I don’t watch Beck to much anymore, but I have watched him enough to know where he stands. I won’t get into what I agree and disagree with him on since it is not my intent of this post. Safe to say that there is a lot of stuff he says that drives me up the wall. However I often find myself defending him against leftists attacks. Not just any left wing attack though. If a liberal statist criticizes his pro war stance then I do not feel the need to defend him, but usually leftists do not pick apart the arguments of their opponents. They choose to pick apart the person and smear his or her character, and this is why I often step in to defend Beck. But once you take that step and stick up for the guy it’s practically impossible to move on from that point and talk about things you both agree on regarding Beck such as your opposition to his pro war position.
Is Beck who he says he really is? Is he there to implicitly or explicitly paint Libertarians into a corner by claiming he is one only to misrepresent us? I don’t know. Possibly. If so I guess I should simply call the guy a fraud and move on, But I find myself defending the guy against ignorant, knee jerk reactionary leftists at the moment.
I don’t know much about television, let alone American television, or American talking heads, but here’s a little bit I found out.
The man has an entire staff dedicated to seeing what fringe websites are claiming or what conspiracy blogs or otherwise are saying and then he uses that material. Apparently, some bloggers had serious suspicions, but I didn’t believe it. Then somebody wrung out an admission from a few members of his staff.
So you know, he is an entertainer and he uses material that you hear on blogs by senile 80 year old bloggers who just discovered the internet.
As the above poster said, he’s an entertainer. And he is a good entertainer in that he makes a ton of money doing what he does and appeals to a large audience.
He is not an intellectual or some kind of knowledgeable political philosopher and therefore should not be evaluated on those grounds. That isn’t by any means to say everything he says is wrong but just that his main job is not to “represent” any particular position or philosophy, or to further intelligent debate on any topic. It is to entertain and make money. Taking a Glen Beck too seriously is like taking a George Carlin too seriously. They are (or were in Carlin’s case) entertainers who use politics in their platforms.
People who don’t understand this (both on the left foaming at the mouth with hate, and on the right looking up to him for guidance) should spend more time finger painting and less time voting.
Beck is evolving as he goes. I catch some of his stuff here an there. Its not all bad, not all great. He says he is evolving as he goes and I have seen the truth in that. He is now against the patriot act and other things he used to support. As for lables, he typically says he leans libertarian more and more but is still conservative, though ultimately it depends on the issue.
I would not defend him as a person but defend content that you see truth in. Again, whenever I tune in, he says “reaserch for yourself and dont say I said xyz”. Getting the truth on our own eliminated him and gets a cable person out of the way from the true content at hand.
Its just popular to be against him or anyone in the corporate media.
Beck is good for some things. He got Hayek’s Serfdom book attention. The thing I am not to fond of with Beck, or any talk show entertainer is the ad homimnem attacks on folks he is critiquing. Critique the ideas not the person. However, if he any of them didn’t utilize ad hominem attacks, they would not be entertainers in the first place.
Beck is co-opting bits and pieces of political philosophy that seem to fit his agenda. That also includes some things that are pretty bad.
Overall, the Republican Party has grasped at some libertarian ideas, some even claiming them as their own.
So you have to ask yourself a question. Which is worse, a half-truth or a lie? My biggest concern is that the Republican Party regains power on the promises of some libertarian ideas and never goes through with them. Odds are pretty good that this will happen. I just hope that doesn’t tarnish the libertarian movement in the long run, but it’s nice to see some aspects in the limelight. Do you think Ron Paul will be allowed to debate this time if he decides to run for President?
People who don’t understand this (both on the left foaming at the mouth with hate, and on the right looking up to him for guidance) should spend more time finger painting and less time voting.
He’s got a show on a news channel; based on that, assuming that he’s serious - no matter how ridiculous his show is - should be a given. By your logic, one could consider each and every crazy person on TV to be a troll and/or satirist and be done with it. I don’t think I can share your optimism.
