What do you think?
Rate this book
The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11
From THE ENEMY AT
“In this book I make a claim that will seem startling at the outset. The cultural left in this country is responsible for causing 9/11. … In faulting the cultural left, I am not making the absurd accusation that this group blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I am saying that the cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the nonprofit sector, and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world. The Muslims who carried out the 9/11 attacks were the product of this visceral rage—some of it based on legitimate concerns, some of it based on wrongful prejudice, but all of it fueled and encouraged by the cultural left. Thus without the cultural left, 9/11 would not have happened.
“I realize that this is a strong charge, one that no one has made before. But it is a neglected aspect of the 9/11 debate, and it is critical to understanding the current controversy over the ‘war against terrorism.’ … I intend to show that the left has actively fostered the intense hatred of America that has led to numerous attacks such as 9/11. If I am right, then no war against terrorism can be effectively fought using the left-wing premises that are now accepted doctrine among mainstream liberals and Democrats.” Whenever Muslims charge that the war on terror is really a war against Islam, Americans hasten to assure them they are wrong. Yet as Dinesh D’Souza argues in this powerful and timely polemic, there really is a war against Islam. Only this war is not being waged by Christian conservatives bent on a moral crusade to impose democracy abroad but by the American cultural left, which for years has been vigorously exporting its domestic war against religion and traditional morality to the rest of the world.
D’Souza contends that the cultural left is responsible for 9/11 in two by fostering a decadent and depraved American culture that angers and repulses other societies—especially traditional and religious ones— and by promoting, at home and abroad, an anti-American attitude that blames America for all the problems of the world.
Islamic anti-Americanism is not merely a reaction to U.S. foreign policy but is also rooted in a revulsion against what Muslims perceive to be the atheism and moral depravity of American popular culture. Muslims and other traditional people around the world allege that secular American values are being imposed on their societies and that these values undermine religious belief, weaken the traditional family, and corrupt the innocence of children. But it is not “America” that is doing this to them, it is the American cultural left. What traditional societies consider repulsive and immoral, the cultural left considers progressive and liberating.
Taking issue with those on the right who speak of a “clash of civilizations,” D’Souza argues that the war on terror is really a war for the hearts and minds of traditional Muslims—and traditional peoples everywhere. The only way to win the struggle with radical Islam is to convince traditional Muslims that America is on their side.
We are accustomed to thinking of the war on terror and the culture war as two distinct and separate struggles. D’Souza shows that they are really one and the same. Conservatives must recognize that the left is now allied with the Islamic radicals in a combined effort to defeat Bush’s war on terror. A whole new strategy is therefore needed to fight both wars. “In order to defeat the Islamic radicals abroad,” D’Souza writes, “we must defeat the enemy at home.”
“In this book I make a claim that will seem startling at the outset. The cultural left in this country is responsible for causing 9/11. … In faulting the cultural left, I am not making the absurd accusation that this group blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I am saying that the cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the nonprofit sector, and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world. The Muslims who carried out the 9/11 attacks were the product of this visceral rage—some of it based on legitimate concerns, some of it based on wrongful prejudice, but all of it fueled and encouraged by the cultural left. Thus without the cultural left, 9/11 would not have happened.
“I realize that this is a strong charge, one that no one has made before. But it is a neglected aspect of the 9/11 debate, and it is critical to understanding the current controversy over the ‘war against terrorism.’ … I intend to show that the left has actively fostered the intense hatred of America that has led to numerous attacks such as 9/11. If I am right, then no war against terrorism can be effectively fought using the left-wing premises that are now accepted doctrine among mainstream liberals and Democrats.” Whenever Muslims charge that the war on terror is really a war against Islam, Americans hasten to assure them they are wrong. Yet as Dinesh D’Souza argues in this powerful and timely polemic, there really is a war against Islam. Only this war is not being waged by Christian conservatives bent on a moral crusade to impose democracy abroad but by the American cultural left, which for years has been vigorously exporting its domestic war against religion and traditional morality to the rest of the world.
D’Souza contends that the cultural left is responsible for 9/11 in two by fostering a decadent and depraved American culture that angers and repulses other societies—especially traditional and religious ones— and by promoting, at home and abroad, an anti-American attitude that blames America for all the problems of the world.
Islamic anti-Americanism is not merely a reaction to U.S. foreign policy but is also rooted in a revulsion against what Muslims perceive to be the atheism and moral depravity of American popular culture. Muslims and other traditional people around the world allege that secular American values are being imposed on their societies and that these values undermine religious belief, weaken the traditional family, and corrupt the innocence of children. But it is not “America” that is doing this to them, it is the American cultural left. What traditional societies consider repulsive and immoral, the cultural left considers progressive and liberating.
