Sure. Simply read the book’s own advertising to see that it is precisely the sort of title that feeds ultra-right paranoia.
I’m sorry but this is still ad hominem. This is not an argument about whether Steyn is a conservative. I wasn’t asking you to substantiate that. He is a conservative. You are trying to imply that because he is conservative, that his arguments are invalid because of it. It’s from right-wingers, therefore it must be wrong or hopelessly biased is a fallacy. If it truly is that, it should be no problem to dismantle their actual arguments. But that would involve thought wouldn’t it?
Oh, I totally disagree. I’m not at all making the term “conservative” a pejorative. I believe that Steyn is far from a conservative - far, far to the right of what is considered to be a conservative.
Not at all. I deny that he is a conservative. Read what he writes, then read something by genuine conservatives. Try someone like Russell Kirk, for example. Compare the tone and the arguments.
Again, he is not simply to the right like the normal small government, fiscal responsibility, strong defense conservatives - he is an ultra-rightist and his book is aimed at those who are ready to accept extremist paranoia.
Good gravy! The point of all this is that his arguments are not invalid just because of your childish caricature.
Tsk, tsk. You call my describing Steyn as a far-rightist an ad hominem, but turn around and refer to me as childish. Not an ad hominem?
No. Not an ad hominem because I called your caricature childish, not you personally childish.Tsk, tsk. You call my describing Steyn as a far-rightist an ad hominem, but turn around and refer to me as childish. Not an ad hominem?
Ah, yes, splitting hairs. Like saying that one doesn’t hate George Bush, just everything he ever wrote or said. An awfully fine distinction, I’d say.
Not splitting hairs at all. I’m attacking the argument, not you.
You are claiming that Steyn is just a “conservative” and so are attacking my contention that he represents not conservatism, but a far-right position that amounts to extremism. Is that it?
I think that is something all of us here can do and form our own opinions.
Picked it up the week it was released. His analysis cannot be refuted, his prose is wonderful but I dunno, the book depressed me. Maybe because I’ve followed the demographics. Steyn’s humor, so evident in his columns, fell flat. Might be just me. Reviews are glowing. Couple days after receiving America Alone I bought the book I referenced above, Without Roots; The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam by Pope Benedict XVI (then Joseph Ratzinger) and Marcello Pera, as an antidote to Steyn. Anyone who is honest knows where the EU is headed. I wanted to hear from those who believe that path is not inevitable.
There is something to be said for not reading a tone or an emotion into anothers post because it might not be there. I am not angry, nor are my words. As far as forming one’s own opinion, who suggested otherwise? I would suggest that Richardols has not read the book, so if someone says that merely looking at who endorsed it on the dust flap determines whether his actual ideas are all wet or not, there is not much I can do about that. I think the fallacy is painfully obvious, but so be it.