Category Archives: Extremism

Religious Extremism in Israel and Gaza

Extremism, Political Violence, Politics & Religion, violence, War Between Israel and Hamas

 

When religion morphs into politics, or politics into religion, there is likely nothing that produces uglier results. As, perhaps no one understands this better than the Irish.

Something that is too often ignored in the incendiary Middle East is the enormous and shattering effect of religious extremism. The problem is that both sides ignore it in their own tribe, while lambasting it in the other.

Fintan O’Toole, an Irishman writing regularly in the New York Review of Books, knows this better than most and he  asked a crucially important question: “What lessons do people actually learn from the cruelties they applaud and the ones they suffer in return?” We should remember the wise counsel in Matthew 7:3-5: “Why do you see the speck in your neighbor’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?”  And no one ignores this advice more and also needs it more. than religious zealots.

O’Toole’s article centred around a story in what we call the Old Testament and others call the Hebrew Bible.  That article referred to what he called a

 “a Jewish legend” in which “the great warrior Samson ends up, as John Milton famously puts it, “eyeless in Gaza.” He is blinded by the Philistines and harnessed to a huge millstone, forced to drag himself around and around in circles, always moving but unable to go anywhere. Eventually, in the most spectacular of suicides, he gets his revenge by pulling down their temple on top of the Philistines, killing both them and himself. The story is apparently supposed to be heroic, but it feels more like a fable of vicious futility. Cruelty begets cruelty until there is nothing left but mutual destruction.”

 

The current horrid war between Israel and Hamas is exactly that—”a fable of  vicious futility.” The story is a cautionary tale to those of us who are too quick to say revenge is justified, or retaliation a duty. If we can understand that nothing is gained by a thirst for revenge perhaps we can learn a better way. Israelis were attacked by cruel and vicious butchers who targeted women, children and old people and Israel sought revenge. The Israeli’s say that unlike the Palestinians they do not target civilians or children or women or old people, but they know that by attacking the Palestinians in Gaza where 2 million people live in one of the most densely packed places in the world, they will hurt, injure and kill women, children, old people and innocent bystanders. That is unavoidable.

 Saying “we are not aiming to kill them” is not enough. Rather it shows that Israel really doesn’t care if civilians are hurt.  Some Israelis have said as much publicly. Such indifference to suffering can be summed up in the words of that great American philosopher Bob Dylan: “you don’t count the dead with God on your side.” In other words, it shows—clearly shows—that the problem with handing over war policy to religious zealots is that unnecessary harms will follow as certainly as night follows day.

Religious zealots are truly, inevitably, indifferent to the suffering of those in the “other” religious camp. That is because there is no reason for them to count the dead.

 Israel has democratically elected the religious extremists that now wield the vital votes Netanyahu needs to hold onto power in order to deflect attention from the corruption charges he is facing, or perhaps, better yet, the votes he needs to dissolve the charges against him. For the better part of 2 decades now Israel has reliably elected extremist political leaders knowing, but ignoring, the fact that this would certainly lead to a bonfire of violence. So the Israel population is deeply complicit.

The Palestinians on the other have had religious extremists baked into Hamas DNA right from the outset of that organization in 2006.  It has never been without controlling religious extremists. They elected the religious extremists more than a decade ago, and even though they have not had a second chance to vote them out in a democratic election, their acquiescence in the continued leadership of religious extremists makes them complicit as well.

Neither nation can claim innocence. The people on both sides have chosen extremism and the people are now paying a huge price for this mistake. Both sides should eject their extremists at the helm. There is no other way except mutual destruction.

 

No Comic Relief

Extremism, Fellow Feeing, Political Violence, The Commons, War Between Israel and Hamas

 

You know things are bad when we look to comedy writers for wisdom.  But that is what I want to do today. Recently, John Oliver began his television show by setting aside his regular introduction and speaking from the heart without making any jokes. That is not like him. So he did not offer any comic relief. In fact he didn’t really offer any relief at all, but he did offer some wisdom. More than many of our political leaders. So I want to turn this forum over to him. This is what he said soon after the horrific violence committed by Hamas in its attacks on Israeli civilians on October 7, 2023:

 

“I want to briefly talk to you about what has briefly been a horrible day. The immense suffering in Israel and Gaza has been sickening to watch and we are not going to be covering in the main body of our show for a couple of reasons.

