Some of the many responses to my last blog confused me. I didn’t know how to respond to the criticism that my essays are “slanted.” I couldn’t figure out what precisely what my “slant” was.

The best I can come up with is that some are outraged that I don’t see things the way they do and any deviation from their perspective must be “slanted.” I try to articulate a principle and cite some examples from real life to explain what I mean and to illustrate the principle. I choose the examples I think best illustrate my point. But some don’t like the examples, apparently because they do not advance the political agendas that such people want.

Apparently, a recent essay about Adam Fortunate Eagle offended some because it didn’t advance some Zionist agenda. I don’t know what to make of people who see everything I write as an attack against their favorite foreign country. Maybe some psychiatrist can figure that one out.

But I can use such personal attacks against me as an opportunity to examine my own prejudices. Now, some apparently claim they know me better than I know myself; at least, they keep telling me what I believe. But since I have more experience being me than they do, maybe they will permit me to enumerate some of my own prejudices. I’m reluctant to do that because I prefer to write about ideas, not about myself, but some are relentless in making their responses personal.

So, here’s what I propose: For those, who prefer to deal with ideas and principles about public policy, don’t waste your time by reading any further.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is merely for those who prefer the ad hominem approach of trying to demonize those who don’t tell them what they want to hear:

Movie maker John Sayles once said today’s notion of “balance” in the media is the attempt to balance each truth with a lie. I have to admit I am prejudiced for the truth and against lying. I try to tell things the way I see them; I try to refrain from spin. I try to base my politics on what I believe to be true. I consider it dishonest to ignore facts simply because they do not advance my political agenda. If the facts disprove my political agenda, then I change my political agenda. Over the years, for example, I’ve had to discard my political beliefs about the Vietnam War and foreign aid because the facts disproved my beliefs. Since I moved to Alaska 42 years ago, I’ve become more and more skeptical about the power of the federal government. I’ve had to change my political beliefs because they didn’t account for the evils of big government. I’ve become increasingly aware that government doesn’t neglect the poor; government persecutes the poor.

I am prejudiced in favor of good and against evil. I consider terrorism evil. So I condemn all terrorism. I do not make excuses for the terrorism committed by people who agree with me. Agreement with me does not entitle one to do bad things.

I am prejudiced in favor of responsibility and against irresponsibility. I believe people are responsible for their own behaviors, not for each other’s behaviors. I don’t hold you responsible for my actions and I expect you not to hold me responsible for your actions. The same for governments. I do not hold Iran responsible for US actions, nor do I hold the US responsible for Iran’s actions. Anyone who says otherwise isn’t telling the truth.

I am prejudiced in favor of the truth and against lies. I get upset when I write that I do not hold the US responsible for the actions of other nations and someone says that I blame the US for everything wrong in the world. People should not use these cyberspaces to tell lies about me.

I am prejudiced in favor of the concept of innocent until proven guilty. If someone plays the race card and accuses me of anti-Semitism, that person should provide concrete evidence of something I have said or done that is anti-Semitic and not merely require me to deny anti-Semitism or prove I am not anti-Semitic. I have no fewer rights than someone accused of child molesting, for example. Maybe saying that offends someone, but tough. Now, if you truly believe not giving someone handouts is hating that someone, then you should be prepared to explain why not giving handouts to North Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe and al-Qaida proves one hates Asians, Hispanics, blacks and Muslims. Ducking that question is irresponsible behavior. So is saying you “believe” I hate a particular country or a particular religion. How would you feel if some guy wrote he “believes” you molest children? Would you vociferously argue in favor of that guy’s First Amendment right to express his “opinion?”

I am prejudiced against spending money without good reasons for doing so. Some friends pressure me to spend a couple of bucks more to get high-speed internet access instead of the slow dial-up. But I am satisfied with the simple stuff. I also walk to church instead of driving. I don’t spend money on gasoline unless I have a good reason to do so. The same holds for foreign aid. When in doubt, I oppose foreign aid. Someone has to prove to me it will do more good than harm. I have seen too much of it used for evil purposes, the very opposite of what foreign aid advocates claim it will do. I do not mind contributions to charities if those charities help those less affluent than I am. But I do not give to those who think I owe them more affluence than I owe myself. I also do not give to those people who are able to take care of themselves. That holds true for nations. I oppose using my tax dollars so dictators like Ferdinand Marcos can buy 50 million dollars’ worth of New York real estate, for example. If you want to play the race card and make something racist out of that, you’re telling a lie.

I am prejudiced in favor of fairness and against unfairness. I oppose anyone coming to my property and bulldozing my house. I think it’s unfair even if such a person says God gave him the right do so. I think people whose skin is darker than mine have the same right I do. If the guy with the bulldozer offered to compromise and bulldoze only half my house, I would not go along with such a “compromise.” I don’t think it would be fair to expect anyone with darker skin to agree to something I would not do myself. I do not believe in double standards for myself and for others. If you want to play the race card and make something racist out of that, you’re telling a lie.

And, finally, I am prejudiced against using these cyberpages to accommodate those who would rather make nastier and nastier personal attacks against me than to deal honestly with the issues I raise. Despite what you may think, I am not required to see things the way you do every time I write an essay. If you have specific questions about my beliefs, you may e-mail them to me at alascats@gci.net. Or you can call me. My telephone number is in the phone book. I will answer your questions as honestly as I can, and I expect you to do the same.