the Good, Bad and Naomi Wolf
Published by Fred Soto• November 28th, 2007
RSS News Feed
Who’s afraid of Naomi Wolf?
The good:
When I first listened to Naomi Wolf talk about her recent book, “the End of America: A letter of warning to a young patriot,” I was a bit put off by her tone, but I generally received her message well. I’ve yet to read the book, but it sounds like she has very similar views on Democracy and her fear of fascism overrunning society makes me feel hopeful that Americans might just snap out of their mesmerized state.
She interviewed with Jon Stewart, of the Daily Show and Stephen Colbert, a pair of shows I enjoy watching when I’m not sparring with political nerds on the Internet.
“If you fear the government enough and you start doing things the government doesn’t like, it is forced to crush you!” — classic Stephen Colbert
the bad:
Recently, the Washington Post published an article “Hey Young Americans, here’s a text for you“, and again her tone is revealed and it bothers me.
Is America still America if millions of us no longer know how democracy works?
I am not bothered by her tone the way I am the super “patriots”, but the message is similar in that it’s one personality shouting down another, wagging the finger, and telling us how to “properly” dissent. She calls the 70s movement of protest as one stemming from anti-establishment sentiment, rather than a sincere interest in bringing about “change”.
She might be right, maybe the hippie movement was anti-Government rather than pro-Democracy, but it was still effective at the time. Granted the movement had no staying power because of the very issue she described, apathy and anger, but that’s what MoveOn.org is for, right?
In my opinion, Naomi Wolf’s statement about improper dissenters is a good way of saying, “You don’t know how to conquer the fascist State, because all you are interested in doing is defying authority and not correcting the decline of democracy.” It is a valid point given the sample of students she met that were apathetic towards government. At the same time, I think it’s possible to be defiant of corrupted government authority AND interested in restoring democratic principles and defending the Constitution. I’m not saying violent protest is the answer, but throughout history, it’s the anti-authoritarian “Don’t tread on me” activists that have kept government straight.
the ugly:
I agree that many young (e.g. I probably fit this category) people are driven by their hatred and have turned away from voting and the discussion out of sheer disgust with government, Republicans and Democrats alike. She brings up the idea that “young people” have this mistaken idea that “Republicans and Democrats” are one and the same, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Yes, young people are going to say that, but I’ll tell you why it’s happening. They are apathetic, angry, and ready to shake up government because they want true change. When you hear some kid shout “Democrats and Republicans are criminals, we want a Ron Paul Revolution” it isn’t a cry out of spite of government. These kids are engaging in the same tactics that Democrats and Republicans have engaged in for years. That is, they basically are spewing propaganda to the effect of this:
“Republicans sent us to war under false pretenses, Democrats promised to “change the course”, nothing has changed, government is corrupt, it’s time for something different.”
What Naomi Wolf wants is change that means “Democratic” change, she essentially wants to swing the pendulum to the Democrats and Hillary Clinton so that she can restore her understanding of what it means to live in a Democracy. So essentially, what she is saying is that young people are going overboard with their anti-establishment views and they may end up pushing for a movement that they don’t really want. (i.e. Ron Paul?) Some “young” people on Youtube joked that Naomi Wolf would be great as Ron Paul’s Secretary of State. The truth is, on issues like fascism, freedom, and our individual liberties, they are right because Democrats and Libertarians have a lot of overlap in that area. On the economic issues, Libertarian and Democratic ideology could not be further apart; Ron Paul’s limited government and economic beliefs are more in line with traditional GOP thinking.
the rise of libertarian thought
Ron Paul creates quite the predicament for people who fall into the anti-Fascist and pro-Democracy groups. The reason this is true, is that ‘libertarian’ change in government would TRULY be different from having another Democrat or Republican in office. I’m not sold on this being the answer, but I’m certainly not going to write it off because a Democrat tells me that libertarians are going to trample on our civil rights and Republicans are saying they are anti-American and more like terrorists than defenders of liberty and the Constitution.
As one of these “young Americans” who are targeted by people like Naomi Wolf, I want you to know that I am equally capable of thinking about the problems. Yeah, I’m angry, and I’ll occasionally make comments that seem inappropriate or “un-American” as per this new world of super patriots, but I’m not an idiot, I can think for myself. If YOU want to bring about change, fine, then lead. If you are simply criticizing how people ‘not of your generation’ are going about defying authority and ‘bringing about change’ then you may as well be shouting in a vacuum. The condescending tone only undermines your message, and if you truly believe that WE are entirely motivated by anti-Establishment thinking rather than desiring pro-Democracy change, you’ve already lost the battle. Why would you directly confront and admonish anti-authoritarian personalities?
The Verdict
Dumbest, strategy… ever. I guess the good news is this tone helped her sell books to “old people.” The bad news is she’s just not going to get anywhere with “young people” unless she engages in a conversation that gives them the respect as political thinkers that they are seeking. It’s this lacking validation that makes this desire for revolutionary change, almost necessary in the eyes of the ‘young’. If Naomi Wolf really wants to help change America for the better, she’d best spend her time reaching out to people like me instead of making a bunch of stops peddling her book to children who are “too dumb to understand Democracy.”
I’ve had a number of Republicans approach me and talk to me like a human, because they believe my concerns about government are legitimate, if not a bit misguided. However, Democrats have been an entirely different beast about my writings, very schizophrenic and even quick to steal content and ideas, presenting it as their own, rather than linking *cough*Huffington Post*cough*.
tags:democracy, fascism, freedom, liberal, libertarian, Naomi Wolf
Fred Soto is an Attorney and Entrepreneur from the Silicon Valley.
Email this author | All posts by Fred Soto


















The reason I call them Republicrats is that all of them want our money. The Dems want to take my $$ and give them to the poor, cripled or lazy. The Republicans want to take my $$ and give them to corporate America via airline and s&l bailouts. Both want to spend it on foreign aid and feel good programs that do nothing to fix problems make them look good come reelection time. In point of fact, they are the same. They promote the foregone conclusion that our money is theirs to spend as they see fit. To argue for a difference is to say that theft is acceptable as long as the thief spends the money on a good cause.
Fred - Please do not use the work “Democracy” when referring to the way our American government was intended to be setup. Our founding fathers intended for the United States to be a Constitutional Republic not a Democracy. I, for one, never want to live in nor spread Democracy.
John D. - You realize that a Constitutional Republic IS a Democracy? I’ve had this silly line of rhetoric sent my way before and I have no agenda when it comes to using words like Democracy etc. The word is all-encompassing, and yes.. it does include the Republic.
It’s like saying don’t use the word “Freedom” when discussing liberty because they have different meanings, yet the former encompasses the latter and depending on the context is entirely appropriate to use. I’m not sure where or why this whole “Democracy vs. Republic” garbage got started, but the only idea that comes to mind when reading such statements is PARTISANSHIP.
In a highly polarized America, partisans bicker over every minute detail because they want to claim that their ideology trumps all others when in reality all they represent is one perspective. I’ll pose this question to you, when the heck did a constitutional republic cease to be a representational democracy?