Kopel speaks
Posted by Joshua Claybourn on 1 February 2005 | 11 responses
David Kopel offers up today’s “must read,” at least in my book, with his thorough dissection of Bill Moyers’ new column in the Star Tribune. Kopel’s post is magnificent not only because it answers a horrible Moyers column, but because it reminds us of the watchdog service blogs provide when they’re at their best.
Update: James Lileks responds to Bill Moyers in a way that only James Lileks can.
11 Responses to “Kopel speaks”
Although Moyers is over-the-top, there are kernals of truth in what he says. I believe that many conservative Christians have an unnatural focus on the Rapture to the neglect of the eternal life that they have already been resurrected to.
I grew up around a LOT of conservatives Christians convinced that the Pope is the anti-Christ.
I’ve also met, many, many Christian who oppose peace efforts with the Palestians on the basis of Revelation. Such a view of Revelation is simply pure evil, demonic beyond description.
I wouldn’t say that Kopel’s piece is a “thorough dissection,” but it does offer a different perspective — which is what ITA is all about. Gracias.
I’d say it’s a “thorough dissection.”
Well, if that’s a thorough dissection, then here’s my thorough dissection of the dissection …
>”Bill Moyers’ new column for the Minneapolis Star Tribune is stunning for both its mean-spiritedness and for its departure from elementary standards of opinion journalism.”
COMMENT: Does Moyers column also engage in rhetorical oversimplification for dramatic effect?
>”In brief, Moyers argues that the American government has been taken by right-wing Christians who believe in the imminent Rapture, and for that reason look forward to environmental catastrophe.”
COMMENT: Efficiently sets up a scary straw man to beat on for rest of “thorough dissection.”
>”(In a “rapture”, faithful Christians would be suddenly transported from earth to heaven, thereby avoiding the awful events on the earth during the apocalyptic disasters that will take place at the end of time.) Therefore, according to Moyers, right-wing Rapturists actually promote policies which they intend to harm the environment, since destroying the environment will hasten the Rapture.”
COMMENT: He’s tweaking the straw man — carefully posing it, making sure it looks especially offensive so he can beat the hell out of it.
>”After a lurid and hostile description of the beliefs of Christians who think that a Apocalypse/Rapture might occur soon, Moyers declares, “we’re not talking about a handful of fringe lawmakers who hold or are beholden to these beliefs. Nearly half the U.S. Congress before the recent election – 231 legislators in total and more since the election – are backed by the religious right.”
COMMENT: “Lurid and hostile” — ah yes, I see the step-by-step analysis of any “thorough dissection” beginning to form. Disappointingly, we’ve abandoned the straw man … and after all that work setting him up.
>”Moyers falsely conflates “being backed by the religious right” with believing in imminent rapture. This is nonsense. To cite just two examples, plenty of the “religious right” voters and leaders are Catholics and Orthodox Jews who are against abortion and gay marriage, and who rarely if ever think about the Apocalypse.”
COMMENT: OK, so here we have an attempt at some substance. As far as I can tell, in addition to being “mean-spirited,” “lurid” and “hostile,” Moyers may have overstated the number of rapture-believing fundamentalists supporting the right (the possibility that the opposite may be true isn’t examined, but oh well). By how much? Hey, a “thorough dissection” doesn’t need to be precise, does it?
>”Moyers rails against the 59% of Americans who believe that “the prophecies found in the book of Revelations are going to come true.” But thinking that all the prophecies in the Bible will come true–eventually–is hardly the same as believing that all the prophecies will be fulfilled in the next few years, or in one’s lifetime. Moreover, at least some of those Americans who believe in the prophecies have actually read the “Book of Revelation.”
COMMENT: Apparently there’s an inference that Moyers is again innaccurate in his estimation of exactly how many people truly believe that the rapture is going to happen soon, thus relieving us of any long-term responsibilty for the Earth, and how many just say they do. Again, numbers aren’t Kopel’s strong point, either, apparently, but at least he doesn’t try to use any. Better to pick away at the uncertainty in OTHER PEOPLE’s numbers.
>”I suspect that Moyers did not bother to do so before writing his screed against “delusional” Bible-believers–or else he would not have twice given the book the incorrect title of “Relevations.” Would you trust a writer who couldn’t even give the correct title of the book he was denouncing? A writer who complained about Muslims who believe in the “Koan” or Jews who believe in “the book of Jobs”?”
COMMENT: Ah, SUSPICION! The calling card of any “thorough dissection.”
