"Demonic" by Ann Coulter

I will never claim myself as an Ann Coulter ‘fan’; though whenever I see the woman appear on television, I do enjoy listening to whatever she may have to say.  She speaks with a refreshing bluntness, mixed with a flair of humor, that I would imagine creates an accessibility to even the harshest of critics.

Nevertheless, and while I probably agree with her ideology ninety percent of the time, I never felt compelled to purchase any of her prior works. 

There has always existed, within my own framework, something uninteresting when it came to ideologically driven books – even when that ideology was somewhat my own.  Why would I seek to purchase a book echoing the belief system already within my own head?  And vice versa.  Why would I ever purchase a book attacking my belief system as escaped from the loony bin of the insane asylum?

Give me something new.  Show me an idea I have never considered.  Draw me into a world where my pursuit of truth is emboldened with new strength by facts that cannot be refuted.

When I first heard Ann Coulter begin to speak of “Demonic”, I must admit I was intrigued.  As a believer who takes the Bible for the inspired Word of God, any book suggesting an exploration of the unseen spiritual world captures my immediate attention.  Whether, though, this would be an author who would mock the faith of believers or inspire with new insights, I was not sure.  I presumed her approach would resonate in the latter – and I was right.  She takes the unseen spiritual world existing behind the curtain, ties it to the brazen mentality of the mob, and labels it in a generous coat of liberalism with which all her books and her philosophy are rapt.

For any not familiar with the term, ‘demonic’, it refers to the fallen angels from heaven who sided with Satan, rather than with God; and now, as a result, roam the earth causing trouble from that unseen spiritual realm with the very commonly seen horrors and pains we mortals endure daily.   

‘Demonic’ begins, appropriately enough, with the story from the Gospel of Mark where Jesus confronts a man possessed of an impure spirit.  He rebukes the spirit, and learns the spirit’s name as Legion, inferring many. 

“The demon is a mob, and the mob is demonic.”

Coulter’s then works to wrap this thesis around the neck of liberal actions since the dawning of the American republic.  The two chapters she writes about the French Revolution are stark testaments to a book appropriately named.  There is nothing more purely ‘demonic’ than the episodes of utter insanity and sheer violence, visited upon the French people, by the mobs running rampant across their country.

Consider, if you dare, any of the serial killers familiar to our present time.  Be it Jeffrey Daumer, or BTK, or Ted Bundy, or even any of the perverted souls who kidnap children for their twisted deviancy.  These people were singular in nature.  They blended into the crowd.  They carried on regular lives only to engage in their heinous acts under the cover of darkness.  None of it was done for public consumption; nothing was witnessed in the streets outside one’s door.

Now, remove whatever stigma may have existed within their demented souls against committing such acts in public.  Sanction it by whatever governing authority spoke for the moment.  Team them up into a frenzied mob, lusting for death and blood, slavishly following whatever charismatic leader is bold enough to stand up and cheer them on; and the French Revolution presents itself for its public viewing.  The ‘demonic’ is there to either brutalize sans mercy, or permit another day to cower in fear within your hole.

This is, of course, the most extreme example Coulter gives for the mob mentality running rampant, possessed by a rationale of violence and vitriol common sense, logic, nor truth is able to quell.  She also includes studies of the Obama birther conspiracy, juxtaposing it with the “October surprise” from the 1980 election, where a theory was advanced that President Jimmy Carter lost to Ronald Reagan because Reagan made a secret deal with the Iranians to hold the hostages until he took office, thereby ensuring Carter’s loss.

Neither was based in fact; and both were advanced by the Democratic Left.

There is the student riots at Kent State where several students were killed by a National Guard unit sent to restore order to the campus.  This is a piece of history the media illustrates solely from the vantage point of the tragedy of the deaths.  Coulter adds to the story an FBI report which stated a sniper was at the scene, a shot was fired, students were armed with clubs and weapons, the violence and vitriol of the mob was present.

When I read this, I could not help but think of the Boston Massacre, where then-lawyer John Adams defended British soldiers against firing into an angry mob of Bostonians, likewise threatening them with violence.  