 

First, it was horrific and I don’t really want to tell jokes about carnage and I’m pretty sure you don’t want to hear them. And second, we are taping this on Saturday afternoon and you’ll be hearing it on Sunday evening or on Monday through an illegal VPN. I do know who I’m talking to. Given how fast things are moving a lot could change between the time I’m saying this and the time you hear it. I do have a few broad thoughts that I still think will still apply. They have to do with sorrow, fear, and anger.

Sorrow is the first and most overwhelming feeling. The images we have seen this week and onwards have been totally heart-breaking. Thousands dead in Israel and now Gaza will be devastating not just to the people in the region but to diaspora communities across the world. Whatever thoughts you have about the history of this region or the current state of affairs, and I have shared mine in the past on this show, it should be impossible to see grieving families and not be moved. So there has been sorrow this week and lot of it. And also fear. Understandable fear of further attacks in Israel, and those taken hostage, and fear about what is to come in Gaza, as Israel’s leaders seem intent on embarking on a relentless bombing campaign, mass displacement, and a potential ground invasion.

I don’t know where things stand in Gaza right now, but all signs seem to be pointing towards a humanitarian catastrophe. Israeli official announced plans to cut off food, water, fuel and power. Hospitals are running low on generators. This has all the appearance of collective punishment which is a war crime.

I think many Israelis and Palestinians are feeling justifiable anger right now. Not just at Hamas whose utterly heinous terrorist acts set this weeks’ events in motion, but also the zealots and extremists across the board who consistently thwarted attempts at peace across the years. Israelis and Palestinians have been let down by their leadership time and time again and I don’t have a great deal of faith in the current leaders in charge to steer us toward peace. But I do still have some hope because the easiest thing to do in the world after a week like this is to engage in blood-thirsty rhetoric. And there has certainly been plenty of that from those in power, but I will say I have been struck by the ordinary citizens, both Israeli and Palestinian, who have called for restraint this week and not revenge.

 

Just listen to how Noy Katsman, whose brother Heim was murdered by Hamas last Saturday, ended this interview:

 

“I just wanted to say one more thing that is the most important thing for me and I think for my brother was that his death not be used to kill innocent people. I don’t want anything to happen to people in Gaza like happened to my brother. And I’m sure he wouldn’t want it either. So that is my call to my government—stop killing innocent people. That’s not the way to bring peace and security to people in Israel”

 

Right! People want and are entitled to peace. I’m not going to tell either side how to get it. Certainly not in this accent [English] which has done enough damage in that region to last a fucking lifetime. But just know that all the people who want to live in that region are going to keep living there. So peace is not optional and will require some tough decisions. I can’t say where a peace process ends but it just has to start with that kind of an ability to recognize our common humanity.”

 

 

 

Acquiescing to Extremists is not the Answer

Extremism, Political Violence, True Believer, War Between Israel and Hamas

A cousin of mine has responded to one of my recent posts by saying, rightly so, that “Hamas has now proven to be nothing more than a ruthless killer and terrorist organization.” I agree. But I wanted to reply on my blog since not all of my faithful readers go first to Facebook. That is why I wish more people replied on the blog site rather than Facebook, but each has a choice and I am happy when people respond.

As I told my cousin in my Facebook reply (with a few additional comments and corrections):

There is no doubt that people have the right to defend themselves from attacks. Governments must defend their people from such attacks. There is also no doubt that Israel was subjected to a vicious by a terrorist organization, namely Hamas. Nothing Israel has done justifies raping, murdering, and killing innocent women and children.  I do no support what Hamas has done.  I renounce it unequivocally. That does not mean that Israel has an unlimited right to retaliate.

As Nicholas Kristof said in the New York Times:

“Israel has suffered a horrifying terrorist attack and deserves the world’s sympathy and support, but it should not get a blank check to slaughter civilians or to deprive them of food, water and medicine.”

 

I just heard on the news recently that, according to Hamas, and so far uncontradicted by Israel, that more than 4,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed by the Israeli siege and about half of these are children. Is that justified? Israel says unlike Hamas it does not deliberately attack children. But is Israel so reckless about whether or not civilians are killed that there is really no difference between that and deliberate targeting of civilians?

