A Deluge of Ad Hominems

 

I do not usually reply to letters to the editor, and I am not exactly going to do this now.  But there has been such a torrent of criticisms of my Tribune columns that I feel I must address their tenor.  Many readers have not only disagreed with me; they have cast aspersions on my character.

If I have not been called stupid and immoral, then I have been referred to as the next best thing.  I am said to be unscholarly, anti-establishment, and pro-Russian.  In inveighing against neo-Marxism, I am depicted as undermining the integrity of our nation.

What is more, unhappy critics have demanded that my columns be pulled and that I be dismissed from my university position.  It is not enough to tell the world I am wrong; I must be punished for my impertinence.

When I was an undergraduate, a friend of mine, who later became a distinguished professor of economics, was fascinated by what we learned in a logic course.  He was especially riveted by the so-called informal fallacies.  These, we were told, were off-limits when making a valid argument.

But, said my friend, this was wrong.  In looking around the world, he came to the conclusion that these fallacies were frequently the best way to win a dispute.  They might not be fair, but they were effective.

Among the errors he identified as most advantageous was the argumentum ad hominem.  This occurred when the other person, and not his/her claims, was attacked.  The idea was to invalidate what was said by destroying the reputation of the one saying it.

Since even the most scurrilous human beings are sometimes right, nullifying everything they say, just because they said it, misses the point.  It in no way refutes their ideas.  Although this tactic sways many onlookers, it does not establish what is true.

Well, I have been subjected to ad hominem attacks.  While I might, upon occasion, be wrong, this way of discrediting me does nothing to rebut what I have written.  For that to happen, my contentions must be dealt with directly.  They have to shown to be erroneous.

But I am not alone.  Contemporary conservatives have been subjected to a deluge of ad hominens.  We have been called stupid, mean-spirited, and greedy.  Our motives are repeatedly questioned and our knowledge impugned.  There is no reason to listen to us because we are crack-brained fools.

Consider the treatment Donald Trump experiences.  Almost anything he does elicits the charge that he is a racist.  He doesn’t want to ban certain guns, well that’s because he is a racist.  He has been mean to the ruler of North Korea, well that’s also because he is a racist.

Or what about his lowering taxes—or imposing tariffs.  He plainly sponsors these initiatives because he’s stupid.  He doesn’t understand much about anything; hence his proposals are defective.  How he made his billions is therefore one of nature’s mysteries.

Or he demands that liberals who broke the law be punished.  That’s because he is a dictator.  He enjoys destroying our democracy—even when he asks that our constitution be respected.  See how mean he is to illegal immigrants.

It is, of course, true that Trump brings much of this antipathy upon himself.  He has been known to launch a barrage of insults at those who disagree with him.  The question, however, is who began this rudeness war.  Could it have been the PC police?

Liberals have been using ad hominens for decades.  Didn’t Hillary Clinton describe those who opposed her as “deplorables”?   Wasn’t George W. Bush accused of being a murderer?  As for Ronald Reagan, we was a dumb actor who did not understand that the cold war could not be won.

All conservatives are obviously racist, sexist, homophobic pigs.  We all need sensitivity training to rescue us from our tyrannical habits.  The rich, in particular, must be prevented from riding roughshod over their innocent victims.

Isn’t it time we called a halt to this sort of invective?  I will not defend it when comes from Trump.  But shouldn’t liberals also recognize when they have gone over the line?  Perhaps I am being too sensitive—but then again, maybe I am merely asking for a return to civility.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University