On Thursday's episode of "The Ben Shapiro Show," Shapiro talks about how the Left uses ambiguous language to lump their detractors, including mainstream conservatives, with the truly execrable far-right. Video and partial transcript below:
I've been saying all week long; I have been saying for years. We should all be able to unify on the notion that white supremacism is evil, and that mass shootings are evil. But there are many Democrats like [Rep. Jerry] Nadler (D-NY), who don't want to do that for political purposes. [Sen.] Cory Booker (D-NJ) did this in a softer way yesterday as well. He drew this binary between agree with me or be a white supremacist supporter. He's speaking at a historically black church in Charleston, South Carolina. In any case, here was Booker trying to draw a binary between everybody who agrees with Cory Booker and white supremacists.
BOOKER: The real question isn't who is or isn't a racist, but who is and isn't doing something about it. This is a question that has a deep moral resonance. It's not enough to say, ‘I'm not a racist.’ We must be anti-racism because there is no neutrality in this fight. You are either an agent of justice, or you are contributing to the problem.
OK. One of the problems with what Cory Booker is saying here is that he never defines his terms. So, I agree, you either can be anti-racism — like overtly anti-racism — or you can be pro-racism, but there's not really a neutral ground. You can’t just be like, "I'm kind of ambivalent on racism." He can't do that, obviously. But when he says, "Do something," what exactly does that mean? Because what are people quote-unquote "doing" about it. Does that mean if you don't cancel your "Soul Cycle" membership today, then you are overtly advocating for racism? Or what he really means, is if you don't back Democrats, then you are racist. If you don't back Cory Booker, you're racist. If you don't rip on Trump daily, and declare that you won't vote for him, and donate to his opponents, then you are a racist. That is the false binary that the Left is attempting to draw, and they're attempting to do so in a clever way. They're attempting to do so by refusing to define terms.
So, I have not said anything racist. I've not done anything racist because I'm not a racist. In fact, I hate racism, and I hate white supremacists so much that they hate me right back, which is why we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, here at this company, to defend us from death threats from white racists [and] from white supremacists. But I would be according to people like Booker — and people like presumably AOC (D-NY) — a white supremacist because I've expressed support for many of Donald Trump's policies, and because I don't think that Trump is a white supremacist.
So, what the Left likes to do is throw out terms like white supremacist, without actually defining them. Just like they wouldn't define alt-right back in 2015 and 2016. The alt-right was a threat in 2015 and 2016 … There is an actual definition as to what alt-right means. It is the ideology of folks like Richard Spencer, it is the ideology of folks like Vox Day, people who have suggested that there is innate biological difference between the races, such that some races are inferior, and some races are superior. Right, that is the nature of white supremacy. That is a definition that I just gave you. But what the Left refuses very often to do, is provide definitions of any of this stuff because they don't want definitions. What they want is a broad miasmatic sense, like miasma, they want a broad sense of what white supremacy is without having to define it, so they can label you a white supremacist, if you disagree with them on anything. That is the goal.
Specificity in terms is really helpful when you're having political conversations, or moral conversations, because then we can get to what we agree on and what we disagree on. So, for example, I do not think that it is white supremacy to oppose affirmative action. In fact, I think it is racist to be in favor of any program that benefits one race at the expense of another race, and it's designed to do so. But according to members of the Left, it would be quote-unquote "white supremacy," presumably, to oppose affirmative action. If you support Trump in 2020 because you like his policies and you don't think that Trump is racist — you just think that he is a muddle-headed dolt, who says doltish and clownish things on a regular basis in the racial realm — if you're one of those people, the Left will declare you a white supremacist; even if you speak out forcefully, every time you think Trump crosses the line.
So, the point here is that for the Left, the construction of a debate between white supremacy and everything else is all about obfuscating the line between white supremacy and everything else. We don't know where the line is, and I can put you on the other side of the line, anytime I want.