Historians stand up to 'Liberal Fascism' and its abuse of history, while Beck blithely promotes it
Well, Glenn Beck's special "documentary" -- at least, that's what he calls it -- "The Revolutionary Holocaust: Live Free Or Die" aired Friday, and it was pretty much exactly what we predicted: A long promotion for Jonah Goldberg's fraudulent Liberal Fascism and its underlying thesis, to wit, that fascism is "properly understood" as "a phenomenon of the left."
In Beck's hands, of course, this mishmash of a theory gets mashed even more, so that fascism is indistinguishable from communism and socialism, and that all are essentially identified in the bundle of the progressive movement, which is Beck's ultimate target.
On Friday, Beck worried that "the academic bloc" of the progressive movement would be arraying its forces to attack him for this piece of work (and it is a real piece of work). Probably, most of them will dismiss it as just another piece of lunacy from the nation's fearmonger in chief.
But it's obvious that, despite the cold reality that Goldberg's thesis is profoundly dishonest and the most odious kind of historical fraud, right-wingers like Beck not only believe it but have embarked on avidly promoting it -- especially among the Tea Party set, where the signs calling Obama a fascist are almost as common as those decrying his tax increases.
As I mentioned Friday, I began some months ago organizing some of the more authoritative historical experts -- historians and political scientists -- in an effort to finally produce a serious response from academics to Goldberg's traduced version of history.
Today, at History News Network, you can read the initial essays.
In addition to my introduction, there are four essays:
-- Robert O. Paxton, professor emeritus at Columbia University and the author of The Anatomy of Fascism, leads off the essays with "The Scholarly Flaws of Liberal Fascism."
-- Roger Griffin, professor of political science at Oxford Brookes and the author of The Nature of Fascism, has a piece titled "An Academic Book - Not!"
-- Matthew Feldman, professor of history at University of Northampton, and a co-editor of several academic texts on fascism, offers his assessment on why refuting Goldberg still matters: "Poor Scholarship, Wrong Conclusions".
-- Chip Berlet, senior researcher at Political Research Associates and the co-author (with Matthew Lyons) of Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort, has penned a history of Goldberg's arguments, "The Roots of Liberal Fascism: The Book."
For those who watched Beck's "special," the following excerpt from Paxton's piece alone may suffice:
Goldberg simply omits those parts of fascist history that fit badly with his demonstration. His method is to examine fascist rhetoric, but to ignore how fascist movements functioned in practice. Since the Nazis recruited their first mass following among the economic and social losers of Weimar Germany, they could sound anti-capitalist at the beginning. Goldberg makes a big thing of the early programs of the Nazi and Italian Fascist Parties, and publishes the Nazi Twenty-five Points as an appendix. A closer look would show that the Nazis’ anti-capitalism was a selective affair, opposed to international capital and finance capital, department stores and Jewish businesses, but nowhere opposed to private property per se or favorable to a transfer of all the means of production to public ownership.
A still closer look at how the fascist parties obtained power and then exercised power would show how little these early programs corresponded to fascist practice. Mussolini acquired powerful backing by hiring his black-shirted squadristi out to property owners for the destruction of socialist and Communist unions and parties. They destroyed the farm workers’ organizations in the Po Valley in 1921-1922 by violent nightly raids that made them the de facto government of northeastern Italy. Hitler’s brownshirts fought Communists for control of the streets of Berlin, and claimed to be Germany’s best bulwark against the revolutionary threat that still appeared to be growing in 1932. Goldberg prefers the abstractions of rhetoric to all this history, noting only that fascism and Communism were “rivals.” So his readers will not learn anything about how the Nazis and Italian Fascists got into power or exercised it.
The two fascist chiefs obtained power not by election nor by coup but by invitation from German President Hindenberg and his advisors, and Italian King Victor Emanuel III and his advisors (not a leftist among them). The two heads of state wanted to harness the fascists’ numbers and energy to their own project of blocking the Marxists, if possible with broad popular support. This does not mean that fascism and conservatism are identical (they are not), but they have historically found essential interests in common.
Once in power, the two fascist chieftains worked out a fruitful if sometimes contentious relationship with business. German business had been, as Goldberg correctly notes, distrustful of the early Hitler’s populist rhetoric. Hitler was certainly not their first choice as head of state, and many of them preferred a trading economy to an autarcic one. Given their real-life options in 1933, however, the Nazi regulated economy seemed a lesser evil than the economic depression and worker intransigence they had known under Weimar. They were delighted with Hitler’s abolition of independent labor unions and the right to strike (unmentioned by Goldberg), and profited greatly from his rearmament drive. All of them would have found ludicrous the notion that the Nazis, once in power, were on the left. So would the socialist and communist leaders who were the first inhabitants of the Nazi concentration camps (unmentioned by Goldberg).
