The American Scene

An ongoing review of politics and culture


Articles filed under The Media


A Hastily Compiled, Non-Definitive List of Books That Have Influenced Me

Tyler Cowen has posted a list of books which influenced him the most, and, on Twitter, Mr. Gobry has asked for similar lists from TAS contributors. Happy to oblige! I’m not sure if the books below are truly the absolute most influential in my life, but they’re certainly the ones that immediately stick out in my mind as having stuck with me over time.

Fahrenheit 451 — Ray Bradbury: I’ve always been a little perplexed by the book’s reputation as a defense of free speech. It is, of course, but that’s not its most important point by far. Instead, it’s a novel about mental debilitation and loss of empathy induced by media overload — in particular, overload on shallow, visual, electronic media. It’s also a novel about the love of stories, and the way written stories in particular can provide humans with meaning, purpose, and escape; by the book’s end, the hero joins an outcast community in which individuals devote themselves not only to learning works of literature, but to immersing themselves in them, fusing their identities with these works and, in a sense, becoming them. For reasons that should be obvious, I’ve long found this wonderful and tremendously appealing.

Videohound’s Guide to Cult Flicks and Trash Pics: Before the Internet, and thus before easy access to IMDB and the rest of the digital cinemaverse, cinephiles had to rely on incomplete reference books in order to familiarize themselves with back catalog films. For years, I poured over Videohounds’ cult film guide almost daily, and its sensibility — a quirky mix of giddy, passionate, erudite, snarky, and critical — helped shape my appreciation of and attitude toward pulp ever since.

The Caves of Steel — Isaac Asimov: As an eight year old first reading the book, I loved Asimov’s cleverly constructed murder mystery story, and as an already-devoted sci-fi geek (Star Trek was a staple in my household), I loved the intricate future world Asimov designed even more. But what stuck with me most was the slightly detached, slightly cranky, cerebral-but-not-stuck-up quality of both the detective protagonist, Elijah Baley, and the storytelling itself. As with most of Asimov’s characters (and, as I understand, Asimov himself), Baley was a hyper self-aware invert somewhat vexed by people and social situations, but who solved problems by thinking them through as thoroughly as possible and accepting whatever results, often imperfect, came of this method. Perhaps to my detriment, I related to this quite a bit and found it a useful model for understanding human relations.

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns — Frank Miller: I got my first copy of this at nine or ten years old, and I literally read and reread it until it fell apart (for a while I held it together with duct tape, but eventually I lost so many pages that it was no longer worth saving). Miller’s fusion of gruff noir sentiment and comic book action helped define the way I think about pop art and genre storytelling; sure, it’s low culture — frequently crude and base — but it’s executed with such verve that it somehow makes it into the upper middlebrow (or near enough) anyway.

Ender’s Game — Orson Scott Card: Speaking of hyper-cerebral! Scott Card’s later books descend into a near-parody of the Asimovian worldview, with protagonists who presume (and act upon) an absurdly concrete and knowable understanding of human behavior. But while you can find hints of this in Ender’s Game, it works anyway, in large part because of the young age of its heroes. These days, I prefer the first two sequels, Speaker for the Dead and Xenocide, both of which are more mature in their outlook. But the original is the one I’ve read most often, and the one I think of most.

The Catcher in the Rye — J.D. Salinger: Yes, another novel about a social outcast who spends too much time in his head. But it’s a classic for a reason, and an enduring portrait of adolescent questioning.

American Pastoral — Philip Roth: Probably the finest work of prose in the bunch, and arguably also the most mature, it’s one of those novels that’s both impressive and gripping — not only do you admire it, but you can’t stop flipping pages as you do.

You may have noticed that except for the Videohound guide, it’s all fiction. For a reason! While I read a lot of magazine-length nonfiction, I read very little in the way of nonfiction books. And what I have read came later: In my formative, pre-college years, I probably read fewer than a dozen non-fiction books (not counting school text books, although I suppose I didn’t actually read most of those either). It’s not that nonfiction books haven’t influenced me — think of obvious libertarian touchstones: The Road to Serfdom, The Law, Capitalism and Freedom, The Calculus of Consentbut I read them most of them post-college and, as a result, I suppose I don’t feel like they’re really, well… as much a part of me in the Fahrenheit 451 sense.

