Legal Commentary

IOKIYATAP

By Big Tent Democrat

The debate over the use of the phrase American Talban, which was always absurd, now reaches new heights of absurdity. The American Prospect's Adam Serwer writes:

I've written pieces with the intent of breaking down the very kind of arrogance that presumes the bad acts of our countrymen are different from those of our enemies, so I can hardly be thrown in that camp. I have no problem with pointing out individual instances in which conservative figures embrace the premises behind the arguments of religious extremists; I do it all the time. That doesn't mean that conservatives are "indistinguishable" from the Taliban "in their tactics and on the issues."

Serwer's argument appears to be it's ok if he, or some other American Prospect writer (Serwer, like all of the American Prospect writers, still ignores the fact that the American Prospect published Robert Kuttner's article "American Taliban") makes comparisons of American figures to foreign theocratic reactionaries, but it is not ok if Markos Moulitsas does. Of course, this makes no sense. Alternatively, one could argue that Serwer is saying pointing out one instance where American theocratic reactionaries resemble foreign extremists is ok, but pointing out serial instances of resemblance is not ok. Serwer does not explain this argument, so I'm not sure what reasoning underlies it. And again, since the Kuttner article published by the American Prospect does not focus on a single instance of resemblance, it seems to me that Serwer needs to address why it is ok for the American Prospect to do that which he is condemning. Glenn Greenwald writes:

I must note how odd it is for Serwer and The Prospect, of all people, to be leading this charge, given that Serwer himself six months ago wrote a (genuinely superb) piece for The Atlantic entitled "American Takfiris" which equates John Yoo, Jay Bybee and their "cohorts in the [Bush] Office of Legal Counsel" with Al Qaeda leaders ("takfirism," Serwer explains, is what "allowed al Qaeda to, for all intents and purposes, kill anyone they wanted without violating the laws of Islam": somehow, "American Taliban" is beyond the rhetorical pale, but "American Takfiris" is perfectly acceptable). And then there's the fact that TAP's Editor-in-Chief, Robert Kuttner, wrote an article in February of this year -- in that very magazine -- entitled . . . . wait for it . . . . "American Taliban," which repeatedly compared the American Right to the Taliban with sentences like this one: "With the complete takeover of the GOP by an American Taliban, the party should be doomed to minority status." How can Prospect writers possibly rail against Moulitsas as though he committed some grave sin without grappling with these identical "transgressions," including from TAP's own chief editor and from Serwer himself (Serwer claims that his Al Qaeda comparison was narrowly focused on Bush OLC lawyers while Moulitsas generalized much more, but I wonder if Serwer even read American Taliban because Moulitsas is quite specific in citing his culprits, as opposed to Kuttner, who applied the term to the GOP generally).

(Emphasis supplied.) In the end, the argument of the American Prospect writers is sufficiently clear - It's Ok If You Are The American Prospect.

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on September 18, 2010 (boomark / email).