Be sure to go read them all. And for more background, you can go read my reviews, exchanges and responses with Goldberg.
"...fascism properly understood".
Oh, oh, oh. Ok.
I just didn't understand properly!
Sorry, Jonah.
My bad.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
The confusion here is the linking the terms liberal and fascist.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Yeah, as I noted in my introduction, his doing so is actually a classic case of Newspeak along the lines of "War Is Peace" and "Ignorance Is Strength."
A conservative (the actual Fascist side of the spectrum) Jew using the word "holocaust" to sell a book about how liberals are actually Nazi's...is...
(how can I put this?)
...Despicable.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
Goldberg is not Jewish. He is Episcopalean. His father was Jewish, his mother Lucianne was not.
Sorry. Wasn't up on the "Who's a real Jew" rules.
How 'bout a conservative who's father was a Jew, who's grandparents and cousins and aunts and uncles are Jews...???
Anyway you cut it (no circumcision pun intended)....Despicable.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
doughy pantload claims to be Jewish so he can accuse others who challenge his views as being bigoted and anti-Jewish.
To be born Jewish one's mother has to be Jewish.
If born from a mixed faith couple, and the mother's not Jewish, one has to convert.
And they don't make it easy, particularly the Orthodox.
They were claiming a few years ago the right to announce in Israel that Reform and Conservative Jews were not Jews.
And of course doughy pantload blamed the liberals mistaken ideas of Jewishness to claim he wasn't Jewish, which he isn't until he officially converts.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
My mom is Jewish, my dad was Catholic. I was confirmed as Catholic. I can't recall if I had to renounce my Jewishness or not, or if I even mentioned it to the nuns...
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
...But (with all due respect to anyone's faith) the whole "real" Jew or Muslim or Catholic "rules" are all hocus-pocus, flim flam to me.
Bottom line...You summon up the word "holocaust" to describe a argument about political theory and you lose credibility.
Even if you're only Jew-ish.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
-and what's more it was perpetrated by (Fascist) NAZI's.
When we see Fascist behavior and systems taking hold or being promoted in our country, it is only sane and sensible, and even One's Duty to point out what happened last time when Fascism came to power.
And the Fascist don't like that. So they find a particularly stupid, greedy and corrupt stooge such as Goldberg to "write" a "I know you are but what am I"? "book"
And we DO see it; particularly on the Right. Fox news with their creation of Tea Parties is a very clear example of the early stages of Fascism being used to support the Conservative Purpose: collection of more and more Power & Wealth.
And, I also agree with your earlier comment even if he's not a Jew, although you definitely have a good point: just because Jews say he is not a Jew does not actually determine anything.
Mussolini's description of fascism from 1932 are
here 1 2 3
Two interesting comments at the Amazon page for Chip Berlet's Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort
emphasis added:
I would quibble with Berlet's contention that the conservative push back against collectivism in the US began in the 1930s after FDRs inauguration.
He is correct that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers were at the helm, but they had already started in 1914 with the Imperialist Woodrow Wilson.
See the comment on the Creel Commission here and on US propaganda here
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
I really enjoy C&L for exactly this reason: great informative discussions like this regarding current topics.
I have learned much by reading posts and comments over the past few years. I encourage my friends to do the same and leave the corporate "news" product.
This is my BIG thanks to everyone.
They are promoting a book and they expect people that watch those sort of snot sessions to read?
What a waste of publishing resources.
The majority of beck's audience will not read this. They look to authority figures to tell them what to think. The book is just a prop and could just as easily be 250 blank pages with a fancy binding.
I think I'm turning Japanese, I think I'm turning Japanese, I really think so.....
whatever passes for porn to these people on every other page.
Look for it to be made into a coloring book too.
WOOT! You nailed that one.
The Big Lie being told again. Say it enough and it becomes the truth. Worked for every dictator in history, with the help of the Goldbergs and Becks of their times....
In a Nutshell ;
Fourteen Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
From Liberty Forum
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=...
109&page=&vi
Kinda of a large "nutshell"
A link would have been just fine.
Think bandwidth.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
Loading up another webpage?
Not yours...John Amato's.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
Britt's descriptive explanation is fine as far as it goes, but it's actually very dated in terms of where the academic debate has gone.
right here in good ol' Merica....what a surprise...
Cue the Kabuki....
