Glenn Beck Demonstrates The Right Wing Attitude Opposing Science and Reason

If anyone still wants to claim that CNN is a liberal network, Glenn Beck has made this even more difficult. After his recent words of praise for the John Birch Society, Beck has come up with this on his radio show:

Al Gore’s not going to be rounding up Jews and exterminating them. It is the same tactic, however. The goal is different. The goal is globalization. The goal is global carbon tax. The goal is the United Nations running the world. That is the goal. Back in the 1930s, the goal was get rid of all of the Jews and have one global government.

You got to have an enemy to fight. And when you have an enemy to fight, then you can unite the entire world behind you, and you seize power. That was Hitler’s plan. His enemy: the Jew. Al Gore’s enemy, the U.N.’s enemy: global warming….

Then you get the scientists — eugenics. You get the scientists — global warming. Then you have to discredit the scientists that say, ‘That’s not right.’ And you must silence all dissenting voices. That’s what Hitler did.

There is, of course, absolutely no connection between Hitler’s hatred of the Jews and Al Gore lecturing on the consensus of scientific belief. This is simply another example of the right wing’s hatred of science, from evolution to climate change. The latest attempt by the right to disparage science has been to bring up eugenics. While the right tries to tie in liberalism with eugenics, the connection is as imaginary as WMD in Iraq.

Consideration of right wing myths beyond their anti-science leads to why the right wing hates science. Science is the manner in which we objectively learn about the universe around us. Science looks for objective facts, not arguments to support any particular ideology. In contrast, many conservatives base their arguments upon substituting their own  unsubstantiated claims for the facts.

The far right, which is now dominant in the conservative movement, base many of their positions on ideas which are contrary to fact. The smarter ones among them, who realize that most of what they say is fiction, understand the damage a scientific mind set would do to their beliefs.

Conservative claims about WMD and ties between Saddam and al Qaeda do not hold up to those who seek objective truth. Conservatives base their attacks on liberals, including this latest one from Beck, upon tremendous distortions of liberal beliefs which do not hold up for people who seek out actual evidence of liberal beliefs. While the free market generally is the best solution, their ideology demands that this be true one hundred percent of the time and therefore conservatives often feel compelled to distort the truth when wrong. They can’t have people looking at the evidence in an objective, scientific manner. Perhaps worst of all, their alliance with the religious right is threatened by acknowledgement of the basic facts of modern biology.

The authoritarian right hates science because they do not want you to look at things objectively or to weight the facts. As is typical of authoritarian movements, they want you to blindly accept what they say. After all, if the American people had been taking a close look during the nightmare years of Republican rule, they might have seen how their liberties were being stripped away and would not have stood for it.

Be Sociable, Share!

10 Comments

  1. 1
    b-psycho says:

    What gets me the most about his garbage is that he weasel-like attempts to qualify it with “the goal is different” only to proceed to argue the goal is NOT different. Glen wouldn’t know logic if it violated him in a dark alley one night.

  2. 2
    Brett says:

    Correct, B-Psycho. No logic at all. Particularly, equating World War II era eugenics with the anti-global warming movement. The problem with the argument that Al Gore is trying to “silence” those scientists who say global warming does not exist is that there are very few of them who do say that, while there were many back in Hitler’s time that said eugenics were not right.

    They’re completely different examples! I can’t believe Beck would go as far to equate a carbon tax with eugenics. This is even more extreme than accusing a Muslim congresman of being a terrorist. Beck has lost it.

  3. 3
    daveinboca says:

    Beck still makes more sense on AGW than Al Gore, who keeps prattling on about how “the science is settled,” which it isn’t.

  4. 4
    Ron Chusid says:

    Beck makes absolutely no sense in what he said–I note that Dave provides no rational arguments for his claim. On the other hand, Gore’s work is based upon the consensus of scientific thought.

    Actually I would have prefered that Gore not word it that way as “the science is settled.” Science is rarely totally settled. However, the gist of his arument at the time was correct. It is very rare to have a consensus statement this strong on a subject, and there is minimal disagreement iln the scientific community (contrary to what the right wingers claim).

  5. 5
    Rick says:

    “There is, of course, absolutely no connection between Hitler’s hatred of the Jews and Al Gore lecturing on the consensus of scientific belief.”

    You’re correct. And that’s not what Beck has been talking about. He’s been referring to the propaganda campaigns of each, and how they are similar. Beck even states outright the same thing you do in that quote.

    Yet another example of taking things out of context. These are “Liberal Values”?

  6. 6
    Ron Chusid says:

    Rick,

    Do you bother to actually read what is printed before you come up with these ridiculous rationalizations. Beck is comparing Gore and global warming to Hitler and the Jews. There is no propaganda campaign from Gore which is analogous to Hitler’s propaganda campaign against the Jews.

    I took absolutely nothing out of context. I replied to what Beck said.

    You have a mighty weak form of arguing–falsely claiming something is taken out of context when that is not being done at all. You might be able to come up with better arguments if you responded to what is actually being said rather than repeatedly claiming that things are being taken out of context when there is zero justification for your charge.

  7. 7
    Rick says:

    I read it, completely understand what you’re saying. You’re just wrong, since you’re taking things out of context. You replied to only a portion of what Beck said. If you only reference a sentence of what someone said, when to take it in context is a paragraph or two, that is a problem. My point is that you, and many bloggers like you, take small snippets of statements, take them out of context, and then try to use that to demonize people. All without ever really explaining why you disagree with what was actually originally said.

    I have come up with examples of what is actually being said, and you responded by saying the actual context was irrelevant.

  8. 8
    Ron Chusid says:

    Rick,

    I must ask again if you actually read the stuff you comment about. Your comments sound like an Eliza program in which you throw in accusations such as that things are being taken out of context just for the hell off it, but you show no signs of understanding what is being discussed.

    I am responding to exactly what Beck said. If anyone, it is you who are taking things out of context. You stay fixated on the first sentence and ignore the meaning of the full paragraph. Beck’s illogic here was already addressed by the first commenter here.

    If you have any sensible arguments to make that is one thing. For you to just repeat your same unsubstantiated claims such as that things are being taken out of context is meaningful. You’ve said nothing meanigful about the topic of the post.

    I am not trying to demonize people as much as I am quoting their work to make a point. Your comments here come much closer to demonization when you make your unsubstantiated claims that I am taking things out of context or not really explaining why I disagree (which should be quite clear in the post).

  9. 9
    Joe says:

    I don’t understand evolution and I don’t want my children understanding it.  Death to the thinkers!

  10. 10
    matt says:

    YES, Rick! YES! Tell the pagan barbarians that we do’n take to kindly to all thems a-theists down roun deez heee-uh paaaarts! I better see me a dang blasted CRAC-a-DUCK for i bleave any uh tht new fangled hippie crap! them’uns can go fourneekate with munkees ‘n treas four all we’uns cur, riigh, pah-nah?

1 Trackbacks

Leave a comment