Another Exceptional Critique of Lowry and Ponnuru

Daniel Larison offers another deconstruction of the infamous essay and the even weaker response:

[T]heir argument is not really with Obama’s belief in American exceptionalism, but something much more basic. They do not much care for his domestic policy, and they have a sneaking suspicion that there is something wrong with his foreign policy even though they cannot actually prove it. For whatever reason, instead of advancing policy arguments against the administration’s agenda, they have concocted a half-baked theory to make American progressivism and American exceptionalism appear antithetical to one another when any halfway honest accounting of modern domestic and foreign policy tells us that they have been complementary and closely linked. From my perspective, that is one reason to be very skeptical of American exceptionalism, but there is no real reason why anyone who believes in American exceptionalism should doubt Obama’s belief in the same.

Conor dealt with this business here and here.

The Party of Small Government

I’ve got a piece up at Newsweek looking at how Paul Ryan’s deficit-killing Roadmap For America might cause problems for the GOP.

Evangelical Humanitarians, Condoning Anti-Tax Violence, Etc.

Peter beat me to recommending Ross’ great column on the health care summit, but almost everything in the Times Week In Review section is worth a read this week.

Nicholas Kristof on evangelical humanitarians expanding the definition of “pro-life”:

A pop quiz: What’s the largest U.S.-based international relief and development organization?

It’s not Save the Children, and it’s not CARE — both terrific secular organizations. Rather, it’s World Vision, a Seattle-based Christian organization (with strong evangelical roots) whose budget has roughly tripled over the last decade.

…Evangelicals have become the new internationalists, pushing successfully for new American programs against AIDS and malaria, and doing superb work on issues from human trafficking in India to mass rape in Congo.

And Frank Rich on Republican pols who got way too close to condoning the suicide attack on the I.R.S. building in Austin:

What made that kamikaze mission eventful was less the deranged act itself than the curious reaction of politicians on the right who gave it a pass — or, worse, flirted with condoning it. Stack was a lone madman, and it would be both glib and inaccurate to call him a card-carrying Tea Partier or a “Tea Party terrorist.” But he did leave behind a manifesto whose frothing anti-government, anti-tax rage overlaps with some of those marching under the Tea Party banner. That rant inspired like-minded Americans to create instant Facebook shrines to his martyrdom. Soon enough, some cowed politicians, including the newly minted Tea Party hero Scott Brown, were publicly empathizing with Stack’s credo — rather than risk crossing the most unforgiving brigade in their base.

Elsewhere we have a clash of European privacy and American speech, the terrifying things that could happen if we leave health care alone, and some typical Gore on climate change.

The Winners

My picks for the best journalism of 2009 are posted here.

The Best of Journalism: 2008

(Originally published in Culture11, I am republishing this feature at The American Scene in advance of the 2009 awards. Is an enterprising editor perhaps interested in paying to publish those? If not you’ll see ‘em here.)

Best Storytelling

Trouble in Paradise by William Prochnau and Laura Parker

Perhaps you’ve seen Mutiny on the Bounty. Did you know it was a true story? Or that the rogue sailors kidnapped Polynesian women, sailed away to escape the British Navy, and wound up on a remote island where they proceeded to develop a society whose social mores were a bi-cultural mix of Polynesian and rogue sailor? That’s just the beginning of the most fascinating story I read all year.

Best Personal Essay

What Kind of Father Am I? By James McConkey

The writer, an octogenarian, looks back “at a lifetime of parenting sons and being parented by them.” His essay brims with all the wisdom of a life well lived, rendered with dramatic tension and ringing as true as Leo Tolstoy at his best. The personal essay form is so often the province of the young these days. We cannot compete with the best our elders can muster.

