-
Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
May 13, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Tangles of Pathologies
April 12, 2013 | 35 comments
-
An Enduring Partnership
March 25, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Spies, Traitors, Agents of Influence, and Useful Idiots
January 31, 2013 | 35 comments
-
On Knowing When to Shut Up
December 19, 2012 | 7 comments
Buy the Book
From Left To Right
What happens to a great playwright when he’s no longer a braindead liberal?
(Page 2 of 2)
As Mamet puts it, “Fear of Global Warming was, in the seventies, and as propounded by many of the same scientists, a fear of Global Cooling. See also Malthus’s…assurance that as population outstripped agricultural production, humanity must soon…starve. See also the Y2K scare, antinuclear hysteria, and the yearly assurance that some new influenza is going to devastate the population.”
“The Left,” he continues, “in addition to its embrace of the false (higher taxes means increased prosperity for all) and its acceptance of the moot as incontrovertible (Global Warming), must account for the incidental effect of the sum of these decisions. This effect is the destruction of our culture.”
MAMET IS PROUD of being an American, proud of being a Jew in America, and proud of Israel. He pities the Jewish liberal who denounces this country, attacks Israel, and denies “his heritage, and his co-religionaries in their distress.”He quotes the muddled linguist Noam Chomsky, who has strayed far from his field of expertise: “To summarize, contrary to the claim that is constantly reiterated, Israel has no right to use force to defend itself against rockets from Gaza, even if they are regarded as terrorist crimes.”
“Of course Mr. Chomsky feels that all is not right with the world,”Mamet writes. “His hobby is promoting the cause of people who want to kill him.”
Throughout his book, with these and other trenchant observations, he speaks of what in this age of approved euphemism is the unspeakable—tradition, absolute values, the primacy of the individual. And if conservatism is applied intelligence, informed by the best that’s been thought and said down through the ages, reinforced by acceptance of immutable truths and leavened with a healthy dose of common sense, then by any measure, David Mamet is a conservative.
According to the bibliography he appends, he has read seriously and widely—Tolstoy and Trollope, Melanie Phillips and Shelby Steele, Victor Davis Hanson and Friedrich Hayek, Niall Ferguson and Milton Friedman, Whittaker Chambers, Noam Chomsky, Eric Hoffer, Paul Johnson, Mencken, Macaulay, Podhoretz, Sontag, Sowell and Veblen, to name a few. In short, an eclectic reading list tending toward the conservative, although no Burke, Buckley, Kirk. But that will no doubt come.
“I spoke with my first conservative at age sixty,”he writes, a Republican rabbi in Hollywood (“Where did he find one?”asks Suzanne Fields in one of her splendid columns) who steered him toward some of the more conservative writers.
But now that the ice has been broken, and broken with singular eloquence, one suspects the conversation will continue.
About the Author
John R. Coyne, Jr. a former White House speech-writer, is co-author with Linda Bridges of Strictly Right: William F. Buckley Jr. and the American Conservative Movement (Wiley).
Letter to the Editor View all comments (52) | Leave a comment
More Articles by John R. Coyne, Jr.
More Articles From Buy the Book
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/09/27/from-left-to-right
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Mr ED| 9.27.11 @ 6:58AM
But the unreasoning Leftist "devolution from reason to belief" doesn't make sense until it is viewed within a somewhat larger context. The "professional" Liberals, while not a uniformly homogenous group, do share some common traits - behaviours and assumptions about life, humanity and themselves - That form the core of the Liberal Formula from which they derive all of their philosophy. The first and most important of the Lib assumptions is their absolute faith in themselves and their own lofty personal "specialness". The second assumption is that almost everybody else in society falls into one of two opposing groups - 1) The Helpless, needy victims (the unsuccessful) and 2) The Oppressors (the successful). Naturally it falls to the special ones, the Libs who realize just how uniquely gifted and enlightened they themselves are, to act as intercessors to insert themselves between the Oppressors and the Victims in order to remake the world into a "fair" world, a world where the Libs get to make all of the important decisions and tell everybody else how to live their lives, all for their own good of course. This is all about good intentions, ya know.
And what vehicle is the best for seizing control of all levels of society and ontaining the power required to force others to do as YOU wish them to? What else but our bestest friend, Government. So it should be easy to see that when Libs talk about government, they are not talking about it in the same context as conservatives. Government to Liberals is simply the best vehicle to herd society into the Liberal pens for their branding (Victims to the Left, Oppressors to the Right thanks) and reeducation so the Libs can sit astride the whole mess and supposedly create the "new man", a being who will obey any and all proscriptions of the Leftists without question or comment, which will inevitably lead us to the Lib promised land of perfect fairness. All that those who know best in all things really require is for us little people to trust them and allow them to lead us to that promised land.