... well worth the extra bit of bandwidth, IMO.
Remind you of a particular administration that ruled our nation from 2001 to 2009? Give you a clue: He was a shrub!
Election 2012: Be Educated! Be Active! Vote!
www.phoenixjustice.com
But wasn't Nazi Germany atheistic?
"Henceforth anyone applying for government employment - and soon for various other positions as well - had to submit proof that he was not a Jew. Since prior to 1874-1876 births had been registered only by the churches, the latter were asked to help in determining who was or was not fully Aryan, for under Nazi law this depended on the racial (i.e., religious) status of the parents and grandparents. The Church co-operated as a matter of course, complaining only that priests already overburdened with work were not receiving compensation for this special service to the state.
The very question of whether the Church should lend its help to the Nazi state in sorting out people of Jewish descent was never debated. ... And the co-operation of the Church in this matter continued right through the war years, when the price of being Jewish was no longer dismissal from a government job and loss of livelihood, but deportation and outright physical destruction."
Study the symptoms not the virus...
gets any respect at all astonishes me. Like Coulter this guy just wants to profit off of ignorance, an abuse of capitalism.
The internet is full of bogus 'American patriots', posting from places like Latvia, Qatar, and Nigeria.
Off button - really any time you use the on button stooopid comes out of the box.
"I know that there are people who do not love their fellow
man, and I hate people like that! " ~ Tom Lehrer (1928 - )
(In a huffy, tantrum-ready voice) "But, but, but, my mom said it was so!"
As you may have noticed, HNN contacted Goldberg, and he officially announced he would not be responding.
Buck-buck bakaw.
-and so are the "Leftie" Professors with all their fancy-schmancy book-larnin an' stuff!
...is writing essays. Glenn Beck had a nice slick video made, because he knows those dumb enough to believe in the liberal fascism farce won't be keen to read anything beyond the streaming line at the bottom of Fox News channel shows.
Looking at the US from the outside, it's hard to believe Beck and his theories have any kind of traction- and by the way, is he really taken seriously by anyone? Can't people feel in their primitive reptilian brains how fake that guy is? You can laugh at the clown, but base any kind of political decision on his rants?
At some point, the 'liberals' around the world are going to have to stop being passive and cut the license to stupidity that has been given to so called conservatives everywhere. Some of us are trying to have a functional, fair society going on. It's getting harder to get forward when a proportion of the population is trying to get us to go back to the 'good old days' where witches and sorcery are factual, and rich magnates get away with literal murder.
the intelligence of those who shout out how great they are....
into the wind....
I saw many of these dummies at the health care rallies this past summer. I cannot even count how many of them said "Beck said this." They had no clue about fascism, socialism, communism or capitalism. The only thing they knew is that Beck said Obama was being everything but a capitalist, so he needed to be stopped. Many of these people need a civics and history lesson again.
They need a lesson in false authority. Had a discussion with an otherwise smart college kid a few weeks ago, after he posted a man-love bit about Beck on his Facebook page.
The kid couldn't hear how Beck could possibly be wrong. He simply refused to believe that Beck was anything less than a hero speaking truth where others were nothing but lies.
I suggested he take a class on cults and brainwashing.
I would suggest a class on empathy and con man detection. It seems a lot of people have problem discerning the obvious fakes ('this is my truck' etc). They might be all smiles, creepy smiles, but when you pay close attention to their mannerisms and tics, you can sense the shallowness beneath, the lack of true conviction- no matter how many tears he sheds during a show, Beck doesn't really buy into his own bullsh**. He's happy to go home at night an rationalize the evil he's truly bringing to society by telling himself he's taking good care of his family, and it's all that matters.
I'm typically cautious about saying whether someone is being honest or not, but I agree. Beck has never struck me as a true believer.
an effective response to Beck's (Fox's) ravings? I'd donate to him-her-or them.
Fascism and Communism have merged into globalism, and this new ideology is what defines both the left and the right in this country. Goldberg is therefore entirely correct when he argues that elements of fascism and communism exist within modern liberalism. He's being dishonest though in not acknowledging that those very same elements exist within the neo-conservative movement.
But...in modern globalism there is no element of millenarianism that was at the heart of both Russian style communism and the reaction to it...Italian then German style fascism.
Unless the coming Utopia is a really, really big shopping mall.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
What a complete crock of crap. You are obviously one of the maroons who believes in that fake Mussolini quote defining fascism as the marriage of corporate and state power.
Globalism by definition is not fascist, because one of the defining traits of fascism is its ultranationalism and its animus toward internationalism and international cooperation. (One of Hitler's chief canards about the Jews was that they ran the international banks.)
