can they possibly threaten us if we don’t let them into the country? Again the blank stare. They know the answers, but they can’t utter them because it’s political suicide in modern America. This is what we have to work on. We must make it safe to talk about certain forbidden topics.LA replies:
You wrote:N. writes:
You wrote in reply to my previous e-mail:LA writes:
Also, having a symposium is the easiest, most cost-free way of dealing with an issue. Instead of having a contributor write a real article on the subject which might have a real impact on the debate, you ask a bunch of people to send their thoughts, limited to two or three hundred words each, basically the equivalent of a collection of blog comments..
Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 08, 2010 02:12 AM | Send