I mean hey, what could go worng?
idalily| 9.27.11 @ 2:47PM
Well said. Most evil stems from people whose primary desire/motive is to be special. To be someone extraordinary. Those with this insatiable need (among them Hitler, Castro, Charles Manson, Osama bin Laden, to name a few) were thwarted in their private lives from being special or successful at what they wanted most, and that led them to become the mass murdering, power hungry psychos they became. They appealed mostly to people who also could not be satisfied unless they were part of a special group, movement or society. The German people/Hitler dynamic, Manson and his Family, fanatic Muslims and Osama--it's all the same: we're special. Many communists think the commune is special. Leftists want to be special so they sneer at those on the right. And so it goes.
There is a reason why Christians are taught that "contentment with a lowly place" is a virtue. Too bad so many people, Christian and not, can't remember that fact.
Stormzeye| 9.27.11 @ 3:16PM
Ed, I'm impressed that such clear analysis comes to you well before 7AM. You must have frightening dreams :)
Timothy L. Pennell| 9.27.11 @ 4:39PM
What happens to a great playwright when he's no longer a Brain Dead Liberal?
Why, he becomes BLACKLISTED, of course.
See, when it's the LEFT, that does this, it's because HE DESERVES IT.
When it's the Right (And I can't think of an instance where the Right has done this) it's MACARTHYISM.
You know the way the game is played.
Moe Blotz| 9.27.11 @ 8:08AM
Regarding The Bard of Stratford-upon-Avon,we know little about William Shakspere who is credited with writing the volumes of plays and sonnets attributed to William Shakespeare. If youse subscribe to the theory that the real author of Shakespeare's works was The Eighth Earl of Oxford,Edward DeVere,you may think him a little kooky as well. The late Joseph Sobran covers the subject well in "Alias Shakespeare". If the anyone could confirm that DeVere was homosexual,then perhaps the LGBT community and the liberals would embrace the Eighth Earl as the one deserving their accolades .
Beau Blotz| 9.27.11 @ 9:20AM
He was the XVII or 17th Earl of Oxford depending on how you want to print it. There is no evidence the man from Statford was even lierate or ever attended school. All the things the author should be is what Oxford is.
Aqua Buddah| 9.27.11 @ 12:20PM
Then I guess Shakespeare was trailer trash. Only an elite like the Earl of Oxford could possibly be a talented writer, don't you know...
Moe Blotz| 9.27.11 @ 12:30PM
The late Joe Sobran deals with arguments from both sides,presenting evidence where the reader of "Alias Shakespeare" can choose for himself. Mr.Sobran had his own opinion,but did not denigrate those who held an opposing view. Read the book and you will be enlightened.
Mike Hawk| 9.27.11 @ 1:40PM
Considering Earl of Oxford was a highly educated man of letters and talents, well traveled (notably to Italy) and learned in literature in the original Latin, Greek and fluent in French and Italinn, yes. Do some research at the Shakespeare-Oxford website and learn something. In order to be a writer/ poet / playright, you must first be literate.
John Navratil| 9.27.11 @ 3:49PM
Mike Hawk,
To add to your comment... The motivation for secrecy was that it would have been scandalous for the Earl, the highest rank of peerage, to have been associated with something as common as the theatre. This was at a time when palace intrigue could cost your life. Apropos of nothing in this case, it is not uncommon in history for writers to use a "front".
crooked wren| 9.27.11 @ 8:11AM
I read Mamet's book recently and loved it. Years ago, in my theatre training, I had picked up his "Writing in Restaurants" and felt a sense of kinship back then. I was a bit on the liberal side myself back then, although my "inner Conservative" hadn't been completely destroyed by the educational system and mainstream media (to whom I paid small attention).
Now I'm definitely a conservative, having awakened to find that the Marxists and Maoists with whom I had argued years ago had been busy little beavers -- thriving from the free market system they've been working to destroy. They had infiltrated state and local and federal governments -- with great ease. And were now reaping the benefits.
But I had awakened -- and am alarmed. Seriously alarmed.
What Mamet says is so -- true!
Brian Mc| 9.27.11 @ 8:39AM
His "Village Voice" article is in my favorites. When I post it to a liberal leaner in order that I might enforce my argument I will receive the response, "I don't read tripe from others trying to prove a point." And there goes the battle.