There's a powerful anti-Semitic component (or undercurrent if you will) to the current anti-globalist campaign too.
We're so used to calling those on the right fascists would you say that we were in error in calling them so, as much as doughy pantload was wrong, because they are internationalists?
And couldn't one argue that since it seemed to be the goal of the Italian Fascists and German Nazis to take over most of the world, the goal hasn't changed, just the tactics, from bullets to internation corporatism (closely identified with those who would govern us)?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Of course Globalism is closer to some new version of Uber Corporationists, not Smithian Capitalists, where the guiding law seems to be allegience to their system above any political party.
So we had Patrick Kennedy saying he believed in the Free Market System, but immediately digressed into a more traditional liberal speech. It's like if it says free (or liberal like the neo-liberalists) than it must be good.
It appears to be Orwellian Newspeak, describing oneself as the opposite of what you actually espouse, by arguing that the term has been misdefined, so eventually the terms mean nothing.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Sorry....But you can't use "crap" and "Maroon".
That's copyrighted by Johnny2Bad, Inc., Dubai, U.A.E.
"I can't keep doing this on my own with these...people."
It borrows elements from both ideologies, but isn't the same as either. All three though have the same basic goal of eliminating separate nation-states in favor of a unified world government, as ysbaddaden pointed out.
He was spouting drivel here earlier this weekend.
Thanks for the essays - excellent reads!
Just wondering - If I were to say that Glenn Beck puts Joesph Goebbels to shame, would Beck take it as a compliment?
.
Another dogmaniacal Mormon twisting, distorting, mangling and re-writing history.
Shocked, I tell you. Shocked!
I was raised Mormon.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
What turned you off? Cuz you seem to know ya shit!
Study the symptoms not the virus...
And a conscience.
Two things sorely lacking in any fundamentalist sect. And deeply frowned upon.
Narcotics and Witchcraft.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
And the Aristotelian Ratiocinations.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
is your brain and which is your conscience? I don't have time to acquire both.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Technically the consciousness comes from the human more developed neurocognitive cerebral cortex, and the unique human capacity (as we thus far know) to insight into our own motives, and the motives of others (to the 5th degree), imagination and language to communicate.
That includes communication within ourselves. That's the reason we have little memory before the age of 5, because of limited language ability. Much of what we call memory is non-verbal self-talk.
And humans have the unique capability of manipulating symbols for things not immediately present in the environment; this becomes tge basis for developing language.
So one can't have consciousness, as in being awake, or the ability to distinguish right from wrong without a brain, but having a brain doesn't mean one is educated or being educated that one is virtuous.
So we have thingamabobbers like the M'Naghten Rule, and the interesting case history of Phineas Gage and those with Tourette System (where one has a brain but there's some imbalance or damage).
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
When I am done with the rush should I expect to be smart or conscientious?
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Stop being funny. I remember the letter you submitted... I understand it's personal, good enough and thanks for the wit. ♥
Study the symptoms not the virus...
Dismissing all Mormons (and others, I suppose) as being stupid and unconscious. Do this at your own peril..
Good advice √
Study the symptoms not the virus...
pointing out the inherent danger of any form of group think.
Groupthink—the go along to get along mentality that results in accelerated, false consensus—was vexing collective endeavors long before psychologist Irving Janis popularized the phenomenon in 1972.
Those who might dissent stifle themselves: No one wants to rock the boat, irritate superiors, or lengthen a meeting by disagreeing with the consensus. But a project can be doomed if no one stops to wonder “What if we’re wrong?”
Study the symptoms not the virus...
Is NOT dismissive.
Glenn Beck’s Hot Mormon Wife
Or as he says to Failin... your 1 hot Grandma at >0:50
When Stossel asked Beck why he decided to become a Mormon, Beck replied:
“I apologize, but guys will understand this. My wife is, like, hot, and she wouldn’t have sex with me until we got married. And she wouldn’t marry me unless we had a religion.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"And what the eliminationists call jokes aren't. The humor in their statements—whatever might be funny about them—is entirely contingent on their listeners' underlying attitude about their fellow Americans, an attitude that not only demonizes them but also reduces them to subhuman level, prime targets for violent elimination. Jokes shouldn't have a concrete real-world effect, and these do: at some point members of their audience (particularly the more hate-filled and mentally unstable types) will act on them."
Study the symptoms not the virus...