Taking issue with those on the right who speak of a “clash of civilizations,” D’Souza argues that the war on terror is really a war for the hearts and minds of traditional Muslims—and traditional peoples everywhere. The only way to win the struggle with radical Islam is to convince traditional Muslims that America is on their side.
We are accustomed to thinking of the war on terror and the culture war as two distinct and separate struggles. D’Souza shows that they are really one and the same. Conservatives must recognize that the left is now allied with the Islamic radicals in a combined effort to defeat Bush’s war on terror. A whole new strategy is therefore needed to fight both wars. “In order to defeat the Islamic radicals abroad,” D’Souza writes, “we must defeat the enemy at home.”
352 pages, Hardcover
First published January 16, 2007
42 people are currently reading
362 people want to read
About the author
Dinesh D'Souza
53 books904 followersDinesh D’Souza is a political commentator, bestselling author, filmmaker and a former policy analyst in the Reagan White House, Dinesh D'Souza graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Dartmouth College in 1983. He served as John M. Olin Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, and the Robert and Karen Rishwain Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. D'Souza writes primarily about Christianity, patriotism and American politics.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews
May 22, 2013
Before 9/11 widows had time to properly mourn and direct the country's attention to security breaches, inadequacies and naive paradigms of invincibility, out comes Dinesh D'Souza with a tome aimed at having his party of preference re-elected in 2008.
According to the author, the Muslim extremists who plotted and executed the worst terrorist attack on American soil was justified and encouraged by the cultural left. Why? Hollywood norms of gay rights, open sexuality and sexual equality between men and women. Here are just a few "choice" quotes.
"Shortly after the fall of Baghdad, graffiti began to appear on the walls of the city and its environs. The following scrawl caught my attention. "Marriage of the same sex became legal in America. Is this, with the mafia and drugs, what you want to bring to Iraq, America? Is this the freedom you promised?" Even if the source of this statement is of little consequence, the content is revealing. It is not an objection to freedom, but to the kind of freedom associated with drug legalization and homosexual marriage. As such, it is a vital clue to the sources of Muslim rage. And here is an excerpt from a recent videotape by Ayman al-Zawahiri, deputy of Bin Laden and reputed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. "The freedom we want is not the freedom to use women as a commodity to gain clients, win deals, or attract tourists; it is not the freedom of AIDS and an industry of obscenities and homosexual marriages; it is not the freedom of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.""
Obviously, these extremists do not respect the rights of those who wish to live life differently. The concept of "victimless crimes" do not exist to them. It's theocracy or nothing, with no desire, inclination or possibility of reconciliation or compromise. What the extremists are actually saying (and Dinesh conveniently ignored) is that they desire to impose their traditions and cultural values on everyone else. That isn't freedom. That's oppression. Respect for the freedoms of others is essential for any civil, modern democracy. Blue laws (based on religious edicts) are a minor example of theocratic traditions run amok. They prohibit everything from doing business on the Sabbath to permitting child genital mutilation.
If gay marriage or casual drug usage (apparently, only things other than tobacco merit such vociferous and spiteful opposition). Why does D'Souza defend these policies, if not to propose suggestions for what he would like to see happen in the US. I suppose to him, freedom is comprised of the freedom to oppress, torture and quarantine minorities and behaviours he disapproves of. I wonder if his actions in 2012 have prompted him to reassess his stance on adultery.
According to the author, the Muslim extremists who plotted and executed the worst terrorist attack on American soil was justified and encouraged by the cultural left. Why? Hollywood norms of gay rights, open sexuality and sexual equality between men and women. Here are just a few "choice" quotes.
"Shortly after the fall of Baghdad, graffiti began to appear on the walls of the city and its environs. The following scrawl caught my attention. "Marriage of the same sex became legal in America. Is this, with the mafia and drugs, what you want to bring to Iraq, America? Is this the freedom you promised?" Even if the source of this statement is of little consequence, the content is revealing. It is not an objection to freedom, but to the kind of freedom associated with drug legalization and homosexual marriage. As such, it is a vital clue to the sources of Muslim rage. And here is an excerpt from a recent videotape by Ayman al-Zawahiri, deputy of Bin Laden and reputed mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. "The freedom we want is not the freedom to use women as a commodity to gain clients, win deals, or attract tourists; it is not the freedom of AIDS and an industry of obscenities and homosexual marriages; it is not the freedom of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib.""