FastJohnny| 9.27.11 @ 9:13AM
Mamet, has in effect, seen the light. The most telling of all is the thoughtfulness that I see brought to the surface by the critique of this book. He has finally graduated to adulthood and broken the bonds of that first undergraduate class of Sociology 101 where we all were taught to despise the conservative outlook and view. When we were young, it was ok to have a irresponsible liberal view of the world and our society, that is what young people do...the old saying that when you are young and liberal is shows you have a heart, but when you are older and conservative, it shows you have a brain, is more than applicable here. Although that phrase can be contrite, it is very true: only maturity in a social sense can bring one to grips with the reality of our world and understand why a conservative outlook eventually becomes more and more sensible. At the risk of sounding like a cliched phrase regurgitator, I would like to offer one more gem, that I think many of you would appreciate:
Q: What is the definition of a conservative?
A: A liberal that has been mugged.
Btw, 'mugged' is a metaphor, not a literal term. :)
Bill| 9.27.11 @ 9:49AM
I am a former liberal (in point of fact, actually a soi-disant socialist revolutionary) who has moved over to conservatism (actually Burkean liberalism). When I was mugged, I fashioned the following justifications:
1. I was in the wrong for having been traveling through Harlem in the early hours of the morning, so I should have expected, as a white guy, to get mugged;
2. the black guy who mugged me was poor, and although he was probably taking my money to buy drugs instead of take steps to eliminate his poverty, that was understandable, because the life of black man in Harlem must be so bad that drugs are the only succour;
Finally, I decided that I felt so violated, metaphorically raped, by the robbery and the threat of the use of deadly used to effect it, that I decided that there is no excuse for armed robbery, and punishing this guy would be the only thing that would give me a sense that "social justice" had been served. Of course, the guy was never found, so my faith in the power of government to solve problems was also undermined.
Bill| 9.27.11 @ 9:54AM
Also, when I discussed the incident with my acquaintances who shared my beliefs, they agreed that I was "asking for it." I asked if that held true for women who wear provocative and revealing clothing, then get raped. They said nothing worth hearing in reply to that. That convinced me of an essential schizophrenic angle to liberalism.
idalily| 9.27.11 @ 2:56PM
The schizophrenic angle is baffling to me as a lifelong conservative. Mostly because I wonder: do they KNOW how schizophrenic they are? And the answer is clearly, no, they don't. So when confronted with such two opposing examples, such as you cite, they have to walk away, mentally expunge everything you said, and start over. Liberals are constantly having to reboot. It must be exhausting. No wonder they want to shut up the Tea Party.
mames| 9.27.11 @ 4:23PM
Mamet has always been very direct even as a liberal. Here he has the integrity to do the hard work of examining his own world view. I have always loved his work and his writing even if I did not agree with his political undertones. Good for him, a even greater product of the Midwest now than before.
sinanju| 9.27.11 @ 11:02PM
I prefer to add "a liberal with a teenage daughter." to "a liberal who has been mugged."
Bill| 9.27.11 @ 9:18AM
Mamet's book contains a host of quotable comments. But one of my favorites from the book is this: "Kindness is good. No doubt. Kindness to the wicked is cruelty to the righteous. As a child I read of the Tibetan monk who left his home, walked a thousand miles and discovered, hidden in his robe, an ant which only existed in his home village. So he walked the thousand miles back to replace the ant to avoid doing it violence. But how many ants did he step on, on the way?"
idalily| 9.27.11 @ 2:58PM
Ah, but to a liberal, it's the good intentions that count, not the results. Which is why, when you confront them with the facts of lib-controlled cities like Detroit, they ignore you and build another block of projects.
pespada| 9.27.11 @ 10:08AM
Now Mamet needs to write a play summarizing and expressing his new conservative beliefs in some dramatic fashion. That will help popularize conservatism and persuade the fence-sitters. The left knows the importance of capturing the culture--a successful play by David Mamet of all people would be an important first step in recapturing the culture for the right.
Bill| 9.27.11 @ 12:26PM
Have a look at the movie version of his play "Oleanna." It's very good.