How do you counter a philosophy, an ideology, a movement that embraces ignorance and peddles dangerous lies? When intellectualism is scorned, when learning/understanding complex structures/relationships is seen as subversive, when attempting to impart knowledge or explain one’s POV is violently resisted is there any hope that the followers of these charlatans can be ‘reached’? and, if not, then what?
Question 2: is the right more effective at mobilizing their base? Or is it that the media gives them more coverage, and that politicians are more susceptible to pressure from the right and tend to cave to the right?
about right wing propaganda? oookay
It seems silly to use standard/traditional characteristics and definitions of left and right when talking about all powerful dictatorships. It doesn't seem to me that Hitler, Stalin, Hussein, Kim Jong-Il, etc., are either left or right. I would say that the majority of these political anomalies are bits and pieces of each side, but their main platform is self-enrichment through endless brutality.
His notions and actions had nothing in common with Liberal ideals or actions. Nothing.
if Fox is promoting it, reality is being stood on its head once again
I have a few conservative media and teabaggers following me on Twitter, so I follow them back, and just...wow.
It's stunning. There's someone in particular who insists that Hitler is a socialist, that the liberal elites have done this huge cover-up to hide the fact that Hitler was liberal, and since Obama is supposedly a socialist too, well, you get the picture...
How some people can be so stupid is beyond my comprehension.
I've never seen change without a fire
I was just watching this bit of history this morning, spin this Peckerneck Beck
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knwInALcz98
assignment David.
My challenge will be to somehow see if any of this can be related...
to the opposing political views that surrounded that last tree being cut down....
on Easter Island.
Historically at their extreme both the right and left are statists
But that's not the same as fascism or any other ism.
Although under Communism, the State essentially ceases to exist, as we know it. But in reality with the party as the Vanguard of the Proletariat, such has not happened yet.
And fascism is a particular political movement. That would be like calling a 21 century politican a Whig or a Greenbacker.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Except that, unlike Whigs, there really are fascists even still in the 21st Century.
See, e.g., the activities of various white-nationalist organizations, from the Aryan Nations and National Socialist Movement, that are very much still with us.
Most writing I see refering to such movements use the term neo, as in neo-fascists or neo-nazis.
But then I prefer to call a spade a spade.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I doubt Hitler woulda been a fan of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5Hv0tsvpyU
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Hmm. Neither am I.
You repeat the fallacy regarding state socialism, ie Stalinism.
Please study the Chomsky piece The Soviet Union Versus Socialism here
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
The Vanguard of the Proletariat came out with the Red Revolution of October 1917 to distinguish it from the White Revolution of February 1917.
It also led to the split between Leon Trotsky and Josef Stalin, in that the former opposed the over-bureaucratization of the movement, as well the the accord Stalin was favoring with Hitler. Trotsky wanted the party to fight the fascists and the Nazis.
Of course eventually Hitler broke the pact with Stalin, not surprisingly since he thought of Communism as being a Jewish plot, an odd thought since he also said they owned all the banks of Europe. But his wild conspiratorial theories were on par with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and of course the unspecified enemies General Erich Ludendorff.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Are you reciting Cliff's notes or Wikipedia.
Read the Chomsky article.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
My degree is in Political Science, Constitutional Law and Comparative Law.
Do you think your cheap cracks have any suasion for me to take heed of your recommendations?
Back on the ignore list you go.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
The world famous (but cyber being anonymous) ysbaddaden who claims a degree (sic) in Political Science, Constitutional Law and Comparative Law disses the lowly Noam Chomsky regarding a piece that might be informative.
Everyone here should be on your ignore list, oh exalted one, and legend in your own mind.
I still recommend the Chomsky piece. His mind can't possibly be up to yours but he is good.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
But his degrees are in linguistics, Alice.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
At Chomsky's level of intellect one does not worry about degrees.
He has long been held in the highest esteem by the international community vis a vis his political insight and commentary.
It is in this country where the effort to marginalize him is maintained, largely I suggest because US Imperialism is the primary target of his commentary.
I am trying to draw attention to an important essay.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
...but with what you might deem a less-than-towering intellect? Or is it just that ysb disagrees with you?
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
His presumed degree (sic).
I have multiple degrees. My presumed degrees. But calling attention to them would lead to the same quandary that you propose is Chomsky's impediment.
My problem with ysb is that he is rude, as I have found you to be.
When I suggest a germane article and someone replies that they have no interest in the article but then attacks me, that is rude.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
You leave comments that are open to reply, but when someone replies in a manner that doesn't jibe with your perspective, you call that replier rude. Hmmm...
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
Welcome to the club.
That makes 3 of us in one week. ROTFBMGO
What is your conceptual, continuity?