Obviously, these extremists do not respect the rights of those who wish to live life differently. The concept of "victimless crimes" do not exist to them. It's theocracy or nothing, with no desire, inclination or possibility of reconciliation or compromise. What the extremists are actually saying (and Dinesh conveniently ignored) is that they desire to impose their traditions and cultural values on everyone else. That isn't freedom. That's oppression. Respect for the freedoms of others is essential for any civil, modern democracy. Blue laws (based on religious edicts) are a minor example of theocratic traditions run amok. They prohibit everything from doing business on the Sabbath to permitting child genital mutilation.
If gay marriage or casual drug usage (apparently, only things other than tobacco merit such vociferous and spiteful opposition). Why does D'Souza defend these policies, if not to propose suggestions for what he would like to see happen in the US. I suppose to him, freedom is comprised of the freedom to oppress, torture and quarantine minorities and behaviours he disapproves of. I wonder if his actions in 2012 have prompted him to reassess his stance on adultery.
May 31, 2013
One of the best books I have ever read. It is rare that I go into an argument where I have very strong opinions on the subject and have my mind changed or my perspective drastically altered, but Dinesh D'Souza made extremely convincing arguments (for the most part) that I think would convince a lot of people to see things his way. I read a number of the other reviews of this book, and pretty much all of the people who gave it 1 or 2 stars cited reasons that were exceedingly weak and almost makes me suspect they didn't read the book. At the very least they read it so set in their opinion that they stubbornly stuck to their opinion no matter what argument was presented. Some of the topics that made the most impact to me were:
1. The division in America. The difference between cultural right and left is how they view morality. The left says your moral compass comes from within each person. It is also called the moral of self-fulfillment. It is this perspective that says "it's ok if I'm gay cause that's what I feel inside" or "my actions are justified because they make me happy, regardless of the consequences on others".
The right acknowledges an external moral code you should follow, typically from religion. What a number of other reviewers seem to not understand is having an external moral code does not mean people are perfect or that everyone will try and adhere to the moral code. The external moral code emphasizes that there are certain actions that are wrong, regardless of whether or not people follow the rules.
2. The Islamic radicals are not anti-Christian. D'souza cites letters and sermons given by some of the most radical jihadists that says their problem isn't that America is Christian, but that America isn't Christian enough. My perspective of why they hate us changed completely. Instead of thinking they hate us cause of religion, they hate us because our politics are increasing atheist (which alone they wouldn't really care about) and we are putting a lot of pressure on them to enact policies in their countries that 90% or more of the population are completely against. This is the reason, D'souza argues, that they fight us. I agree with him. The muslims see their religion under attack. If they do nothing, they think the liberals will take over their religion in the Middle East like they are taking over Christianity in America. D'souza spends a great amount of time explaining the Muslim perspective of this conflict, a perspective that I have never heard before.
3. D'souza details many of the sermons and videos made by jihadists describing why they are fighting us. I was amazed to find that, when I read the actual quotes of what was said by them, I agree with almost all of the accusations they made against America. And it isn't for the reasons that the media always cite, but for liberal ideals being pushed on them like homosexuality being encouraged by the government and abortions being allowed and more readily available when almost all of the population is vehemently against these issues.
4. D'souza doesn't spend a lot of time gloating over the hypocrisy of the liberals, but when he does point it out I found it very funny. The funniest to me was how many liberals who hated Bush with a passion claimed democracy will never succeed in Iraq because Bush is a despot, a tyrant, and the worst terrorist in the world. He would never let them have free elections or voluntarily get out or let them make up their own minds on stuff. When Bush did let them have free elections, they elected people who have ideals that the didn't fit with what the liberals wanted. They elected religous figures who didn't take the stance the liberals wanted. They elected people who were for sharia law and didn't see the women's rights the same way that the liberals do. It turned out that Iraq wasn't the way the liberals thought it should be because the people their didn't want it to be. Instead of accepting that these people democratically chose their leaders, the liberals basically said they only made those choices because they weren't educated enough or were ignorant about the candidates. They couldn't accept that these people didn't see things the same way as they do, so they seek ways to force them to believe or at least behave in the ways that they deem appropriate, regardless of their beliefs. This is the funniest thing about the liberal argument. They defend many topics on the grounds that, you can't tell me what is right and wrong. I follow my own inner compass. But somehow they can justify in their own minds going around and telling everybody else what is right and wrong. But they also go beyond speech, they try and force people to adhere to their beliefs. When they fail democratically, they find ways through the courts.
