Culture Warrior

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Culture Warrior is a book by Fox News Channel commentator Bill O'Reilly. In the book, O'Reilly argues that there is an intense culture war between "traditionalists" and "secular-progressives" in American society in the early 21st century. The book covers controversial political and social issues such as the war on terror, same-sex marriage, abortion, and legalized drugs.

O'Reilly describes "traditionalists" as those who feel that the United States should be based upon a values system of hard work, care for others, and opportunity. On the other side, O'Reilly coins the term "secular-progressives" to refer to those people whom he accuses of believing that the United States is an evil nation that needs drastic changes. O'Reilly argues that these secular-progressives are virtual socialists and are implementing change in the United States through judicial activism. The term "secular-progressive", which he abbreviates to "S-P", is used widely by O'Reilly throughout the book.

Published in the fall of 2006, this is O'Reilly's sixth published work, and his fourth non-fiction. As of December 31, 2006, it is number four on the New York Times Best Seller list (Hardcover Nonfiction) [1].

1 Definition of the term "secular-progressive"
2 The secular progressive movement
3 Accusations of fascism against the ACLU
4 Critical reaction
5 See also
6 References

[edit] Definition of the term "secular-progressive"

According to O'Reilly, "secular-progressives" are individuals who are not content with the current state of affairs in the United States. Secular-progressives wish to "mold [America] in the image of Western Europe." In Chapter 1, [2], O'Reilly describes secular-progressive goals as:

The redistribution of wealth via systems such as the progressive income tax, which disproportionately tax the wealthiest members of society

A decrease in school discipline in order to promote "their so-called liberties"

An increase in hostility towards religious values and their expression (accomplished through the support of legal organizations in their efforts to remove religious icons from publicly-owned spaces)

The implementation of a one-world approach to foreign relations by promoting a foreign policy in which American interests are not necessarily considered first

The furtherance of an emotion-based society that places individual self-expression and rights over self-sacrifice and adult responsibility

According to O'Reilly, the politicians he puts in this category are not willing to state these goals openly, as he believes that the United States is not ready to openly accept the tenets of the so-called secular-progressive agenda. However, O'Reilly also says that he believes secular-progressivism is increasing in militancy, and that the American public have been largely unaware that this increase is taking place.

[edit] The secular progressive movement

The "Secular Progressive Movement" is a postulated group of Americans whose non-traditional ideals have become a talking point in recent years for conservative commentators. Supposedly led by media billionaire George Soros, the group has been credited with the "erosion of societal discipline" in the United States. Though no such organization formally exists, O'Reilly states that the secular-progressive agenda is a threat to traditional American society. In this context, society relates to, but is not specifically, traditional culture, beliefs, and values. Also supposedly linked to the movement are Hollywood liberals, Al Franken, UC Berkeley Professor George Lakoff and the ACLU.

O'Reilly goes on to articulate the various members of the secular-progressive "army." The ACLU and similar legal organizations form the "shock troops," who have "blitzed the legal system" in an attempt to "secure secular policies without having to go to the ballot box." These troops are aided and abetted by "mainstream media enablers," who provide "aid and comfort to the frontline troops and are invaluable in getting their message out to an even wider audience."

[edit] Accusations of fascism against the ACLU

O'Reilly has called the American Civil Liberties Union a "fascist organization," believing they seek to impose a secular-progressive world view on America by "gaming the legal system." As an example, he cites the gay-marriage ruling of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts (Goodridge v. Department of Public Health) :

“

The ACLU, on the front lines, is extremely aggressive and well funded, as I have stated [referring to George Soros]. That means they are serious people. On my programs, I have called this crew a "fascist organization" because they seek to impose their world view on America — not by the popular vote, which is the way it is supposed to be done in a democracy, but by "gaming" the legal system. Because they know that they will never, ever achieve their goals on Election Day, their strategy is to rely on activist left-wing judges to bring about secular changes in our laws. The most notorious example of this strategy is the gay-marriage ruling in Massachusetts. The ACLU helpfully pointed out to the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth that the state constitution had an apparent loophole: that is, the document failed to define marriage specifically as between one man and one woman. Presto! With the stroke of a pen, the liberal court wiped out more than three hundred years of legal traditional marriage going back to the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. The ACLU was in ecstasy. To this culture warrior, gay marriage is not a vital issue. I don't believe the republic will collapse if Larry marries Brendan. However, it is clear that most Americans want heterosexual marriage to maintain its special place in American society. And as long as gays are not penalized in the civil arena, I think the folks should make the call at the ballot box. Traditional marriage is widely seen as a social stabilizer, and I believe that is true. But if you are trying to secularize American society, gay marriage is a good place to start — thus the ACLU's fervor on this issue.

”

O'Reilly generally believes that "secular progressives" are misguided individuals who share general political beliefs, such as, but not limited to: Little or no acknowledgment of God or other higher powers in public; The practice of taking money from the affluent and giving to the less fortunate; Opening national borders to create a "unified world"; Legalization of drugs; and belief in provision of "prosperity" by the government.

[edit] Critical reaction

Culture Warrior received a mixed critical reception. Syndicated columnist Liz Smith praised O'Reilly's writing as "diamond bright, ready to pounce, and never at a loss for words", and even compares O'Reilly to George S. Patton. [3]

Others were far more critical, however; Publisher's Weekly called it "more resentful and self-pitying than feisty" [4], while Elbert Ventura of Media Matters for America accused O'Reilly of making baseless claims, writing "It seems O'Reilly feels he is entitled to his own facts as well." [5] In its review of Culture Warrior, Media Matters wrote that the book was "replete with factual errors, rank hypocrisy, and ad hominem attacks directed at anyone who has crossed swords with O'Reilly." [6]

MSNBC personality (and noted O'Reilly rival) Keith Olbermann, who refers to Culture Warrior as "Bill Orally Wears a Windbreaker," said of the book: "Bill, your book sucks. Some people are going to buy it anyway. Shut up and take the check... and then send Andrea Mackris her 30 percent or whatever it is." [7][8]