A Woman’s Place by Caitlin Flanagan

The writer, musing on “Katie Couric’s long day’s journey into the evening,“manages to capture a ubiquitous but little remarked upon fact of modern life — the way in which television and its characters insert themselves into our lives, age as we do, provide us with succor, and come to feel as though we know them. It’s the rare magazine piece on a celebrity that’s worth reading.

Best Court Reporting

Dispatches from the R. Kelly Trial by Josh Levin

The writer captures the absurdity of the rapper’s… well, the absurdity of everything about him.

Best Profile

A Boy’s Life by Hanna Rosin

“Since he could speak, Brandon, now 8, has insisted that he was meant to be a girl,” says the subhead. “This summer, his parents decided to let him grow up as one.” The story,exhaustively reported and scrupulously balanced, delves into the scientific debate about the nature of gender, and asks “whether the limits of child indulgence have stretched too far.”

Best Review

Big Kills by Anthony Lane

The writer cinches this award with the first paragraph alone:

What is it like being Timur Bekmambetov? No artist should be confused too closely with his creations, but anybody who sits through “Wanted,” Bekmambetov’s new movie, will be tempted to wonder if the life style of the characters might not reflect or rub off on that of the director. How, for example, does he make a cup of coffee? My best guess, based on the evidence of the film, is that he tosses a handful of beans toward the ceiling, shoots them individually into a fine powder, leaves it hanging in the air, runs downstairs, breaks open a fire hydrant with his head, carefully directs the jet of water through the window of his apartment, sets fire to the building, then stands patiently with his mug amid the blazing ruins to collect the precious percolated drops. Don’t even think about a cappuccino.

Read the rest here.

Covering the Economic Disaster

The Giant Pool of Money by Alex Blumberg and Adam Davidson

The single best piece of financial journalism ever produced. You’ll even understand it!

The End by Michael Lewis

“The era that defined Wall Street is finally, officially over. The writer, who chronicled its excess in Liar’s Poker, returns to his old haunt to figure out what went wrong.”

Foreign Affairs

Policing Afghanistan by Graeme Wood

In Afghanistan an ethnic minority group that traces its lineage to Genghis Khan is proving to be an excellent source of recruits as Allied forces try to professionalize the police force. Why are they so professional in comparison to other Afghan policemen? Is using a minority group to police the majority setting the stage for horrific reprisals once Western forces leave the country? The writer answers these questions in an elegantly written, exceptionally contextualized piece reported while running through grape fields, avoiding Taliban ambushes and IEDs.

Into the Valley of Death by Sebastian Junger

This dispatch from “the deadliest pieces of terrain in the world for U.S. forces” chronicles Army outposts where “men spend their days in a surreal combination of backbreaking labor—building outposts on rocky ridges—and deadly firefights, while they try to avoid the mistakes the Russians made.” This piece made me appreciate, more than anything else I’ve read, the dangerous conditions braved by Americans on the front lines.

Best Campaign Coverage

The Magazine Industry!

Whether measured by scoops, quality of analysis or enjoyability of the read, newspapers were handily outshone by magazine writers covering election 2008 — notable mentions go to John Heilemann at New York, John Dickerson and Chris Beam at Slate, Marc Ambinder and Josh Green at The Atlantic, and Camille Paglia at Salon.

The Hardest Vote by George Packer

The writer tours Ohio, capturing the disaffection of working class voters.

Story I’d Most Want Every Mayor in America to Read

The NYPD Diaspora by Heather MacDonald

Want to reduce the murder rate in your city? The writer argues that crime-fighting techniques pioneered by the NYPD are doing just that all over America as former New York cops become police chiefs elsewhere.

Excellent Articles to Read Together

Food for Thought by John Schwenkler

The writer argues that renewing the culinary culture should be a conservative cause.

Farmer in Chief by Michael Pollan

The writer pens a letter to our next president about our blinkered agricultural policies.

Best Article on a Topic You Don’t Actually Need to Know Anything About

Up and Down by Nick Paumgarten

Every interesting fact related to elevators, and the story of one man trapped inside one. Will he live? Will he die?

The What You Are Afraid Of by Adam Sternbergh

The writer demonstrates his genius by penning a whole story about the comments section of a Brooklyn Web site — and it’s somehow gripping from start to finish!