Coulter adds one chapter on the American Revolution, juxtaposing it against the two chapters on the French Revolution, and shows the Founding Fathers absolute abhorrence for the violence of the mob.  Most of them were appalled at the actions of the Boston Tea Party.  They saw it as the performance of a rabble, and they promised to repay the tea company for the ruined tea.

This is why, she states – and I tend to agree - we know the names of Washington, and Jefferson, and Franklin, and Adams; while the names of the men who chose the way of the mob are lost to history tide.

It is the history which makes ‘Demonic’ primarily worth the read.  Most people will never buy into her thesis of attaching liberalism to the mob which is attached to the demonic.  They will view it through the ideological lens telling them, ‘I want no part of that.’  

However, when one considers things from an imagery standpoint, Coulter does have a point over which reasonable people can mull.  Who are the mobs stirring up trouble, inciting violence, spewing the vitriol of name calling and character assassination?  I cannot think of one instance where it emanates from a conservative group.  Everything is left-wing, liberal, democrat.  Everything.

On that particular aspect, the woman has a point.  Liberals are the ones who depend upon the instigation of the mob for a pushing forth of their agendas.  When she attempts to link the way a liberal thinks, versus the way a conservative thinks, to a natural progression gravitating them towards the mob, I am not so sure such a leap can be made.  It is a point to be considered with greater study.

I say that based upon two incidents.  The first is the election of Barack Obama to the presidency of the United States.   I had a coworker, back in 2008, who believed, because he was black, it would not be long before an assassination attempt would be made.  Three years later, no attempt having been made, I consider what Coulter wrote in her chapter on “Imaginary Violence from the Right vs. Real Violence from the Left”:

“There’s never been an assassination attempt by a right-winger.”

All the assassinations and assassination attempts have been committed by people on the left wing.  Right-wing conservative Republicans just don’t go there.  While conservatives long for the man out of office, none are going to pick up a rifle and try to hasten the pace.  Coulter has a point.

Does that mean if Barack Obama had been a conservative Republican, rather than a liberal Democrat, an attempt would have been made?  Hopefully not.  Hopefully the era of resolving differences with the occupant of the White House through the barrel of a gun are finished.  The last attempt was Ronald Reagan in 1981.  

Regardless of whether a person loves or hates Ann Coulter, the point of the mob forcing their agendas upon the people, not through logical argument in the arena of ideas, but through the vitriol and violence masses of people stirred into an emotional frenzy can cause is a point around which all of us should agree.  Steer clear.  Keep your own thoughts about you.  Step away from any mob forming.  It could get very ugly, very fast.

The evidence for this is clear.  

In 1943, John Ford directed ‘The Ox-Bow Incident’.  It was a western, as most of his films were, and it revolved around the issue of a town dealing with cattle rustlers.  When a posse of men are formed, and three men are found, rather than deliver them to the sheriff and the judge, the mob of men who found them, frenzied from all the cattle lost, pronounce judgment and hang them there.

In 1988, Jodi Foster starred in a movie called “The Accused”.  It is the story of a woman, dancing suggestively with a man in a bar, who is then raped by that same man, in that same bar, with a crowd egging on him and two others.

Outside the storytelling of motion pictures, back into the reality we all face,  a man by the name of Alex Jones (he is a radio of host of some degree with some measure of a following) confronted conservative blogger Michelle Malkin and began screaming in her face like an Army drill sergeant gone off the deep end.

For anyone who is not familiar with Michelle Malkin, she is a woman of Phillipino descent, staunchly conservative in her beliefs, and a frequent contributor to the news programs on cable.  She draws a lot of fire from those who vigorously oppose her views, and she gives back as powerfully as she gets. Yet in this situation, Jones is physically encroaching upon her space, ranting like a mad man against her conservative views, while some morons in the background begin chanting, ‘Kill Malkin.’  The potential for violence in such a situation is huge.

Malkin, to her credit, knew she could not compete verbally with a guy like Jones; so she kept between the men sandwiched at her sides and calmly moved about her business.  I hate to think what may have taken place if she would have been on the streets by herself, knowing that ‘the demon is a mob, and the mob is demonic’ - always seeking someone to kill and destroy.