Long story short, Peter Berkowitz hammers Zmirak for daring to cast a minor aspersion on Robby George. It's another of the widening circles resulting from the stone dropped into the pond byTucker's interview of a genuine POS named Fuentes. (More on that later in this post.)
Berkowitz must play games with the text in order to disparage Zmirak. Surprised?
...according to Zmirak, “George’s problem – and it’s a fundamental, fatal one – is that he mistakes and conflates the Natural Law with certain post-World War II bromides, the practical implications of which have already proven nearly fatal to Western nations.” Those bromides, Zmirak contends, prevent George from appreciating that the principle of equal human dignity “must stand in perpetual, creative tension with the particulars of Western civilization and the concrete needs of peoples.”
To illustrate George’s supposed blindness, Zmirak blurs the context in which George wrote and the controversy to which he responded. Bypassing George’s concrete concerns about antisemitism and other forms of bigotry within right-wing ranks in America, Zmirak abruptly turns to immigration throughout the West. He contends that George’s way of thinking encourages “Western nations” to welcome “millions of foreigners more religiously zealous than virtually any Westerner, whose creed obliges them to attempt religious conquest.”...
Berkowitz plays the Blind Man Who Will Not See. Zmirak obviously refers to Mohammedans and describes their faith exactly as THEY believe it--assuming that they actually believe it. Here's his non-response response:
...That’s nonsense. George opposes open borders, which undermine national sovereignty and the rule of law, but supports legal immigration that assimilates new citizens to the best in America....
Who said anything about "open borders"? Not Zmirak. Zmirak's concern has to do with one specific group of individuals whose faith compels them NOT to "assimilate" in the usual sense.
Naturally, Berkowitz would like to ignore Pat Buchanan. But PJB was correct when he warned against allowing immigration by peoples NOT of the Judaeo-Christian tradition. Someday, Berkowitz may learn why--the hard way.
Meantime, he could more honestly represent Zmirak, et. al.
As to Fuentes and Carlson: Carlson is accused of 'going soft' on the POS during the interview. It is true that Carlson did not push back at some of the ridiculous crap the POS pushes. But Carlson was not there to argue with the POS. He was there to try to figure out why that POS attracts followers in the <30 age bracket.
But Berkowitz' (and Tel Aviv Levin, and "You Cannot Retire" Benny) are bound and determined to "other" Carlson because Carlson does not prostrate himself at the altar of Zionism.
Good luck with that, pal.
No comments:
Post a Comment