Best Piece of Meta Criticism

How Wood Works: The Riches and Limits of James Wood by William Deresiewicz

If you like great literature, critics, and getting deep into the weeds about the ways in which they intersect, this piece is for you.

Best Legal Story

Too Weird for the Wire by Kevin Carey

“How black Baltimore drug dealers are using white supremacist legal theories to confound the Feds.”

Best Non-Fiction Book

The Dark Side by Jane Mayer

This exhaustively reported look at the Bush Administration’s use of torture and other illegal methods in the War on Terror has an ideological edge to it. No matter, for the facts presented are too powerful to be ignored, though that is just what segments of the right-leaning press is doing.

Best Story About an Absurd Topic

Hot for Creature by Eric Wills

“Thirteen years ago, William Dranginis saw Bigfoot. Fifty grand, a van, and a camera in a log later, the quest continues.”

Somehow, I Ended Up in a Bloggingheads Called "Puppies Are Awesome"

But don’t let that fool you: There are no puppies involved, just TPM’s Brian Beutler and myself talking health care reform.

Since puppies actually are awesome, and I wouldn’t want to leave you disappointed, here’s a picture of Bartleby:

Who Is the Inventor of Pomoconservatism?

James Poulos, Jeopardy champion!

The Gatekeeper

My first magazine feature for Reason — a look at the Congressional Budget Office — is now available online.

A Strange Argument About Political Journalism

In our recent Bloggingheads, I complained to Peter, as I am prone to do, about political writers and commentators who knowingly mislead their audiences. One of his responses was to say that it seemed as though what I want is more earnestness in political discourse.

That actually isn’t the case. Earnestness has its place in political discourse, especially when you’re trying to persuade people who are inclined to dismiss your arguments before even considering them. It also characterizes some of my blog posts (perhaps too many, as one can certainly be over-solicitous of folks who are going to focus on what they imagine or tactically assert to be your motivations). But I believe that sarcasm, polemic, satire, hyperbole, dark humor, and writers whose tone is seldom if ever earnest, whatever else it is, all have their place in journalism and conversations about politics more broadly. It is entirely possible to be fair, truthful, and logical without being earnest at all.

This brings me to Helen Rittelmeyer. Since she’s been honest about her dislike of my writing, I’ll disclose that her prose often drives me to distraction, probably more than it rationally ought to do — I spent half her piece on lady blogs mentally screaming at my laptop for her to acknowledge the existence of men’s magazines, and to grapple with them in her argument. It is precisely because Ms. Rittelmeyer is smart, and has a lot to offer as a writer, that it vexes me when she papers over flaws and incompletely fleshed out aspects of her arguments with nice turns of phrase, unkilled darlings, and too cute cleverness.

As best as I can tell, her argument in this post is that if you believe journalists shouldn’t lie, or write stuff they don’t believe for money, or allow partisan loyalties to color their writing in ways that mislead or misinform, you’re not qualified to write about politics. Of course, she doesn’t put her argument as starkly as I’ve just done it, but read the whole post yourself. Isn’t that what she’s basically saying, beneath the rhetorical flourishes that make the argument as she puts it seem less absurd?

Let me put it this way: I think pacifism is wrong, but I wouldn’t ever try to talk someone out of it; I’m glad that there are pacifists in the world, and I admire the commitment of the real pacifists I’ve met. But I wouldn’t send one to cover World War Two. I wouldn’t send a society matron to cover the NCAA playoffs. And I wouldn’t assign a punctiliously honest, “enlightened discourse” loving, goo-goo throwback like Conor to cover politics.

I’d like to hear more about why Ms. Rittlemeyer wouldn’t send a pacifist to cover World War II. Whatever her answer, I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be analogous to sending a society matron to cover an NCAA playoff game, since the underlying relationship is different in kind. As far as I can tell, the wisdom of assigning me to cover politics isn’t usefully informed by either analogy — violence is intrinsic to war in a way that isn’t true about dishonest journalists and politics, and I’m sure I observe politics a lot more closely than the archetypal society matron watches college basketball. As far as I can tell, we have the assertion from Ms. Rittlemeyer that a desire for honest public discourse is disqualifying without any coherent account of why this is so.

