[b:c2df230d12][color=darkblue:c2df230d12]The topic is also the title of Ann Coulter’s new book. It is reviewed in Shermer’s latest E-Skeptic.
Here is a taste -[/color:c2df230d12][/b:c2df230d12]
[quote:c2df230d12]CoulterÌs fans apparently consider death threats and violent rhetoric humorous, and she doesnÌt disappoint them. She is a hate-mongering reactionary who has said she is for public flogging, and against womenÌs suffrage. I wish I were making this up.  Godless is a boring collection of rants filled with utterly mind-boggling absurdities, like, Ïpublic schools are the LeftÌs madrassas,Ó ÏThe most important value to liberals is destroying human lifeÓ (in reference to abortion), and Ïliberals made up Watergate.Ó We neednÌt worry about misinterpreting her words because she has repeatedly told interviewers that she believes everything she wrote in the book. She has even said that she never regrets anything she has ever said and she wouldnÌt have said anything differently. Even if the cynics are right to say that Coulter is laughing all the way to the bank and that she doesnÌt really believe any of it, it still reflects horribly on our media that gives her a national platform, and on our culture in which she is thriving with a lucrative speaking career and best-selling books.[/quote:c2df230d12]
[b:c2df230d12][color=darkblue:c2df230d12]It is difficult to understand how someone who so clearly is a hate monger gains the attention of national media outlets.
You can read the whole review at http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/index.html
Jim[/color:c2df230d12][/b:c2df230d12]

Couldn’t have said it better, Jim. She’s an embarrasment.

It is difficult to understand how someone who so clearly is a hate monger gains the attention of national media outlets.

Really?  I think the very fact that she IS such a hate monger grants her nationwide infamy and attention.  One would have to look long and hard to find a TV personality whose views would be called “nuanced” or “scholarly.”  Even when journalists or experts come on Chris Matthews’ show to discuss politics and elections, the host (when faced with overly academic or equivocal answers to questions) pushes for black and white responses and controversial topics.  RATINGS, people, NOT education.  I think it’s a similar ethical dilemma to other products of consumerism / capitalism, such as the sports industry or even health care…  ultimately, quality or the sacred “what ought to be” falls by the wayside in favor of profit.  And let’s face it, Ann Coulter is more entertaining than someone like Paul Krugman or David Gergen, both infinitely more qualified than Coulter to discuss politics.

Well, that’s also a good point, HolyAvenger. And to that extent it is even comprehensible why she gets airtime: programmers want ratings, conflict gets ratings, Coulter promotes conflict.

QED.

Depressing little syllogism.

But it partly explains why I never watch any of these shows. Look what I’m missing!

Oh yeah!  Her column ran in our daily newspaper (the Augusta Chronicle) for several months, but then there were enough complaints about it that it was reluctantly dropped (the editors are rabid Conservatives).  Naturally, they are still getting letters to the editor praising Coulter’s “amazing wit and intelligence”, and accusing the newspaper of being in the pocket of the Far Left for dropping her!

It’s depressing that someone like this can be considered by so many to be a serious commentator.

Some people like to feed off hate that is how we got Nazi Germany, the Inquisition, and the modern radical islam.

Some people like to feed off hate that is how we got Nazi Germany, the Inquisition, and the modern radical islam.

Careful there!  All three of those events / historical events had/have a myriad of causes, of which “feeding off hate” is only part of the equation.  Nazi Germany was as much about the Treaty of Versailles and the post-war economic impact on Weimar Germany as it was about “hate.”  As for modern radical Islam, there are also numerous theleological, cultural, political, and economic factors behind it.  Hate seems to be more of a bi-product of these things.

As far as the “roots” of hate go, I’d say that the human tendency to amalgamate into in-groups and create “the other” is much to blame…