I also recognize that Israel is surrounded by murderous enemies. That makes a difference. How would we respond in the same situation? But Israel claims the higher moral ground. To justify that claim it must act accordingly. Using superior brutal military power to effect mass killings on Palestinians is not the way to do that. There is a better way.

I wish Israel had not turned its country over to its worst extreme elements when it elected Netanyahu and the religious extremists with whom he has aligned himself.

When two groups led by religious extremists do battle there is not much room to protect the innocents on either side.

Fear: The Secret Sauce of American politics

Conspiracy Theories, Death of Truth, Extremism, Fear, Right-wing Extremism

 

Conspiracy theories have abounded both on the right and the left. Of course, conspiracy theories were vitally connected to the right-wing movement and radio talk show hosts knew how to utilize them to advance their cherished cause. They also knew that fears drove these theories and hence drove their movement.

Many people were moved by paranoid fears of dangerous others, such as Communists who wanted to change the world that they liked and virile black men who were out to rape innocent white women whom they also liked.

Carl McIntire was dead center of another vitally important factor in the promulgation of right-wing theology in the south and that came right out of the credulity for which the south was robustly fertile. Southerners since birth had been taught to believe and believing was something they could do with astonishing ease and  vigour. It beggared belief to see the beliefs they could cheerfully swallow. They created what Kurt Anderson referred to as FantasyLands.

As McIntire and his cohorts were creating profound fears in America of 5th columns, commies under every bed, a Red Scare, churlish Bolshevism, the Yellow Peril, and Uncle Joseph’s secret plot, among many others. Notice the common thread here—FEAR. American was driven by fear. I have often said, America is the most fearful country in the world. That is why it spends so much money on its military—as much as the next 9 countries spend combined!

As Paul Matzko said, “You can’t understand the American political scene in the 1960s without realizing how pervasive conspiracy theorizing was on both sides of the aisle and how much political discourse was spread by paranoid fears.” In my opinion, paranoia is the secret sauce of American politics.” And it has been since its inception. The reason for that is fascinating. My theory is it is largely based on a guilty conscience and that conscience has been largely unacknowledged since the days of its genocide of the American indigenous people followed shortly after by a second genocide against millions of imported black slave labourers from Africa. America has a lot it should feel guilty about. That guilt has supercharged hatred, violence, destruction on massive scales. Guilt has fire started paranoia. The result has been horrific, and it continues to this day. And it will not stop haunting that great country until it acknowledges its sins and repents. Nothing short of that can save it and the American right-wing has spent most of its energy trying to hide the black reality of its sins from itself and its offspring.  Only truth can set it free. America urgently needs truth and reconciliation. Instead the Republican Party offers comforting myths and obfuscation.

An astonishingly interesting consequence of this  is the rich fertile  soil of fear of dangerous others. This has bred a unfathomable number of wildly irrational conspiracy theories that have gained mind-numbing numbers of adherents filled with zealotry. Many of the hit movies of the time disgorged theories of right-wing authoritarian coups. Novels and films like Seven Days in May warned of a coup by Communists assisted by corrupt and treacherous American officials. These were also the fears that generated the McCarthy witch hunts. Then there was that amazing film Dr. Strangelove whose name said it all.  The basis of that film was dread at the prospect that Russians were working on a doomsday device.

Carl McIntire  in his radio shows was the one who proved how powerful the anti-Communist hysteria was. And we must remember that it was exactly that—hysteria. It was insane and it was found at the centre of the richest and most powerful country in the world. No amount of wealth and no power can hold back secret and terrifying guilt.

 

A New Religious War

Extremism, Hate, Politics & Religion, Right-wing Extremism, True Believer

 

Carl McIntire was an important part of this wave of talk radio in America. According to Justin Ling in his podcast Flame Throwers, as absurd as this sounds to the modern listener, McIntyre, like Coughlin before him,  gave the people what they wanted—lengthy sermons.” Most modern listeners would rather go for a root canal than listen to long sermons, but at the time in the US in particular they were very popular.  Yet, McIntire provided what he called “The Twentieth Century Reformation Hour,” and it was immensely popular. Religion and politics is often considered a poisonous stew, but in right wing radio it is magic. Black magic perhaps, but magic.