Then there is this:

No one has railed against mercenary journalism as fervently as Condorf. He always insists that you should never write something you don’t believe simply because you can get paid to write it. But if sending Conor to cover politics is like sending Dorothy Day to cover the Battle of Normandy, then it’s strange to hear him admit that money is the only reason he writes about politics so much. Remember, it’s not just that Conor doesn’t like writing about politics, or that it doesn’t interest him. It’s that his deep and powerful aversions to things like money, naked ambition, and team loyalty make him constitutionally ill-suited to political journalism. No crime there, but it does make his career seem masochistic.

Again, beneath the writerly flash this is certainly wrong, and perhaps empty. Does Ms. Rittlemeyer think that journalists should write stuff they don’t believe for monetary rewards? It sounds like an absurd question, but she certainly treats my belief that they shouldn’t do so as a quaint, fundamentally unserious curiosity. The pacifist analogy remains problematic for all sorts of reasons — to pick just one, it’s perfectly clear how more Dorothy Days among the allies could’ve weakened the fight against literal Nazis, whereas reducing mercenary journalism would be bad how? Ms. Rittlemeyer also seems unable to grasp the distinction between criticizing journalists who write stuff they don’t believe for money, on the one hand, and being someone who writes what he believes about politics more than he otherwise would because there is a market for it.

Why she believes I have an aversion to money, ambition or loyalty is beyond me. And while it’s true that I’d gladly start spending 40 percent of my time on fiction and 40 percent on travel writing tomorrow given a winning lottery ticket, that hardly makes writing about politics a masochistic exercise, seeing as how I’ve chosen it myself instead of any number of other careers I am perfectly capable of doing. I’d gladly go another round about the necessary attributes of political journalists, if there is actually anything more than what we’ve seen so far to her argument. Meanwhile consider this a broadsword to its slight sternum.

Average Janes

TAS-friend Helen Rittelmeyer’s Doublethink takedown of the world of ladyblogs is sharp and thoroughly entertaining. I don’t quite agree with all of her individual judgments, but on the whole, her assessment of the problems with ladyblogs is dead on.

Douthatblog is back

like a heart attack.

"Frum Forum"

It sounds like an Orthodox Jewish bulletin board, but it’s actually David Frum’s rebranded blog. Too bad Frum Youth and Frum Teens are already taken; there’s nowhere for the next generation of “Frum conservatives” to go. But maybe giving up on New Majority means he’s not quite sure there will be a next generation.

Postie Bob Barkered for Bad Journalism

This bit of Washington Post gossip is my favorite media story of the year (emphasis added):

Details are sketchy, but numerous witnesses report that veteran feature editor Henry Allen punched out feature writer Manuel Roig-Franzia on Friday. The fracas took place in sight of Post executive editor Marcus Brauchli’s office. Brauchli rushed to separate the two.
It should be noted that Allen is nearly seventy, but he served in the Marines in Vietnam. He also won a Pulitzer prize in 2000 for criticism. Both apparently came into play when Allen jumped Roig-Franzia.
According to many sources, the incident began when Style editor Ned Martel assigned a semi-political story to Monica Hesse and Roig-Franzia. Playing off of an inadvertent disclosure last week that many congressmen are being investigated for ethics violations, Martel asked the two Style writers to compile a list of similar disclosures in the past. They came up with a “charticle” with a dozen examples, starting with Robert E. Lee’s Civil War battle plans for Antietam showing up wrapped around cigars.
Allen took a look and didn’t like. He started ranting about the number of mistakes he had found.
Hesse at one point asked him to send the copy back to her. She got a bit teary at the verbal beatdown.
Allen, according to sources, said: “This is total crap. It’s the second worst story I have seen in Style in 43 years.”
Roig-Franzia then wandered into the newsroom. A veteran foreign correspondent, he has been turning out political features for Style. He heard Allen’s rant and stopped by his desk.
“Oh, Henry,” he supposedly said, “don’t be such a cocks——-.”
Allen lunged at Roig-Franzia, threw him to the newsroom floor, and started throwing punches. Roig-Franzia tried to fend him off. Brauchli and others pulled the two apart.
Veteran Style writers said they knew Allen wasn’t happy. He had come up in Style’s heady days, when writers could wax for a hundred inches on the wonder of plastic lawn furniture or the true meaning of the Vietnam War Memorial. No more. Working part time on contract, Allen seethed over the lost art of long-form journalism.