You don't get it because you didn't read one comment after another.
If he had read the Chomsky article he would not have made the second comment, such as it was.
My comment invited him to read the article, a coherent response would have been directed to that.
Or a link to some other discussion.
If he is claiming some special educational bona fides relevant to the discussion, let him come forward with his peer review.
And furthermore, he is claiming bona fides in the Political Science, Law and Comparative Law.
Fine, with that background by all means take on Chomsky. That is the discussion I want.
My suspicion now becomes that ysbaddaden is an NSA operative.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
"My suspicion now becomes that ysbaddaden is an NSA operative." ;) That's the spirit!
Come on... can't we all just collaborate regardless of the pride...
I think everybody is right, until I decide who is wrong. ;P
And then, even after that... I run the risk of being wrong.
Study the symptoms not the virus...
I did have to dust a piece of NSA equipment in the Telecommunications Center at Edwards AFB.
We weren't allowed to know what it did, just make sure the lights were in order.
I always suspected it was to jam our signals, because periodically they would bring a truck into our parking lot to check and see if there were any electronic leaks.
Even our radios had to be checked out by security to make sure while we was rockin' out we weren't somehow broadcasting signals.
What drove the guys crazy, was whenever I, and only I walked near the radio, it would static out.
One guy told me he had a cat that used to do that.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center... Dryden is NASA's premier site for aeronautical research and operates some of the most advanced aircraft in the world.
I don't have the need too know... but sounds interesting.
Must be all that positive energy or being well-ground?
Study the symptoms not the virus...
I was at Edwards AFB for the first three landings of the shuttle craft, although I never got to see it myself, I was always working the graveyard shift, because no one wanted to work with me. As a reader I made them nervous.
I remember at the time they were experimenting a lot with a turbo-driven army tank in the desert. We were laughing at it. We knew that most likely our next field of battle would be in the desert, and the air filter for the tank was located outside, and when clogged, the occupant of the tank would have to leave the relative safety of the interior to clean out the filter. In other words, in battle, it be a sitting duck.
The desert was also where they experimented with some kind of supersonic car. But most of us were too stoned to care what they were experimenting with.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Sounds like you-all were doing some experimenting yourselves... I can relate. I built MK-48's myself, tailcone specifically.
Study the symptoms not the virus...
The joke was during the first landing that there were guys out in the dessert who got higher than the shuttle craft ever got.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
And since you appear to lack the power of discernment, it was Lenin who initially established the Vanguard of the Proletariat, with additions added later by Stalin, primarily to restablish order after infighting between their groups and others.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
You recite what you take to be facts but you do not understand their meaning.
Stalin also had no understanding of socialism. He was a totalitarian.
Were you to read the Chomsky piece you would understand more.
If you are claiming some special educational pedigree I suggest you come out from behind your shield of anonymity.
If you genuinely have these bona fides then direct us to them.
If you cannot, they don't exist.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Apologies to all those who have seen this one over and over...
http://www.dallons.com/political.htm
How do you account for Veganomics?
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
it is also part of a larger effort to redefine all forms of collective effort by governments as an example of big/bad tyranny.
Cue the Kabuki....
Mon, 01/25/2010 - 09:59 — Patriot Actor
Apologies to all those who have seen this one over and over...
http://www.dallons.com/political.htm
_________________________________________________________________
Mooo...
"Because half-a-dozen grasshoppers under a fern make the field ring with their importunate chink, whilst thousands of great cattle, reposed beneath the shadow of the British oak, chew the cud and are silent, pray do not imagine that those who make the noise are the only inhabitants of the field; that of course they are many in number; or that, after all, they are other than the little shrivelled, meagre, hopping, though loud and troublesome insects of the hour."
Reflections on the Revolution in France. Vol. iii. p. 344.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
...written by a tea-bagging idiot.
Here's how it really works:
Conservative:
You have two cows.
Your neighbor has none.
You don't teach your neighbor how to work so he can buy his own cows because you don't care about him; you've got your cows - fuck him.
You build a higher fence and get watchdogs to keep your neighbor away from your cows.
You worry, complain and get paranoid about your low-life/low-income neighbor for so long that you finally move to the suburbs to a gated community.
Conservatism is a mental illness.
It's getting to be like Idiocracy around here.
Followers of Facism and revolutionary Communism had much in common with Beck and Goldbert and their followers. They were Authoritarians, people in search of a strong leader to keep them safe from their degenerate enemies.