There are many more things I learned from this book, but those are some of the highlights. I think everybody would benefit from reading this. Regardless of your political stance, if you read this with an open mind, I think you would have a hard time standing firm with whatever belief you currently have. Many people are turned off by D'souza blaming the cultural left on 9/11. I agree with him. He isn't saying that the jihadists are without fault or that their actions were justified. He is just saying that their emotions and fears are completely justified. As a Christian, I share many of their fears and disgust at what the left thrusts upon us. My review doesn't do this book justice.
1. The division in America. The difference between cultural right and left is how they view morality. The left says your moral compass comes from within each person. It is also called the moral of self-fulfillment. It is this perspective that says "it's ok if I'm gay cause that's what I feel inside" or "my actions are justified because they make me happy, regardless of the consequences on others".
The right acknowledges an external moral code you should follow, typically from religion. What a number of other reviewers seem to not understand is having an external moral code does not mean people are perfect or that everyone will try and adhere to the moral code. The external moral code emphasizes that there are certain actions that are wrong, regardless of whether or not people follow the rules.
2. The Islamic radicals are not anti-Christian. D'souza cites letters and sermons given by some of the most radical jihadists that says their problem isn't that America is Christian, but that America isn't Christian enough. My perspective of why they hate us changed completely. Instead of thinking they hate us cause of religion, they hate us because our politics are increasing atheist (which alone they wouldn't really care about) and we are putting a lot of pressure on them to enact policies in their countries that 90% or more of the population are completely against. This is the reason, D'souza argues, that they fight us. I agree with him. The muslims see their religion under attack. If they do nothing, they think the liberals will take over their religion in the Middle East like they are taking over Christianity in America. D'souza spends a great amount of time explaining the Muslim perspective of this conflict, a perspective that I have never heard before.
3. D'souza details many of the sermons and videos made by jihadists describing why they are fighting us. I was amazed to find that, when I read the actual quotes of what was said by them, I agree with almost all of the accusations they made against America. And it isn't for the reasons that the media always cite, but for liberal ideals being pushed on them like homosexuality being encouraged by the government and abortions being allowed and more readily available when almost all of the population is vehemently against these issues.
4. D'souza doesn't spend a lot of time gloating over the hypocrisy of the liberals, but when he does point it out I found it very funny. The funniest to me was how many liberals who hated Bush with a passion claimed democracy will never succeed in Iraq because Bush is a despot, a tyrant, and the worst terrorist in the world. He would never let them have free elections or voluntarily get out or let them make up their own minds on stuff. When Bush did let them have free elections, they elected people who have ideals that the didn't fit with what the liberals wanted. They elected religous figures who didn't take the stance the liberals wanted. They elected people who were for sharia law and didn't see the women's rights the same way that the liberals do. It turned out that Iraq wasn't the way the liberals thought it should be because the people their didn't want it to be. Instead of accepting that these people democratically chose their leaders, the liberals basically said they only made those choices because they weren't educated enough or were ignorant about the candidates. They couldn't accept that these people didn't see things the same way as they do, so they seek ways to force them to believe or at least behave in the ways that they deem appropriate, regardless of their beliefs. This is the funniest thing about the liberal argument. They defend many topics on the grounds that, you can't tell me what is right and wrong. I follow my own inner compass. But somehow they can justify in their own minds going around and telling everybody else what is right and wrong. But they also go beyond speech, they try and force people to adhere to their beliefs. When they fail democratically, they find ways through the courts.
There are many more things I learned from this book, but those are some of the highlights. I think everybody would benefit from reading this. Regardless of your political stance, if you read this with an open mind, I think you would have a hard time standing firm with whatever belief you currently have. Many people are turned off by D'souza blaming the cultural left on 9/11. I agree with him. He isn't saying that the jihadists are without fault or that their actions were justified. He is just saying that their emotions and fears are completely justified. As a Christian, I share many of their fears and disgust at what the left thrusts upon us. My review doesn't do this book justice.
January 24, 2009
I do not like the title of this book. It states liberals bear moral blame for 9/11. Only those who did the deed bear the blame for that particular deed. So I do not like the title. I do not like the title, yet I do think it is good someone has pointed out something that has been overlooked. It has been overlooked by those on the political left in America who think we should (I think the expression is correct) “make nice” with the Muslims of the world to prevent 9/11 type acts. These people think that Americans are in part to blame for such Muslims hating us so much, and that if we acted differently, they would not hate us so much.
Act differently, how? Of course they mean not swagger, not be cowboys, not be arrogant. But live in a Muslim part of the world for awhile, and you will know what Muslims most hate America for--its moral decadence. What they hate us for is what they see to be our widespread moral decadence, of course, of which our arrogance is but one part. Much of what they hate us for are the very things that the American left either supports or at least insists on tolerating fully – sexual licentiousness, open homosexuality, no fault divorce laws, abortion, pornography, free mockery of religion and of devout religious people, and so forth. So if we truly wish to “make nice” with such Muslims, and not fight them, then the easiest way to improve their opinion of us is to start strongly discouraging these behaviors in America.
