Admittedly I have not read the Prager/Telushkin books on antisemitism, and I take your point that they're not about politics. However I would find it difficult to fully take Prager's views on antisemitism on board, when he is himself such a xenophobe and so culturally intolerant.
The word 'conservative' has many meanings. Often it is used to mean simply 'traditionalist', 'opponent of radical change of any sort', or 'economic conservative'. However, there is a certain strand of right-wing so-called 'conservative' opinion which places great emphasis on xenophobia and intolerance of diversity, whether regarding background, religion, or political viewpoint. To me, xenophobia - especially the sort that consists not just of a dislike of foreigners but of an intolerance toward suspected 'enemies within'; an insistence on a narrow system of values as defining one's culture or nation; and an equating of cultural or religious diversity with treachery or not being a 'true Briton' or 'true American' - is my 'bridge too far'; one of my strongest litmus tests for extremism. Someone who holds such values *is* an extremist, whether an Islamist 'Westernophobe'; a Europaean anti-immigrant bigot; or an American 'culture warrior'. The slurs that I ardently oppose against 'Zionists' being more loyal to Israel than to their own country are just different horses from the same stable as Prager's.
Prager's xenophobia is perhaps most clearly shown in his comments about Keith Ellison's taking his oath of office on the Koran, and its ramifications:
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?... 'He should not be allowed to do so – not because of any American hostility to the Quran, but because the act undermines American civilization.
First, it is an act of hubris that perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist activism – my culture trumps America's culture. What Ellison and his Muslim and leftist supporters are saying is that it is of no consequence what America holds as its holiest book; all that matters is what any individual holds to be his holiest book....
I'm afraid we are becoming a diverse, secular society without any roots, and this is symbolically an example of that. The Bible is the repository of our values, not the Constitution...'
In part, I have to admit, I hate and distrust Prager for the rather simple reason that, by implication, he hates and distrusts me. I am a secular Europaean left-winger. He considers people like me as a danger to civilization:
www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ART... - 29k
'The second ideology seeking to dominate the world is secularism and socialism as practiced in Western Europe and supported by educated elites around the world.
...Western European socialists and their American (and Canadian, and Latin American) supporters are as passionate about secularism and socialism as believing Muslims are about Islam. And they want to dominate the world as much as militant Muslims want Islam to. Their vehicles are the United Nations, the European Union, international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocols, and international institutions such as the International
There is no other country that claims to be Judeo-Christian and no other that has such strong support for capitalism and small government (the opposite of socialism). Therefore, while both the militant Muslims and the socialists/secularists have supporters around the world, American values have few. That is why America goes it alone -- with the partial exceptions of Israel and Britain, no other society has the same values as we do.
Second, neither Judeo-Christian nor capitalist values are secure in America. Many Americans, including almost its entire intellectual class, are as hostile to Judeo-Christian and non-socialist values as the militant Muslims and European socialists are.
Third, almost no one is teaching the next generation of Americans (as almost no one taught the present adult generation) what is unique, let alone superior, about American values. Our children are overwhelmingly educated by people who believe in Europe's values, not in ours.
As neither China nor the rest of Asia, nor Africa, nor Latin America are offering an ideology that can dominate the world, either Europe's, or the militant Muslims', or America's way of life will prevail.
But the American way can only prevail if Americans believe in it. That is why, as important as the military and ideological battles against militant Islam are, the most important battle is the ideological one within America. But with America's universities, unions, professional associations, mainstream news media, and one of its two major parties ideologically aligned with Europe, and with big businesses constantly undermining Judeo-Christian values, the battle within America itself for America's unique values is far from won. And given that only America offers a viable alternative to both militant Islam and secularism/socialism, if we lose the battle here, humanity has a very dark future'
Another article:
o
www.jewishworldreview.com/0304/prager03020... begins:
'America is engaged in two wars for the survival of its civilization. The war over same-sex marriage and the war against Islamic totalitarianism are actually two fronts in the same war – a war for the preservation of the unique American creation known as Judeo-Christian civilization.
One enemy is religious extremism. The other is secular extremism.
One enemy is led from abroad. The other is directed from home.
The first war is against the Islamic attempt to crush whoever stands in the way of the spread of violent Islamic theocracies, such as al-Qaida, the Taliban, the Iranian mullahs and Hamas. The other war is against the secular nihilism that manifests itself in much of Western Europe, in parts of America such as San Francisco and in many of our universities.
America leads the battle against both religious and secular nihilism and is hated by both because it rejects both equally. American values preclude embracing either religious extremism or radical secularism. ...All this explains why the passions are so intense regarding same-sex marriage. Most of the activists in the movement to redefine marriage wish to overthrow the predominance of Judeo-Christian values in American life. '
Here we see not only an extreme hostility to secularists, but an accusation against significant numbers of people *within* America of being 'against American values' and indeed a threat to 'the survival of civilization'; an 'enemy' rightly subject to a 'war'.
Do I think Prager should be banned or suppressed? No; that would in itself be extremely RW, intolerant, and bordering on totalitarianism. However, I do consider that his value system is so fundamentally different from mine and opposed to everything I value - in ways that go well beyond what's commonly meant by 'conservative' (e.g.: I dislike our Tory leader Cameron and would never vote for him, but I think that fundamentally Cameron and I have far more in common with one another than either of us does with Prager) that I would have a very hard time taking *any* of his ideas seriously, and would need a lot of convincing that they don't form a part of his very dangerous RW agenda.