 

Much of right-wing talk radio was driven by fears.  The first of those fears was creeping socialism or even worse, communism. The second fear was the rise of ecumenism or the progressive wing of Christianity.  Those 2 fears would not generate much fear today, but in the early 60s that was real and scary stuff. Often the two fears were tied together to make the fears exponentially more explosive.  The National Council of Churches was representative of this opposition and McIntire obsessed over it. According to Ling, when he used the word “secularism” you could hear and see the venom in his speech. It was like spit being ejected with extreme distaste. Both of these of course, were generated by conspiracy theories that pointed to a takeover by these forces. Secularism was liberalism—evil in other words. He did not hesitate to suggest, without evidence of course, that they were Communist sympathizers. Fellow travelers in other words. Religion and politics in other words in unholy matrimony.

 

Ling’s podcast brought us Clarence E. Manion, another religious zealot and right-wing true believer,  bellowing, “This is not a political war, this is not an economic war, this is not even a military war, this is a religious war at bottom.” And this brought together religion and politics into a constantly heated toxic brew. In America at least, it is still today a religious war—i.e. the worst kind of war. Manion of course was a committed Catholic who loved to use radio. He said “Communism could not succeed in atmosphere of religious belief and practice.”

 

Another militant in this spirit was Billy James Hargis who led “the Christin crusade.” The name of course is important and tells us a lot all by itself. He said, “I believe that the National Council of Churches is an instrument of Satan.” Right-wing extremists always go after those in their own movement who are not extreme enough often with more hate than their liberal enemies.  To many of us this seems rather extreme. Because it is extreme. But in its day, this was dynamite. Such attacks were what Ling said was “a very successful formula.” The Evangelical or Fundamentalist Christians ate it up. In 1956 Carl McIntire was on two national radio shows, one in Pennsylvania and another in Georgia. By 1960 he was on more than 100 radio stations and more than 400 by 1964.

 

Even though many of us (like me) have probably never heard of him, according to Justin Ling, “It was staggering how much affect McIntire had on the conservative movement in America. The National Review magazine, a prestigious right wing journal,  had 73,000 subscribers while McIntire had 23 million listeners! I have definitely heard of the National Review and their influence paled in comparison. Radio not literature was the King of the Right-Wing movement in America.

 

People like McIntire were instrumental in what became the “Southern Strategy” the movement to take the American south from liberal democrats in favor of conservative Republicans. Ling said “McIntire played a kind of John the Baptist role preparing the way for a kind of partisan transformation of the south from deep Democrat to deep Republican. They do so by playing on racist segregationist fears.”  He was important in convincing them their support of segregation was not racist. It was valid. It was ordained by God. Even though he was based in the north, half of his stations were in the south. By playing on racist fears, they helped move the south from the Democrats to the Republicans. This strategy proved very effective in getting Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan get elected. Fear and religion always play a vital role in this right-wing  movement. Race and fear go together like love and marriage. Or pee and porcelain to quote a friend of mine.

 

Flame Throwers and True Believers

Extremism, Hate, Right-wing Extremism, True Believer

 

The abolition of the Fairness doctrine in the US  opened the way for ordinary grass roots citizens who were unhappy with the political consensus of the 1950s to call in to talk radio and voice their opinions and gain some satisfaction from that engagement. These people felt connected to each other and a national movement. Their yearning to belong was deeply satisfied. AM radio did not have a lot of range during the day, but at night clear channel stations could pump out 50,000 watts. They were called “flame throwers” as a result. They threw the flames of hate.

Many of these radio shows offered ‘All talk, all of the time.”  That’s how popular the radio shows were, especially if they offered some spice. They were, in many ways, like Social Media is a today.  They offered a way for community members to engage with citizens on the fringes.  And those audience members were attracted to flames like flies to shit.

For most owners of most of such radio stations  did not care about ideology. The talk was cheap and all they cared about was making a buck. They weren’t  trying to elevate listeners or making the country a better place. Yet they helped to form a political movement.

They all tried to tap into a visceral element that kept such talk radio alive—“ this sense that is very common to conservatism, a sense of embattlement—the idea that everybody else is out to get you.”  Often they complained that they were held in contempt, that people ridiculed them, that their motives were questioned.