Desperate to determine the first worst story in Washington Post Style Section history, I’ve e-mailed Mr. Allen. Should he report back I’ll alert readers. Meanwhile feel free to make your nomination in comments.

Bemused and Weirdly Uncomfortable

Is there any other reaction appropriate to this Ron Artest song about the plight of Afghan women? And his love for them? Hal Incandenza himself never produced anything so… unclassifiable. Even Bill Walton, for whom everything is either a profound disappointment or the greatest feat of its kind in the history of the NBA, would be rendered speechless. Is this what MTV2 will play at 3am after the singularity? Slow jams that so quickly evolved radically from their predecessors that I am unable even to grasp their meaning?

Mitch Kupchak, what have you done?

Defending One of the Worst Rap Songs in History

Oh, Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism students, you’re so adept at opening yourselves up to mockery!

What I think, when I see that rap, is how the graduate program somehow takes on the strange social atmosphere of a high school summer camp. I speak with authority, having spent a good deal of time hanging out with my friend Bill and his classmates when he attended Columbia, penned a well researched story about the school, and mischievously persuaded a surprising number of its students to join a faux secret society I created on a lark to see if I could convince my in-the-dark buddy to join. (I could!) This wasn’t, I hasten to add, the kind of work we did at NYU (nor did we have a weekly happy hour, a costume party at Halloween, a school dance or a pre-graduation boat cruise).

Cringe-worthy as I find the aesthetics of that display, however, I’ve got to disagree with Nick Gillespie and Greg Gutfeld about its substance.

Read the full article

Suderman Elsewhere

I’ve got a web piece up at Newsweek looking at conflicts between Republicans and business interests.

Earlier this month, I had an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal examining problems with health-care reforms at the state level.

And of course, I’m still writing just about every day at Reason.

Journalism, Viral Loops, Etc.

Though I understand a graduate degree in journalism seems like an insane proposition to many right now, applications are up at all the programs where I’ve spoken to faculty, and if you’re going to pursue that course of study, I am more convinced everyday that NYU is the place to do it. Among readers of The American Scene, Jay Rosen is probably the most well known professor. His analysis of the changing media landscape is certainly more sophisticated than anything being done at Columbia University. And beyond Professor Rosen, the program as a whole is making an effort — how successful it’ll be is beyond knowing — to train students for the actual world they’ll be facing, rather than running a program as if they’re all going to get jobs as cub reporters at daily newspapers.

An example just posted on the course listings: “Entrepreneurial Journalism, taught by Adam Penenberg.”

Journalists who can successfully navigate these turbulent media times must be equal parts journalist and entrepreneur. In this seminar students will learn how to build successful freelance careers, manage their own journalism brands that they will extend through social media platforms like Twitter, pitch ideas for media start ups, write their own business plans or book proposals, and explore ways to attract venture capital. There will be a lot of learning by doing. Students will work as media entrepreneurs and run their own online publications, which they will operate as a business. At its center will be a blog, where students will post several times a week.

They’ll retain an ad server, market their work to the blogosphere (and beyond) and track traffic. The semester will culminate with students either drafting their own business plan for a media start-up that they will pitch in class to a venture capitalist, or penning a formal book proposal, which a literary agent will also critique in class. Guests will include well-known journalists, successful media entrepreneurs, literary agents and venture capitalists.

Professor Penenberg, the guy who caught Stephen Glass, taught my press ethics class. He also just published the book Viral Loop — and his fascinating approach to marketing it demonstrates that he practices what he preaches.

