At National Review, "Reality may cause sadness and pain, but it is reality nonetheless":
I recently devoted my biweekly column in the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles to analyzing why most Jews believe that people are basically good despite the fact that this belief is neither rational nor Jewish. In a lifetime of teaching and writing on Judaism, I have never encountered a single normative statement in 3,000 years of Jewish writing that asserted that man is basically good.This reminds me of the hatemonger and racist Repsac3, who when confronted with the fact of President Obama's bigoted racial stereotyping, refused to acknowledge it, and instead called critics of the president racist. Again, these people are not "liberal." They're radical leftists, and they're insane. More at the link, in any case.
As I expected, the reaction — apparently all from Jewish liberals — was entirely negative. Almost an entire page of the journal was devoted to letters attacking me. One of the seven letters — from a prominent Hollywood screenwriter — bordered on hysteria.
The question is, why?
Why would liberals in general, and Jewish liberals in particular — given the Jews’ singularly horrific history at the hands of other human beings — react so strongly against someone who wrote that people are not basically good?
In my original article, I offered one explanation: Since the Enlightenment, the secular world has had to believe in man (or “humanity”), because if you don’t believe in God and you don’t believe in humanity, you will despair.
But one critic opened my eyes to an even deeper reason most liberals do not acknowledge that people are not basically good.
This is what he wrote:
“What a sad world it would be if we all believed as Dennis Prager that mankind is inherently evil.”
And this is what I responded: “I did not write that man is inherently evil. I wrote that he is not basically good. And, yes, that does make the world sad. So do disease, earthquakes, death and all the unjust suffering in the world. But sad facts remain facts.”
“A distinguishing characteristic of liberals and leftists,” I concluded, “is their aversion to acknowledging sad facts.”
3 comments:
To believe that man is basically good one would have to discount the vast majority of human history. It is replete with wars and man doing all manner of damage to each other.
Even in today's environment, we have a significant number of people who would kill and otherwise do all kinds of damage to others to satisfy their own desires. On only needs to look at the reponses from Leftists, who keep stating that the believe in the goodness of man, every time they are challenged. The standard response is some form of violence. It does seem that "Utopia" is going to be built on the dead bodies of those who do not tow the line of their political thought.
I do look at this in a somewhat different manner. I believe that about five to ten percent of people are good. Ten percent of people are bad and the other eighty percent are trying to do good, but many time do not live up to their expectations. People, because of their constant changing environment, do move in and out of these various categories.
When you make man into your GOD you make your GOD an imperfect being which can never reach that which you dersire.
Sorry about a couple of missing letters. I am just getting used to my iPad and have not figured how to move up and down in the comments block. Just beginning the learning curve.
Not only would liberals have to discount most of human history, they would have to accept the Biblical point of the fall of man. It is the liberal rejection of the judeo-Christian view that forces them to beleive in the Goodness of mankind. They have to accept the opposite point of view against all history and daily facts. It is their rebellion that makes them liberal. JPB
Post a Comment