Again, this has been constant in right-wing extremism down to today.

 

The Fertilizer of Resentment

Extremism, Hate, Right-wing Extremism

 

One element that clever radio host constantly took advantage of was the sense of embattlement—that everyone was out to get you.  The pundits delivered this and the people loved it. There was a common feeling among people in America, particularly, in rural America, that the elites held them in contempt and eagerly ridiculed them. By the 1960s, according to Justin Ling, “this was a learned habit.”

 

This sense of resentment was the common denominator of hordes of talk radio listeners. It was the water in which they swam. And as we have learned at least since Friedrich Nietzsche. Resentment is a shockingly powerful force, never to be under estimated.

 

The advent of FM radio opened up the radios for excellent music. But that did not kill AM radio. Far from it. Because that left AM radio open for those who wanted to produce political hate. National networks could be created for super cheap. This was a golden opportunity for those who wanted to use radio.

 

Paul Matzko wrote the book called The Radio Right: How a Band of Broadcasters Took on the Federal Government and Built the Modern Conservative Movement. He wrote about how in recent years trust in traditional media has declined sharply. As a result many people in North America no longer believe what they hear or see on traditional or mainstream media and have started to turn to “echo chambers” where they see themselves reflected. This has led in turn to the ideology of their group cementing the bonds of the group. According to Matzko this is not the first time this has happened.

 

In his book Matzko writes about the far right that was frustrated by what they saw as liberal bias in the mainstream media. This started with what many of them thought  of as a sycophantic relationship between the media and the administration of John F. Kennedy. The media saw Kennedy as their golden boy from Harvard, rich, liberal, educated, and haughty. The media liked this. The people who resented this turned in reaction to news and particularly commentary from a resurgent ultra-conservative mass media on the radio.  Truckers in particular, driving across the country took up the right-wing causes with passion and exuberance. I have taliked to some of them. Networks turned to television so radio provided a home for hundreds of popular right-wing radio programs, programmers and pundits. The more bombastic the better. There was not premium for moderation. Extreme opinions were in vogue.

It is also interesting that resentment has never stopped from being a critical force in the right-wing movement down to present times. It is constantly triggered by modern Fox News pundits like Sean Hannity and former Fox host Tucker Carlson.

There is no better fertilizer for political hate than resentment and the right-wing knew how to take advantage of that. And they still do. 

 

White Supremacy: The Engine of the Right

Extremism, Hate, racism, Right-wing Extremism

 

After the revival of right wing talk radio that followed the abolition of the fairness doctrine, there was a steep rise in radio stations that catered to and even created the New Right.  This phenomenon was under appreciated, but it was real. “it was a torrent. You could listen to right-wing radio for 24 hours.”

Here was an early sample of such right-wing opinion heard on  one of the right-wing  talk radio shows : “The NAACP [National Association for the Advancement of Colored People] is using the American negro to advance some liberal white men’s political bias.” The racial element of course is not accidental. From the outset, white supremacy was a vital part of right-wing radio, just as it is today and just as it is on right-wing cable television such as Fox News, and of course the Internet which has come to supercharge racism among the right. White supremacy has been an engine of right-wing media and hence right-wing opinion.  As one commentator said on the CBC podcast the Flamethrowers,

That was new on national radio on a consistent basis in the 1960s. There were more than a dozen broadcasters that aired on more than 100 stations nation-wide by the 1960s. And for every one of the national guys there were dozens of local guys who were on 10 stations or 20 stations or 3 stations. ” They really were ubiquitous.

This was very profitable because these right-wing pundits didn’t need to bother with high production, research, or expensive programming. They loved to shoot from the hip. The listeners loved to hear them shoot from the hip. This was win-win for the owners of right-wing radio stations as the people soaked it up with irrational exuberance. All they needed to do was throw a bit of flame. It would inevitably find suitable timber and start a firestorm of some sort over some current right-wing issue close to the heart of its listeners.

Racist comments were particularly prevalent. And particularly popular. Racism is the unacknowledged driver of American right-wing talk radio. The entire right-wing movement has not acknowledged the significance of this ugly fact, but racism repeatedly shows its ugly racist side.

