The eruption of wild accusations after the shootings in Arizona
illustrate once again that those who talk about civility the most
practice it the least. Pious calls for the restoration of civility
have come from a parade of pundits and pols famous for celebrating
or rationalizing the most egregious violations of it.
Civility is a political, not moral concept, in the minds
of many on the left. “Civility” means to them peaceful submission
to liberalism and “incivility” means annoyingly effective
opposition to liberalism. Were greater respect for human beings the
meaning of the term, “civility” would require massive changes to
their agenda, starting with their support for a right to abortion.
Mother Teresa once pointed this out to the tony elite at a prayer
breakfast in Washington, D.C. But they weren’t terribly interested
in her definition of civic virtue. They want “civility” and a
culture of death at the same time.
Moreover, it makes no sense that conservatives who called
for a restoration of respect for the law in Arizona would receive
the brunt of the criticism for a crazed gunman’s violation of it.
Who has fed a “climate” in which violent crime occurs? The answer
can’t be citizens who plead with the authorities to enforce the
law. A climate of lawlessness has been fostered by those in
authority deaf to those protests.
It was killings and kidnappings that led the Tea Partiers
and conservatives to demand that authorities in Arizona take the
law seriously again. Has any of that violence led the left to
engage in soul-searching about its fashionable support for
selective application of the law? The left prides itself on being
“pro-government,” even as it shows no consistent respect for the
rule of law underpinning government.
The “climate” change they have in mind in the wake of the
shootings is not greater respect for the law but greater respect
for “government,” which roughly translates as liberals in power.
The left often glorifies rebels, revolutionaries, and lawbreakers.
Its leading lights trot off to Cuba to pay their respects to a
practitioner of political violence, Fidel Castro, and attend movies
that cast defiant nonconformists like Che Guevara as heroes. One of
the Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh’s most vocal apologists
was the left-wing writer Gore Vidal, whom the self-appointed
guardians of civility have long indulged. Left-wing film director
Oliver Stone has talked about making a movie that will soften the
images of Adolph Hilter and Joseph Stalin.
Several networks have solemnly replayed clips of Bill
Clinton’s remarks at the memorial of those who died in Oklahoma
City bombing. “The words we use really do matter
because there are, there’s this vast echo chamber. And they go
across space and they fall on the serious and the delirious alike,”
he said. Does the left really believe that? Left-wing Hollywood and
left-wing academia would have to be shut down if it did. Children
are fed a steady diet of violence from the music and movies that
come out of Hollywood, before heading off to college where they
hear tenured professors like Ward Churchill present academic
justifications for nihilism.
The same politicians who appear on civility panels and
commissions also pop up at ACLU events where money is raised to
defend the vitriolic speech of open jihadists at Ivy League
colleges. Barack Obama started his ascent to his higher politics
from the living room of a domestic terrorist turned educator of
youth, Bill Ayers, and honed his views of hope and unity under the
tutelage of the “God Damn America” sermonist Jeremiah
Wright.
This coalition of radical intellectuals, Alinskyites,
Constitution scoffers, and 1960s nostalgists is the last group
Americans should entrust with the task of purifying and elevating
America’s political discourse.