Bob Altemeyer is a psychologist who has identified the characteristics of Beck fans in The Authoritarians. These are the subset of the population who will torture people because thats what their superiors tell them to do. http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
See the Chomsky piece The Soviet Union Versus Socialism here
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
I've read Chomsky, and listened to his talks & speeches.
Tho it was pretty clear to me at 14 in Civics class, where they supposedly taught US Government & Soviet Government, that USSR had only a little resemblance to the idea of Communism. The US democracy didn't seem all that democratic, either.
Marx was aiming at reforming industrial societies like the UK and Germany, not agrarian like Russian or Chinese.
However, Russia had a feudal like stratification of classes that made them ripe for revolt.
And Stalin in particular was always coming out with Five Year plans to increase agricultural output, and increase manufacturing capabilities. But that may have been because Lenin was only in charge from 1918-1924, when he died.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Mon, 01/25/2010 - 13:50 — KWillow
That's about when I read Das Kapital, roughly 14-16.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
No wonder Glenn Beck brags about carrying a concealed weapon. The way he pushes this bullshit he is probably one of the most paranoid people in North America. He's the last person who should be allowed to carry a weapon on his person. I'll bet he goes around with a bodyguard, too. I'd bet a lot of people would love to catch this prick alone.
I think some of you have lost the purpose of the Becks and Goldbergs. They don't care about the nuances of one ideology as compared to any other. Their sole purpose is to link liberalism and progressives and even Democrats to something negative. Period. You can point out all day the falsehoods and dishonesty of the argument but the people they are trying to reach do not have honest intellectual conversations. They like good versus evil, light versus dark, and quick easy answers.
Precisely, RayC. Conservatives have gloried for years that liberals have, or are perceived to have, jumped from calling themselves "liberal" to "progressive." I can't count the number of times I've heard it stated that this is the sign that those on the left have no moral compass, etc. The Beck "progressive = Nazi" diatribe is aimed mainly at poisoning the progressive brand.
out against Goldberg. After all, we all know the conservative right values the opinions of the educated class.
If the elitists disagree than it must be right!
You can't possibly agree with somebody thats just making shit up out of thin air, can you?
I tried to watch Beck's nightmare circus, but it only took about ten minutes to realize his aim was to say that progressives were going to kill millions of people and since Obama is, I guess a progressive this week, he must have some horrible plans. Meanwhile, Jonah was on the side lines doing the wave.
Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean.
It doesn't matter that Blech's doc is crap!
It doesn't matter that intelligent people say that both are crap!
The only thing that matters is that the FOX/AM radio cabal repeat it ad-nauseum until most people don't know what the truth is.
This will continue until we get serious about separating freedom of speech from freedom to deceive. I for one, am there.
As they did/do with abortion. Soon the crazys will start shooting and bombing Democrats in SELF DEFENSE, or in "the defense of the innocent" as the murderer of Dr. Tiller claims.
Fox is after more and more Power in the political world. Ratings? Pfft!
. . . was established 1933 to hold communists, socialists, social democrats and liberals who opposed the new Nazi regime.
Anyone who knows the first thing about the Nazis knows they despised liberals and leftists. The first thing Hitler did after taking power was destroy the socialist and liberal opposition. Only then did he go after the Jews.
Facts are totally irrelevant to FOX and their ilk on the AM radio.
The problem here is that we can not discern between freedom of speech and freedom to deceive.
By Comparative Law, I should clarify that involved studying the Code of Hammurabi, Greco/Roman, the Justinian Codex, Anglo-Saxon, Norman, French Napoleonic Law, German Law and Soviet Law.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
Beck should be catatonic about now - This Supreme Court ruling is going to make the T-Baggers' blood boil. McCain is already speaking rationally on the subject - go figure - but here's my take on McCain:
The new ruling will shake the shadow corporate Elite too, and a lot of ripe fruit will start falling. McCain is low hanging fruit - he may have a lot tied up in remaining elite himself, as does the shadow master super elite...
In other words, the usual holders of corporate power that use the MSM as a straglehold on the national narrative and discourse should be very nourvous at the moment that their positions are not so secuse as they once were. I could name the names but we all know who they are...
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
Assuming they influenced (or bribed) the Justices, which would not surprise me at all. In fact they must have 'influenced' them.
Anyhow the ruling is almost Comic in It's wrongness and awfulness. Soon, International corporations will be barred from donating anything to American elections. I hope.
Or it could get worse - all the medium to large corporations would be swallowed up whole by the most massive corporation, leaving a single massive corporation in the end, within a cloud of mini corporations that revolve around it. Our collective actions are inevitable in the exercise, so we have to tweak the rules now to prevent the system from coming un-sprung.
"Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob"
-= Franklin Delano Roosevelt =-
The vast majority of them could care less. The movement only got momentum after the astro-turfers got ahold of it to channel wingnutty energy to simply block anything like progressive legislation. Sure, there are a few tea-baggers who are remnants of the Paul campaign- and a few LaRouche cultists, too- but that vast majority of the movement are Palinites.
Don't try to confuse the issue with half-truths and gorilla dust.
David,
Thank you for your efforts to refute the Jonah Goldbergs of this country. I like Robert Paxton's work and read his entire essay. It is indeed a shame that it has become necessary for serious historians to step into this absurd debate. Keep up this good fight. I will try to do the same in my history classes.
A great series of essays Dave, thank you for organizing them...
I am glad to see REAL historians finally calling these bunco men on their con game, lying about history pisses me off more than anything else which is why I'm always complaining about the 'Factually Incorrect Guide' books.
When angry, count four, when very angry, swear.
-Mark Twain-
And people should wake up to this. I agree with the points made in the video though. The liberals of this site should not get caught up in the fake left-right paradigm. Let's not defend deferetive ethics tied up in a state system. Cilivilisation needs a socialising force to be sure, but the U.S. has this already in its remarkable constitution. Do not get stuck in this game of applying band-aids to everything. People will exploit the system for corrupt purposes if you give them control in the name of peace, love, togetherness, solidarity, security etc.
Beck is a fake because although he puts on a libertarian show, on every occasion when it matters he will propagate an authoritarian viewpoint. He was FOR the bailouts! He is FOR neocon imperialism abroad. Fox (and others) WANTS liberals to dismiss Beck out of hand as a loon and a clown (he is). They also WANT Beck as the face of the Tea Party movement. Wake up America. Start thinking for yourselves. Your mainstream media is not interested in real journalism!
I've been reading David's blog for years now, his many essays have been some very enriching reading. He pointed out that we have our own fascists here in America already and they were terrorists to boot, refering to the KKK and other like minded groups.
I have been reading the book; The bloody shirt: terror after Appomattox By Stephen Budiansky, a very interesting book. It chronicles how the white power structure forcebly retook power away from the Republicans and freedmen of the era in order to keep it in white hands, thus giving birth to a century of segregation. What's interesting is the parralels between the rhetoric used by the whites back then to the sort of ignorant crap being spouted by Becky and the nutbaggers.
Go to Google Books and read the excerpt they have there, it is the whole book basically, but certain select pages have been removed. At least read the opening chapters and tell me what that reminds you of.
When angry, count four, when very angry, swear.
-Mark Twain-
Do you think the radical republicans were already trying to lay the groundwork for the Gilded Age, when they were running as abolitionists, not for altruism, but to demolish the southern economy?
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
Well thats the thing, the Republicans after the Civil War was not anything like the republicants today. Todays Republicans have more in common with Jefferson Davis than they do Abraham Lincoln.
This is not to say that there were no conservative Republicans back then, it was a pretty conservative age. It's the tactics used by the Southern Democrats to disenfranchise the freedmen and run the Republicans out of office that I was refering to, the tactics were extreamly violent, forcing an elected official to flee at gunpoint and then installing one of their own in their place, simply killing someone you disagreed with and such.
Another book called "the State of Jones" which looked at Confederate deserters and their rebellion against the Confederacy in the state of Mississippi was the first book that made me realize that not everyone living in the South wanted to be a part of the Confederacy. That book told of the pressure and the tactics used by the loyal Confederates to cajole those who wanted no part of the rebellion to go along or else.
"The Bloody Shirt" looks at the dishonest tactics those same people later used against all who opposed them.
The economic claims were some of the excuses the Southerners concocted to make themselves look like the victims, sound familiar?
I just find it interesting the various parallels between the very conservative Democrats that made up the Confederacy, and the modern teabaggers who are making the same claims about the government that the Confederates were making back in 1861. Back then it was the radical republicans, today it's the socialist liberals, both claims have about the same amount of truth to them.
When angry, count four, when very angry, swear.
-Mark Twain-
From the south point of view it was largely a war for an elite class of slave owners, the plantation owners.
The middle class might have have a slave acting as a maid.
But the vast majority weren't even in the middle-class and weren't considered much better than slaves themselves. But they feared Northern style factories coming down South where they would have all the smoke, noise and 12-14 hour work days.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
But we let them get away with it. Liberals think themselves too noble to publish "Famous Republican Pedophiles", "Gay Elephant!" and "Ted Bundy: anomaly or Republican role model?"
Comments are closed on this entry