Bill| 9.27.11 @ 12:27PM
Mamet is also the mind behind the TV show The Unit, which, although it's not overtly political, has a distinctly patriotic and conservative point of view.
mames| 9.27.11 @ 4:36PM
I am convinced that his talent and manner of saying whatever he wishes will still draw an audience. Maybe he will finally be the one to write the definite conservative play that is not overt nor does it sanitize our foibles. He is a master with dialog and character development and there are plenty of us flawed yet ultimately helpful conservatives he could model a classic character after. I have seen him flesh out a character, on stage, in just a few lines. He is wonderful watch. Look I am a died in the wool conservative and have always been impressed with how he said things even if I disagreed. There will be a lot of conservatives that will flock to him and some libs will continue too.
sinanju| 9.27.11 @ 11:04PM
"Oleanna" was in 1993 I believe. That's when I knew he was "crossing over" but it was rather incoherent in places. It looked to me like he was still in phase I at the time and had a ways to go.
Petronius| 9.27.11 @ 10:34AM
I wonder how long it will take before the League of New York Theaters holds a Mamet script burning on the eve of the Tony's. Lord knows his work will never again be offered in an Equity house. He differs from other writers who have taken on the Liberals with a full frontal assault on their despotism and their desire to subjugate us. Liberalism was spawned by the boomers refusal to knuckle under to conservative authority figures who were hypocrites amid the rallying cry, "nobody can tell Us what to do!" They dug their heels in to, "get it over on The Man" by forcing any and all to accept them on their terms and supply all their needs and wants. So we Conservatives must therefor surrender our wealth and scrap our dreams to sate the appetites of every wastrel who refuses to compete. Now that the policies of these overgrown brats has caused untold economic disaster and ruined thousands of households, people are finally living it and understand for the first time how damaging liberalism is. Until now, that pain has only been felt by victims of violent crimes where liberal jurisprudence has validated the criminals and condemned the innocent.
I doubt David's book will command a wide readership in our world where belief trumps truth, but he will gain validation because his adversaries and ours have finally jumped the shark. Now if he would only write screen plays where Conservatives defeat the Liberal Oppressors....
WillyP | 9.27.11 @ 10:35AM
It is unfortunate that AM has been hit by the Y2K+11+9+27 computer bug. Combined with the cumulative effects of Global Cooling, Global Warming, and Global Liberalism, and exasperated by the use of Nuclear Power generated electricity in the servers, it would appear that a holocastic virus has taken over. The result is a few articles have broken links to page 2 or more. Expect the world to self destruct at midnight.
Datou| 9.27.11 @ 10:52AM
Willy just hit print at the top and you'll get the whole article in print preview :-)
WillyP | 9.27.11 @ 11:51AM
Ok, cancel the world ending.
Sheila| 9.27.11 @ 10:58AM
Mamet, like most at TAS, is a right liberal. Genuine conservatives were marginalized, long ago, by the neo-cons and their predecessors. While he's busy congratulating himself for no longer being subject to the mental disorder known as leftism, he's still under the sway of classically "liberal" ideas and now the purported "right" must be tarred with his self-righteousness.
Margie| 9.27.11 @ 2:08PM
It depends on what your definition of "genuine conservative" is.
And we know what yours is.
Marc| 9.27.11 @ 6:16PM
Papist
Occam's Tool| 9.27.11 @ 6:50PM
Sheila, one does not need to idolize Wagner to be Conservative. And crawling to Sharia does not make you virtuous.
John Randolph characterized people like you well:
"The principle of liberty and equality, if coupled with mere selfishness, will make men only devils, each trying to be independent that he may fight only for his own interest. And here is the need of religion and its power, to bring in the principle of benevolence and love to men. "
RCV| 9.27.11 @ 7:25PM
To Sheila, a "liberal" is someone who doesn't support the final solution to "the neocon" problem.
JP| 9.27.11 @ 12:04PM
The Left no longer explains itself. It ceased being an intellectual movement about the same time JFK was inaugerated. As a result, the great "debtates" between Left and Right do not resemble the old fights between Marxists and Liberals (the old school Liberals). Today's Leftist's do debate from conviction, but not much else.
The attacks by Liberals, therefore, are not intellectual in nature. And since Reason has been dispensed with, they can only fall back upon character assasination, gossip, and viscious personal insults. Such a political party cannot last.