The Revival of Talk Radio and the Far Right

Extremism, Hate, Right-wing Extremism, True Believer

 

 

The Radio Right provides the essential pre-history for the last four decades of conservative activism, as well as the historical context for current issues of political bias and censorship in the media.

 

After the disintegration of the Fairness doctrine by the Carter administration in the US in the late 70s , and the revival of talk radio that quickly followed,  suddenly radio stations on the right and left had a lot of bandwidth to dole out to attract listeners. It was also possible to create a national network with very little investment.

National networks could be created for super cheap funds. This was a golden opportunity for those who wanted to use radio. And radio entrepreneurs did exactly that. They invested and some of them got very rich.

There were a lot of people who resisted the apparent political consensus the political parties had reached in the 1950s.  These people resisted that consensus. Some Americans thought the political elites were just ganging up against them.

Especially at night they reached homes, cars, and particularly truckers. The first time I heard about this phenomenon was from a trucker I knew He told me how he loved to listen to Rush Limbaugh. At the time I knew nothing about Limbaugh.  Later I learned a lot about him.

This opened the way for ordinary grass roots citizens who were unhappy with the political consensus of the 1950s to call in to a radio show and voice their opinions and gain some satisfaction from that engagement. These people felt connected to each other and a national movement. Their yearning to belong was deeply satisfied. AM radio did not have a lot of range during the day, but at night clear channel stations could pump out 50,000 watts. They were called “flame throwers” as a result.  That was an apt description for what they did.

Homes, cars, and truckers could be reached easily and cheaply across the country. This was a massive audience. And unlike television they did not have to sit passively and watch. They could participate—by calling in. They could join in. They were not longer passive consumers, they were active participants.  Long-distance truckers could drive right across the country listening to talk radio all the way. And it was interesting. I have listened.  The hosts knew how to generate interest.  They were masters of engagement. Unlike social media giants they did not need algorithms.  These people were the livestock for those algorithms. As Matzko said, “that sense of interconnectedness across time and space is very powerful for social movement organizations, and political movement organizations.”]  Not only that, in my opinion that was a vitally significant force establishing the bonds for religious organizations—i.e. political religions that were created. Such social connection could create a very valuable asset—true believers! All that was needed was a spark.

And there were sparks.

The right wing pundits knew how to produce sparks; the left wing pundits were too boring for that.

Creating True Believers

Extremism, Hate, Right-wing Extremism

 

Many of the radio broadcasters of the far right talk shows  originally  were clergy, including Carl McIntire, Billy James Hargis, Clarence Manion, and many others. An umbilical connection between religion and politics was also nourished. The more conservative the religion the better. Conservative politics met conservative religion and the offspring were often inbred monsters.

Many of these religious pundits did not agree on religion, except that what united them was opposition to hated liberal theology. They wanted that old time religion. They also hated the superior John F. Kennedy at least until he died. Then they forgave him for his sins. Their politics was grassroots conservative activism on a huge scale. Kennedy multiplied the audits of radio stations after he worked hard to introduce the fairness doctrine.

 The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), was first introduced in 1949 and it was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints. It sounded good in theory but was sometimes difficult in actual circumstances.

It was a dog a dog whistle for the conservative right. It did actually tamp down right-wing radio until Jimmy Carter, an evangelical liberal, which seems very odd these days, brought in de-regulation of the airwaves and allowed right wing radio to be born again. This formed the foundation for the golden age of right-wing hate ushered in under the near divine regime of  Saint Ronnie Regan. It also reinforced the views of the conservatives that modern media was biased against them, not an entirely fictious belief.

Paul Matzko tells in his history of talk radio showed how Kennedy reacted to the hatred by sending tax auditors to harass conservative broadcasters who reacted with more and more venom.  He relates how, by 1963, Kennedy was so alarmed by the rise of the Radio Right that he ordered the Internal Revenue Service and Federal Communications Commission to target conservative broadcasters with tax audits and enhanced regulatory scrutiny via the Fairness Doctrine. Right-wing broadcasters lost hundreds of stations and millions of listeners. Not until the deregulation of the airwaves under the Carter and Reagan administrations would right-wing radio regain its former prominence and then it did so with a vengeance when it discovered its magic elixir–hate.