This is of course a simplistic thesis. It is simplistic because there are many complicated reasons for what happened at 9/11. There are many complicated reasons, and hatred of American moral decadence is just one of them. It is just one of them, but it is one that has been very much overlooked in the discussion of “Why did this happen to us?” So perhaps this book needed to be written.
Act differently, how? Of course they mean not swagger, not be cowboys, not be arrogant. But live in a Muslim part of the world for awhile, and you will know what Muslims most hate America for--its moral decadence. What they hate us for is what they see to be our widespread moral decadence, of course, of which our arrogance is but one part. Much of what they hate us for are the very things that the American left either supports or at least insists on tolerating fully – sexual licentiousness, open homosexuality, no fault divorce laws, abortion, pornography, free mockery of religion and of devout religious people, and so forth. So if we truly wish to “make nice” with such Muslims, and not fight them, then the easiest way to improve their opinion of us is to start strongly discouraging these behaviors in America.
This is of course a simplistic thesis. It is simplistic because there are many complicated reasons for what happened at 9/11. There are many complicated reasons, and hatred of American moral decadence is just one of them. It is just one of them, but it is one that has been very much overlooked in the discussion of “Why did this happen to us?” So perhaps this book needed to be written.
May 24, 2008
I just didn't agree with what this author had to say about the so called liberals.
June 24, 2013
Most people assume that it was American right-wing foreign policy and empire building that sparked the resentment behind 9/11 and other Islamic terrorist attacks. D'Souza, however, shows that such rationales had little or nothing to do with it. Instead, terrorists like bin Laden have been quite vocal in saying that their actions were a retaliatory attack on what they saw as the degeneracy of American culture (legalized gay marriage, alcohol and drug abuse, promiscuity, feminism, no-fault divorce). Their actions were meant as a response to America's assault (via Hollywood and Leftist activist organizations) on traditional values, as well as America's attempts to use the UN as leverage for applying pressure on whichever countries resisted having a progressive atheistic morality dictated to them and shoved down their throats at their own expense. Furthermore, it was the Clinton administration's propensity for self-flagellation in the aftermath of terrorist attacks that led people like bin Laden to believe that America lacked the will to protect itself from further Islamic aggression.
Whether or not you support gay marriage or think feminism is a good thing is entirely beside the point. The point is that Islamic terrorists are responding more to the policies of the Left than they are to those of the Right. Which is not to say that D'Souza is an apologist for radical Islam. He believes the Bush administration was justified in its decision to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq--though he also argues that Bush dropped the ball in several crucial respects, such as by not wholly uniting with the forces of pro-American Islam against both the radicals and the forces of the Left who remained ever willing to throw Iraq under the bus so long as their actions helped drum the Republicans out of office.
Whether or not you support gay marriage or think feminism is a good thing is entirely beside the point. The point is that Islamic terrorists are responding more to the policies of the Left than they are to those of the Right. Which is not to say that D'Souza is an apologist for radical Islam. He believes the Bush administration was justified in its decision to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq--though he also argues that Bush dropped the ball in several crucial respects, such as by not wholly uniting with the forces of pro-American Islam against both the radicals and the forces of the Left who remained ever willing to throw Iraq under the bus so long as their actions helped drum the Republicans out of office.
September 21, 2008
Everybody loves a good screed that's all about how you're right and everyone else is wrong--me included. But for actual, legitimate discussion, you really need more reasoned arguments and talking points. I am still not sure what I think of his point...I think I tentatively agree, but he's right when he says his hypothesis is completely different from anything else out there. It's certainly the first I've heard anything like it. I'd be a little skeptical of this "lone voice crying in the wildness" status, except the fact that he is much, much smarter than I am, has a greater understanding than the vast majority of the current pundits, and he goes very methodically from A to B to C and therefore D, rather than A, W, C, Q, Z, and D therefore you all suck!
Everyone likes to hear that they're right and the other party is not just wrong but demonic. But if we actually want to do something, this is the kind of thing we need.
Everyone likes to hear that they're right and the other party is not just wrong but demonic. But if we actually want to do something, this is the kind of thing we need.
March 7, 2014
Dinesh D'Souza does his homework. He studies the enemy, be it foreign or domestic, explains the details that 99.9 percent of Americans are missing, then lays out a case for fixing stuff. This guy should be on the staff of any Republican presidential hopeful. His prose is clear and entertaining. He takes sides and is not afraid to name names. I've read several of his books since I started with the insightful The Roots of Obama's Rage, and they've all been great.