Howard| 9.27.11 @ 5:08PM
Unfortunately this non-lasting party has been going since 1972. That is the year McGovern and his minions took full control of the Democrats. Since then, they are owned by Teachers Unions, Trial Lawyers, black activists, and limousine liberals of all ilks. I wish them a speedy demise, but unfortunately, they insist on staying alive.
prudence| 9.27.11 @ 12:30PM
Mamet's film "Edmund" showed the direction of his turning; a harsh, but true revelation of the perversion of the human nature without God.
bob alou| 9.27.11 @ 12:32PM
A fine book, albeit difficult prose. You have to pay attention but it is well worth it.
cicero| 9.27.11 @ 1:05PM
I remember the liberals in training from when I was in undergrad school in the early 60's. Since I was working midnights in an auto factory (earning $3.75 per hour), I always had some money to pay my way. I would go to school during the day. Whenever you would associate with the newby libs, and there was a bill to be paid, they wanted to pool everyone's money for the tab. It was always their .75 against my $5.00. That was fair to them, because we all were paying what we had.
These were also the guys who were against any form of competition. Everybody should win all the time; grades should only be "pass or fail"; etc. They all went on to government jobs, where you never got fired. If you were an obvious screw up, you only got transferred to another department.
Of course, they are now all retired on unending government pensions, and I am still going to work every day. This is a great country wee live in.
John Navratil| 9.27.11 @ 1:44PM
cicero,
In a moment of weakness, I wondered why I didn't leave High School for the benefits of a government job and pension. Two fingers of single malt helped me get over the pangs.
I may never be able to retire, but I still know how to work... and sleep at night. I'm not sure how comfortable I'd feel if I were recently retired at 55 with a CalPers pension.
cicero| 9.27.11 @ 2:06PM
John N. Thanks, I neede that.
Margie| 9.27.11 @ 2:11PM
Don't know much at all about the man, but I would like to welcome him to the light!
"Light is sweet, and it is pleasant for the eyes to behold the sun." Ecc. 11:7.
MikeBee| 9.27.11 @ 3:40PM
David,
Welcome home! We have been "Waiting for You." When you feel the urge, please use your incredible talents to write some screenplays/movies/plays about conservative ideals. How about a tragedy about a true liberal, power-hungry, power-grabbing, but compassionate, who trips on his fatal flaw.
Thanks for the thoughtful plays to date; we look forward to future production, and, again, welcome you home.
Michael| 9.27.11 @ 3:57PM
When interviewed recently about "The Verdict" and on how it made the Roman Catholic Church the villain of the film, he said, "Well, someone has to be the villain". (Paragraph) He has changed, he's just still anti-Catholic.
DRed| 9.27.11 @ 5:33PM
What is it with conservatives and unnecessary capitalization?
John Navratil| 9.27.11 @ 5:36PM
drED,
?
DRed| 9.27.11 @ 6:23PM
Touché. I assure you John, the capital r is vital. Perhaps I've read too many Clint posts, but when I see someone writing like Mamet I assume the answer to the question "what happens to a great playwright when he's no longer a brain dead liberal" is "he's become a brain dead conservative".
Occam's Tool| 9.27.11 @ 6:56PM
DRed,
good comments on baseball today. You are right about Lord Valdemort. Generally speaking I am a nice man, with kind comments even for those I disagree with. But that person and his cheesehead associate turn me into Inspector Dreyfuss when faced with Clouseau.
Further, he is a LIBERTARIAN. For example, he believes in legalizing drugs. I, having to deal with the consequences of drug abuse every damned day, have my doubts.
G-d Bless and have a good week.
John Navratil| 9.27.11 @ 8:55PM
Occam's Tool,
Libertarians aren't always wrong. Just at the edges ;)
general summerall| 9.27.11 @ 7:18PM
Just a short while ago on CBS Pelly interviewed Mr. Johnson, the president of the BETnetwork, who was bemoaning the current economic plight of African Americans in the current Depression, and his solution seemed to be Do the Right Thing (send Us money). Or it seems that is what he was saying (the edited interview was very brief.) I wish Pelly had asked him about what became of the Great Society. Back to the lib vs. conserv discussion; what would a liberal say if one asked him/her about the old Marxist idea of the Withering Away of the State ?
POST American| 9.27.11 @ 10:44PM
-----------------BOTTOMLESS LINE-------------------
-Cut to the chase!
----------------------GLOBALIST------------------------
----------------------RED CHINA------------------------
-----------------------GENOCIDE------------------------
-------------------------SET UP---------------------------
------------------------SELLOUT-------------------------
-----------------------EUGENICS-------------------------
-----------------------------&-------------------------------
----------------------TREASON OP----------------------
NJK| 9.28.11 @ 8:35PM
He gives me hope. You forgot to list Acid Rain in the 70's. They had people believing when they saw a dirty raindrop on their car, it was Acid Rain. The hysteria made it sound as though you would melt if you walked outside. What happened to Acid Rain? I guess it became, Global Warming.