Hugh's Vox Blogoli Vol.2 No.1

Hugh Hewitt raises questions in his first Vox Blogoli of 2005. Hugh read Jonathan Rauch's piece in The Atlantic (subscription required) as he flew cross-country, and was struck by a passage near the end:

“On balance it is probably healthier if religious conservatives are inside the political system than if they operate as insurgents and provocateurs on the outside. Better they should write anti-abortion planks into the Republican platform than bomb abortion clinics. The same is true of the left. The clashes over civil rights and Vietnam turned into street warfare partly because activists were locked out of their own party establishments and had to fight, literally, to be heard. When Michael Moore receives a hero’s welcome at the Democratic National Convention, we moderates grumble; but if the parties engage fierce activists while marginalizing tame centrists, that is probably better for the social peace than the other way around.”

Hugh "[invites] comments on this passage, what it says about the author, The Atlantic, and the left's understanding of the Christian culture in America in 2005."

In fairness, Hugh invited Jonathan Rauch on his show and gave Rauch a chance to explain or rethink his conclusion in light of Hugh's questions. I thought Rauch was a reasonable man, open to discussion and willing to revise his opinion. He admitted that he had written this passage quickly, and after Hugh's careful description of how Rauch's words might be received by religious conservatives, Rauch said that if he could do it over again, he would have written it more carefully.

I must confess I was favorably impressed by Mr. Rauch. I've heard so many left-leaning guests on the various talk shows I listen to, and the majority of them seem to dig in their heels and refuse to consider other viewpoints. Kudos to Jonathan Rauch.

But, even with his willingness to have changed this passage, it's still so revealing. There exists shortcut terminology about conservatives that is meaningful to the left. "Better they should write anti-abortion planks into the Republican platform than bomb abortion clinics." Of course, when the left thinks of the far right they think of abortion clinic bombers. This is their image of the very religious. Violent. Terrorists, with a small "t."

What, though, is their shortcut term for the extreme left? "The clashes over civil rights and Vietnam..." Idealists. Activists.

The issue is the left's uneven contrasts. They cite the clinic bombers as typical of the extreme right, even though these bombers have been soundly condemned by leaders and spokespeople for the entire spectrum of secular and religious conservatives. The proper contrast on the extreme left would be the criminal behavior of the radical environmentalists. But that's not what gets mentioned, and I don't remember this behavior being condemned by the left.

What all this says about the left is that they see themselves as the only true idealists, the only believers in what's really important. They see religious conservatives as deluded--maybe not on the fringe of lunacy, but headed in that direction. The left sees the criminal element on the left as outside the left's mainstream, but they see the criminal right as being the natural extension of right's mainstream. And they don't see a problem with that.

Unfortunately, the right needs to be careful they don't do the same thing.

Update

Teflon at MoltenThought does a thoroughly tart dissection of Rauch's main point--that embracing the extremes reduces radical behavior.