May 20, 2008
I agree with most of what he says, blaming the crap in American culture for some of the backlash we're seeing from the more traditionally minded world, but I think setting up American liberals to take the fall for 9/11 is unnecessarily inflammatory.
January 21, 2009
A great book exposing the lefts responsibility for 911 and other problems our country is facing. A real eye opener to liberal bias in the media as well...you'll never watch the news the same way again.
July 19, 2014
Brilliant and disturbing when he's analyzing the Muslim world -- fall down laughing funny when he tries scolding "decadent" America for giving too many rights to "feminists and homosexuals."
October 23, 2017
Nice book; gives insight and motives behind 9/11 attack and war against Islam.
June 5, 2023
Read this for a research project. THere is a nugget of an idea in here worth taking seriously, which is that Islamist radicals genuinely detest U.S. culture and political values and that this hatred is part of the terrorism problem (as opposed to it being all about U.S. foreign policy). That part I think is worth at least debating. But this book is so loaded with hyperbole, logical leaps, and outright hatred that it is only worth reading to figure out the discourse on terrorism on the right, not as a serious analysis of terrorism. DD, for example, actually argues that the Left in the US and groups like Al Qaeda are in an alliance, working toward the same goals, mainly the reduction of the US presence in the Middle East. He treats this not metaphorically but literally, as he does for the claim that the cultural Left in the US is literally responsible for 9/11. Of course, it is easy to pull claims from lefty whackos that partially blame the US for 9/11 and who think the US is the worst force for evil in the world. But for DD, the Left is actually more dangerous than AQ; it is an internal enemy that must be dealt with in order to win the GWOT.
This book highlights a number of trends and divides on the right regarding terrorism. The first is the fusion of culture war and GWOT, which I've written about elsewhere. That fusion, in which criticism of the Bush administration was taken as actually making the country less safe, has contributed seriously to the poisoning of our politics in the last few decades. The second is increasing discord on the right about Bush's conception of the GWOT. DD disagrees with Bush and the neocons considerably about the nature of this conflict. The cause of terrorist attacks like 911 is Muslim outrage at US cultural depravity (serious scholars of terrorism don't buy this, at least not as the primary reason), not a lack of democracy/opportunity leading to an extremist backlash, as Bush theorized. Bush at least tried to unite Americans for this conflict; for DD, culture war is the first step in winning the GWOT. And the solution is ultimately a kind of conservative internationale for DD in which conservative Americans and traditional but not radical Muslims unite against Leftist cultural values.
Anyways, do not read this if you want to actually be informed about terrorism. Read it if you are research conservative thought in this era.
This book highlights a number of trends and divides on the right regarding terrorism. The first is the fusion of culture war and GWOT, which I've written about elsewhere. That fusion, in which criticism of the Bush administration was taken as actually making the country less safe, has contributed seriously to the poisoning of our politics in the last few decades. The second is increasing discord on the right about Bush's conception of the GWOT. DD disagrees with Bush and the neocons considerably about the nature of this conflict. The cause of terrorist attacks like 911 is Muslim outrage at US cultural depravity (serious scholars of terrorism don't buy this, at least not as the primary reason), not a lack of democracy/opportunity leading to an extremist backlash, as Bush theorized. Bush at least tried to unite Americans for this conflict; for DD, culture war is the first step in winning the GWOT. And the solution is ultimately a kind of conservative internationale for DD in which conservative Americans and traditional but not radical Muslims unite against Leftist cultural values.
Anyways, do not read this if you want to actually be informed about terrorism. Read it if you are research conservative thought in this era.
April 25, 2022
Subtitled, “The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11,” The Enemy at Home is an honest and thoughtful look at how the insertion of liberal western moral depravity, under the guise of progress, into a traditional, family-based culture felt like an attack and impacted the decisions made by Bin Laden and those who supported him. It became the war behind the war.
Now, fifteen years after The Enemy at Home’s publication, the atheistic, materialistic ranks of the far left are no closer to understanding why their push for immorality in the guise of “freedom” was instrumental in the attacks than they were in 2007, let alone 2001.
Though in many ways, one can say this book is outdated, it is also spot on in other ways. The war waged on the long-established traditions of cultures (like the value of family, the sanctity of life, male and female sexes, basic morality, the U.S. Constitution, freedom to speak when your point of view doesn’t follow the accepted narrative, etc.) has continued and the very fabric of western society as we know it is becoming the victim of an all-out strategy to annihilate it in the name of “woke” ideologies.