>”Moyers writes: “The only Democrat to score 100 percent with the Christian coalition was Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia, who recently quoted from the biblical book of Amos on the Senate floor: ‘The days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land.’ He seemed to be relishing the thought.” To put things bluntly, it appears that either Moyers lied, or he made the claim about Miller without bothering to check if it were true. Miller did quote Amos–on Feb. 12, 2004–not “recently.” To be precise, Miller was quoting Martin Luther King quoting Amos. Miller was lamenting a metaphorical “famine” of moral values. And so was Amos, in the original. As quoted by Miller: “The days will come, sayeth the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land. Not a famine of bread or of thirst for water, but of hearing the word of the Lord.” Miller (like Amos) was complaining about a decline in moral values. The words used by Amos (and quoted by King and Miller) have nothing do with a literal famine (or any other environmental issue). No reasonable person could read Miller’s speech as pertaining to an imminent, literal, environmental famine.”
COMMENT: In my opinion, this is the best moment in the column — when Kopel quotes Moyers quoting Miller quoting King quoting Amos quoting God … and PROVING that Moyers got the quote wrong!
>”There are plenty of self-righteous and angry fourth-rate talk show hosts, on all sides of the political spectrum, who rely on inaccurate sources which fit the talkers’ bigoted preconceptions. Moyers begins the column: “One of the biggest changes in politics in my lifetime is that the delusional is no longer marginal.” The sentence may be more self-referential than Moyers realizes.”
COMMENT: Here, again, that haunting suspicion. Not sure what it means … perhaps we’ve learned that Moyers is a talk show host? If only we had FACTS to consider! But as long as we don’t, there’s plenty of fun to be had screaming at each other.
As far as I can see, the only bit Moyers misses out on is the fact that the politicians with the right-wing backing don’t actually believe in that crap, and they’re just pandering to their extremist-religious base because they know that if they don’t, they lose about 1/3 of their votes.
Here’s the proof: the struggle between Anarcho-Capitalism, and Christian Fundamentalist Morality, plays out in the level to which the FCC is willing to reign-in the Free Market, and regulate content on Broadcast media. While Powell was willing to fraudulently pass-off 100 million spam emails from one radical fringe group as “the voice of America’s Silent Majority”, and pushed a few token fines for shock-value, there’s still no overall limiting of broadcast content, particularly in the Internet, or Cable/Satellite – which is what the Fundies are really after.
When the FCC goes after the Internet, and Cable/Satellite, you’ll *know* for a fact, that the Fundies hold real sway in the Republican Party. But at the end of the day, porn is business, sex sells, and Money is King in this nation. The Republican Party is the Party of Big Business. Now that they can’t blame the “Immoral Democrats” anymore, the Repubs are stuck in the unenviable position of “put up or shut up”. They’re going to have to side with either one side or the other of this diametrically opposed pair. It’s a wedge that drives deep, and ultimately, the Repubs have hooked their cart to the MONEY horse. It would be suicide to do otherwise.
Moyers refers to a James Watt quote that he read in Grist. The Grist author says in 1981, Watt said to Congress “God gave us these things to use. After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back,” and that that testimony helped get him fired.
I can’t find any confirmation of this quote anywhere. Most sites merely say it’s from “public testimony.” Its first usage on Usenet was three weeks after its appearance in Grist. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_G._Watt]Wikipedia’s[/url] entry on Watt includes a handful of quotes, but not that one. Quick searches of the NYTimes and Washington Post archives turn up nothing. And Watt was fired in 1983, not 1981, which at least makes Grist’s timeline screwy.
So can anyone find a source for this quote? Or at least a pre-Grist usage? (It’s times like these I wish I still had access to Lexis.)
Loren, I analyzed the Watt quote on my blog. I’m certain it’s false, for the reasons I explain.
Very impressive work, Jon. And in such short time, too. Kudos. To add one more log to your fire, a search at Amazon turns up no results in any books that the site can search inside.
I researched the classic Alexander Tyler quote last year. It’s sorta aggravating to reach a point where you’re convinced that a quote is fake, but you can’t find who coined it.
The most aggravating fake quote experience I’ve ever had was when the UGA student newspaper ran an opinion column that concluded with a false Ariel Sharon quote that said “We, the Jewish people, control America.” I raised heck with the editorial board for printing false, anti-Semitic quotes, but their response was that they’d found *some* sort of publication that had used it, and that was all the fact-checking they needed for opinion columns.
Watt resigned in 1983 after he referred to his staff as including “a Black, two Jews and a cripple.” I think Watt had already been taken to the woodshed for trying to block the Beach Boys from the Washington Mall. Nancy Reagan personally invited the Beach Boys in 1984, I think.
I recall Watt making remarks about the Rapture in reference to the environment, but I don’t remember the specifics.
“I recall Watt making remarks about the Rapture in reference to the environment, but I don’t remember the specifics.”
Check J Mann’s blog. Watt did indeed allude to the Second Coming with regard to the environment, but his words are often taken out of context.
“A 2002 Time-CNN poll found that 59 percent of Americans believe that the prophecies found in the book of Revelations are going to come true.”
Ya’ll are arguing over minutia when the better part of 60 percent of Americans believe a great big invisible sky daddy is going to come and “take them home.”