Interesting how the generation of journalists coming up now is being forced to engage in marketing their work in a way that is, insofar as I know, unprecedented in the field. It’s certainly affected my career. At Culture11, it was once suggested that the three editors who commissioned or wrote basically all the publication’s articles should spend fully half of their time on viral marketing. Editors have asked me to Tweet links to freelance pieces I write for their sites. I doubt that Gay Talese ever considered himself a brand — but I am pretty certain that Malcolm Gladwell has for some time. I wonder what implications brand management, Twitter followers, and all the rest has for the kind of work that is produced by the profession.

Any thoughts?

Free Ross!

Free Douthat!

Scene regular Freddie has an excellent post up, which you should very much read, which asks to “Free Douthat!”, i.e. let him have his blog at the New York Times, written in response to our own Conor’s post at True Slant.

Freddie makes an excellent argument, which is that weekly columns carry much more weight than daily blog posts, especially for a conservatice New York Times columnist, and therefore shackle the author into carefully staking out each position lest he be misperceived or misinterpreted, whereas a frequently updated blog can allow for a much clearer picture.

This is quite true.

But here’s my argument: Ross is such a fantastic blogger it’s a shame to have him not blog. Free Douthat!

WASP Guilt

In this silly review of George Gilder’s The Israel Test, Scott McConnell takes Gilder’s explicit arguments to be symptomatic of deeper psychological scars. He suggests that an embarrassing moment during Gilder’s adolescence explains why Gilder would be politically supportive of Israel. Indeed, for McConnell it explains why any WASP would be pro-Israel:

While trying to impress an older girl, his summer tutor in Greek, he blurted out something mildly anti-Semitic. The young woman dryly replied that she was in fact “a New York Jew.” Gilder was mortified. He relates that he has never quite gotten over the episode. It is the kind of thing a sensitive person might long remember. Variations on this pattern are not uncommon in affluent WASP circles to this day: guilt or embarrassment at some stupid but essentially trivial episode of social anti-Semitism serve as a spur for fervent embrace of Likud-style Zionism. Atonement. It would not be surprising if a similar process helped to shape George W. Bush’s mentality.

What Gilder had said to the girl was a reply to her question about how he liked studying at Exeter. “Echoing sentiments I had heard both at home and at school,” Gilder recalls, “I responded, ‘Exeter’s fine, except that there are too many New York Jews.’” Gilder briefly describes how his embarrassment taught him something about resentment and social grace:

Rather than recognizing my shortcomings and inferiority and resolving to overcome them in the future, I had blamed the people who had outperformed me. I had let envy rush in and usurp understanding and admiration. I had succumbed to the lamest of all the world’s excuses for failure — blame the victor. I would pay by losing the respect of this woman I then cared about more than any other.

Instead of leaving it at this commonplace but worthwhile moral lesson, McConnell thinks the “New York Jew” episode overshadows and “animates” the entire argument of Gilder’s book. According to Gilder, it spurred him to be more open-minded. But McConnell thinks the “incident” filled Gilder with such overwhelming guilt that he became a self-hating shill for the Israel lobby. And that some similar social faux pas probably explains the Bush Doctrine and the invasion of Iraq. Who is it, again, who regards these events as “essentially trivial”?

This seems deeply weird, but it’s not hard to play armchair psychologist with McConnell, too. It is obvious to him why Jews would like Israel, but WASPs? What on earth could possibly lead a self-respecting white Anglo-Saxon Protestant to admire a Jewish state when, in McConnell’s view, ethnonationalism would command otherwise? So McConnell invents a sort of false consciousness, a “WASP guilt,” to explain it. It’s a mean-spirited slur, of course. Critics of Israel have long alleged that Israel’s supporters seek to silence debate by leveling overblown accusations of anti-Semitism at them, but McConnell now insists that non-Jewish supporters of Israel must be self-hating Uncle Toms. “This sequence might be amusing if the real-life consequences were less sinister,” as McConnell puts it. But apart from that, one wonders what seething resentments lurk behind McConnell’s strange worldview. What traumatic event in the boyhood days of Scott McConnell can explain it?

Older articles ↓