The players may have shifted but the enemy at home is still waging a war of deconstruction under to guise of saving humanity from itself. And it’s not likely to give ground any time soon. Already, much has been lost. We need to understand this; and, while we still retain faith, courage, and liberty take a stand for morality, decency, and integrity. Even fifteen years later, D’Souza’s book still does a great job of exposing the truth behind the curtain the cultural left would prefer the “silent majority” not see.
Now, fifteen years after The Enemy at Home’s publication, the atheistic, materialistic ranks of the far left are no closer to understanding why their push for immorality in the guise of “freedom” was instrumental in the attacks than they were in 2007, let alone 2001.
Though in many ways, one can say this book is outdated, it is also spot on in other ways. The war waged on the long-established traditions of cultures (like the value of family, the sanctity of life, male and female sexes, basic morality, the U.S. Constitution, freedom to speak when your point of view doesn’t follow the accepted narrative, etc.) has continued and the very fabric of western society as we know it is becoming the victim of an all-out strategy to annihilate it in the name of “woke” ideologies.
The players may have shifted but the enemy at home is still waging a war of deconstruction under to guise of saving humanity from itself. And it’s not likely to give ground any time soon. Already, much has been lost. We need to understand this; and, while we still retain faith, courage, and liberty take a stand for morality, decency, and integrity. Even fifteen years later, D’Souza’s book still does a great job of exposing the truth behind the curtain the cultural left would prefer the “silent majority” not see.
September 26, 2020
I have previously read several books by this author and found them interesting and thought-provoking. Likewise I have had the same experience when seeing several of his films that have relied on detailed historical research and have presented analysis that is thorough and makes logical sense. In this book, The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11 by Dinesh D'Souza, he takes on the topic of the effect of the "decadent" culture of the West and America specifically on conservative and devout religious societies such as found in Islamic theocracies that causes them to despise what they see as loose morals and degeneracy. According to the author, this includes specific policies supported and pushed on American culture as individual freedoms that are considered blasphemous and serious sins in their society such as gay marriage, immodest female dress, homosexuality, promiscuousness, and what they see as a complete lack of a moral compass. As for putting the blame for the 9/11 attacks on the American left, I follow how logic could lead to that conclusion but it seems to me there are also other factors that played into it as well such as radical Islam's goal to dominate the world and convert all western countries to their ideology. As usual I did find the discussion to be a good mental exercise. Bottom line I think that if you liked his previous works, you will like this one.
September 30, 2017
In his most provocative book yet, The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, Dinesh D’Souza examines the connection between the Left and the rise in anti-Americanism in the Muslim world. D’Souza contains that it is the secularism and moral relativism that the cultural and ideological Left push for that has caused Muslims to see America as the “Great Satan” that must be resisted and fought. Furthermore, the liberal agenda that the Left advances through international organizations to secure women’s liberation, abortion/contraception rights, and gay rights is seen by many Muslims as a war on the family and their religion. Both the Left and the Right, D’Souza believes, have misread and misunderstood fundamentalist Islam; that they neither “hate freedom” nor are they out to convert the world to their religious beliefs. He also asserts that the Left’s hatred of President Bush has led them to ally (though not collaboratively) with Islamic terrorist groups that seek America’s withdrawal/defeat in Afghanistan and Iraq, to the point that their rhetoric is almost indistinguishable from each other. And while D’Souza never questions the patriotism and intentions of the Left, he sees the net result of their actions as harmful to America’s interests and leading to a backlash from countries with more traditional cultures around the world. The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11 is a fascinating analysis of the effects of America’s politics on the world stage.
May 31, 2024
This book has completely changed how I view how Islam, both traditional and radical, have impacted America.
This is one of Dinesh DSouza’s most important and impactful works that has withstood the tests of time.
This should be considered mandatory reading for all conservatives running for political office. There is immense opportunity to create generational coalitions between conservative American and American and foreign Muslims.
The enemy of everyone is the radical Left- who push degenerate ideology on the world to cause it to rot. We must all stand together against Leftism and globalism.
This is one of Dinesh DSouza’s most important and impactful works that has withstood the tests of time.
This should be considered mandatory reading for all conservatives running for political office. There is immense opportunity to create generational coalitions between conservative American and American and foreign Muslims.
The enemy of everyone is the radical Left- who push degenerate ideology on the world to cause it to rot. We must all stand together against Leftism and globalism.
January 26, 2020
If you have wondered how the USA became a target for radical Islamic rage, D’Souza does a commendable job in cataloging the steps taken prior to 9/11. Written in the last years of GW Bush’s term in office, it offers a glimpse of America through the eyes of a traditional Muslim. The uncomfortable view helps explain not only the ‘Ugly American’ assessment all too common abroad today but also the great divide between right & left at home.
December 20, 2017
Very interesting read. He could have gone with a better title considering the books goes into faults and failures of both left and right, not just the left -- but I guess you gotta grab people's attention somehow? I didn't realize how much I likely have in common with Muslims. Well researched and laid out.
June 15, 2020
Good book about the truth about 9/11 and how the issues of unfettered immigration and the lack of honesty in Democrats caused 9/11 to happen!
Rating: 2 stars
Recommend: for all American patriots
Reading level: it was hard to read, only because I already knew much of the information it presented
Rating: 2 stars
Recommend: for all American patriots
Reading level: it was hard to read, only because I already knew much of the information it presented
June 19, 2019
Written during the second Bush term, it's a little dated but actually shows how much D'Souza knew what he was talking about. The strategy called for is still available if only to modify the players in today's political scene.
June 26, 2018
I didn’t know Dinesh was a Truther
July 9, 2020
A must read for all who think they are "open minded".
March 18, 2021
A discussion of the war on terrorism from the differing points of view of the left and the right.
November 10, 2022
This is a good book. He gives you insight on the muslim and islamic cultures
December 22, 2014
The author wonders why muslims are so hateful towards the United States. Because the latter favours the spread of homosexuality and other leftist ideals (feminism, divorce,...). This upsets not only violent radical muslims like Al Qaida. But most muslims in general, that share the conservative values of the right in the US and Europe, the so called traditional muslims.
It is a pity that D'Souza suggests to leave Europe alone as its moral decadence is irreparable. And why are muslims frustrated in India, that is not particular leftist?
To be opportunistic, I would say: if a social conservatism helps to smoothen diplomatic relations, the better. But in the end, most importantly a conservative government helps to protect the family and all what is valuable in life. It is in the interest of Europe and the US itself to drastically change it social policy. Obama, Hollande and many other Western leaders show the wrong way. Maybe another than geopolitical reason why the West is so angry about Mr Putin....
It is a pity that D'Souza suggests to leave Europe alone as its moral decadence is irreparable. And why are muslims frustrated in India, that is not particular leftist?
To be opportunistic, I would say: if a social conservatism helps to smoothen diplomatic relations, the better. But in the end, most importantly a conservative government helps to protect the family and all what is valuable in life. It is in the interest of Europe and the US itself to drastically change it social policy. Obama, Hollande and many other Western leaders show the wrong way. Maybe another than geopolitical reason why the West is so angry about Mr Putin....
Read
August 1, 2013'Dinesh D’Souza’s The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11 is really three separate books jammed together in one package: a persuasive though hardly original account of the Culture War in America; an engaging rendition of the Left’s hostility toward traditional cultures around the world and its attempt to break down the morality undergirding those cultures; and an unconvincing attempt to link the first two books to the third, a defense of the Bush administration’s policies in the Middle East. Because of this odd juxtaposition, there is much of interest in D’Souza’s book, though its parts are definitely greater than the whole.'
Read the full review, "MTV Made Them Do It," on our website:
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
Read the full review, "MTV Made Them Do It," on our website:
http://www.theamericanconservative.co...
June 27, 2008
Provacative, but not as accusatory as the title suggests. His thesis is that the left's cultural agenda for our society is a large part of what radical islamists hate about our civilization. He's got a point, but I think our differences with muslim radicals are deeper than that: even if we were a perfect model of stereotypical 50's convervatism, the islamists would still hate us because we don't pray toward Mecca five times a day.
July 12, 2013
I will start by saying that the title is more provocative than the meat of the book. Dinesh lays out a very informative case against the left, stating America's moral decline being the root cause of 9/11. Though I enjoyed the writing style and found the book informative, I do not believe the basic thesis. Muslim aggression is so dreadfully prevalent around the world and in many places where our culture does not reach.
September 3, 2015
This book made me angry. I was upset that the enemy referred to by the author are a very loud minority, a squeaky wheel, that has become our public face to the world. That is embarrassing. What is worse, this is the America terrorists believe they are trying to silence, or at least stop from seeping into their culture. A diverse country is stronger for its diversity, but the outliers themselves should not then define it.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 30, 2015
This is a book that is not an easy read. It runs through some history of Christianity and Islam. Also come connected history of other faiths in history and the middle east that interact with both. The book gives some unique concepts for why there is such conflict between East and West/ Islam and Christianity/ and USA and European countries vs Islamic groups for reasons not directly connected to faith. The book has some thought provoking ideas and some that just don't seem to fly.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 37 reviews