WARNING: Explicit Language on Unions/FOX and Idiots

I have a specific request for 2012. I need someone to convince me that this country is worth saving, or if it is over-burdened with a fatally vapid population. Convince me that the sooner the last of the so-called baby-boomers and Gen-Xers( of which I am one) are gone this society will have a chance of a progressive and purposeful society. I know, I know, the Right has demonized the word progressive, but pause a moment to think about the root of the word, and then think about something that has progressed, like say flush toilets over outhouses, cars over wagons or cellphones with internet as opposed to hollerin’ across the valley.

I was listening to this evil, evil show on FOX called Bulls and Bears, a lop-sided name as there is far more bull than bear. One comment that all the pundits cheered was regarding how unions prevent the historically profitable and powerful corporations from competing in the global marketplace due to those union wages and benefits. And who precicely would we be competing against for, say, manufacturing? It isn’t Europe or Japan. It is regions and countries like Mexico and Central America, India, China and southeast Asia. Add to that the comment from a relative recently, attacking the Occupy Movement by detailing how poor people in this country need to shut up because they live a better life than people in Africa (As if the entire continent were in all the same dire situation). By that logic, that relative won’t be happy until they are as poor as people in Africa. (Nevermind that this relative on the family’s current income in a southern desert state would be “Africa-poor” if forced to live in say Malibu or Manhattan- because your income is relaive to where you exist) 

It is an all too common theme I hear repeated among people making less than hundred thousand a year, many who make far less than that. They regurgitate so-called common knowledge fed to them by the Right and Corporate media. They pit their economic woes against people on  Social security, welfare or other public assistance, or among evangelicals and other Christians, or Muslims among racial lines, which amounts to little more than fighting over the scraps tossed by the wealthy abusers of the nation and planet.

There was a time when dumbass-no-nothing-neverreadabook-can’tseepasttheirownnose-believeeverythingtheyhearonFOX-flagwaving-can’tgettheirgrosslydimpledassoffthecouch-dunces had no mass outlet to make us all collectively dumber with their insipid opinions. But Reagan and the Clinton saw to that, allowing for the political and idealogical lopsidedness of the media into the hands of a small number of elites. Evidence a number one progressive radio show in San Franscisco being replaced by the obsolete Glenn Beck show because the station is owned by clear channel, which is owned by Bain Capital, which is owned by Mitt Romney.

But Clinton and Reagan aren’t the only ones to blame for media consolidation. Oprah in the early Ninties convinced us all that the news should work for us, not just tell us stuff about foreigners. She gave voice to a slate of housewives who whined about all the violence on the news was bad for their children, and who cares what happens way over on the other side of the world-I want to know where the best shopping malls are and where all the multitudes of child abducters are at any given moment. Of course, while that was going on, we were being set up for 9-11…way over on the other side of the world.

But is wasn’t just Oprah and those other 2 guys. People like Newt Gingrich saw an opportunity to enrich themselves by inventing the moral majority, which was little nmore than a ploy to polarize the nation between so-called Left and Right as a means of tightly focusing  a new market for their flood of crap books and Bill O’Reilly products.

And it wasn’t just Newt and Oprah and, R and C. Too many of the American people fell for that crap. They let it happen. They let themselves be rolled over, and are now too dumb not to know first that they are taking it hard in the caboose, and second that they don’t know who is giving it to them (Hint, it ain’t the Black guy in the office who was “born” in Kenya). And then when their kids, and people who have known all along about the shit-storm befalling this nation and planet stand up in mass protest for the 99%, those poor-as-dirt vapid, dumbass couch-idiots cheer the police for pepper-spraying and beating them, or they call them filthy hippies and communists.

A bit harsh? Needs to be said. This country is teetering on dumb and lazy, and I am afraid it prefers it that way, fighting over scraps from the wealthy 1%. If that is the case, we’re just dumbing out freedom and nation to death and we’ve no one to blame but ourselves.

About 900poundgorilla

W.C. Turck is a Chicago playwright and the author of four widely acclaimed books.His latest is "The Last Man," a prophetic novel of a world ruled by a single corporation. His first novel, "Broken: One Soldier's Unexpected Journey Home," was reccommended by the National Association of Mental Health Institutes. His 2009 Memoir, "Everything for Love" chronicled the genocide in Bosnia and the siege of Sarajevo. His third book "Burn Down the Sky" is published exclusively on Amazon Kindle. It was in Sarajevo at the height of the siege where he met and married his wife, writer and Artist Ana Turck. FOX NEWS, ABC, CBS News, the Chicago Tribune and The Joliet Herald covered their reunion after the war. He helped organized relief into Rwanda during the 1994 genocide. Turck has been a guest on WMAQ-TV, WLS in Chicago, WCPT, WBBM radio, National Public Radio, Best Of the Left and the Thom Hartmann show. He has spoken frequently on Human Rights, Genocide and Nationalism. In 2011, his play in support of the Occupy Movement, "Occupy My Heart-a revolutionary Christmas Carol" recieved national media attention and filled theaters to capacity across Chicago. He remains an activist to the cause of human rights and international peace. View all posts by 900poundgorilla

11 responses to “WARNING: Explicit Language on Unions/FOX and Idiots

  • Hel F Kiernan

    This world is worth saving. It’s the only planet we know for sure has life on it. What country you belong to hardly matters any more, what’s more important is that we all work together as a species (and for other species, too) to make the world as good a place as we can.

    As for the particulars, here’s my two cents, courtesy of the peanut gallery:

    First of all, enough with the us vs them 1% bullshit. It’s divisive and misses the point. There’s plenty of very wealthy people who are good people doing good things in the world, demonizing the wealthy is not only simplistic but harmful. How much money someone has or doesn’t have does not determine whether or not they are on your side anyway.

    Second, if you dislike the government, stop encouraging programs that will take more of your money away from you and give it to them. The government has clearly shown itself to be bad at handling our money and giving them more of it will not ensure that we get more social programs, it will instead be used as it always is, for wars and to take away more of our freedom.

    Third, if you hate Fox News, don’t support them, support the many, many independent news sources that desperately need your funds in order to continue to do the important work of real journalism.

    Fourth, and here’s the biggee, recognize that the world is never going to match up to any ideal any human has ever hatched. There will always be a shit-ton of stupid, lazy, and evil humans around to screw things up. The best we can do is educate ourselves and our youth and work to help the less fortunate and preserve our freedom.

    It is OUR responsibility to make it better.

    • 900poundgorilla

      Thanks for the comments. Not anti-rich, but anti those rich who think th eir money gives them greater voice in the democracy, or who use their money to steal the voice from the rest of us.
      Two, the government is not the problem. The problem is it does not work for the average citizen, but is parcelled to the highest bidder. i want a government that works, and which is big enough not to get bullied by, say, a big corporation, can fight a war where it is necessary and just, help those in need and handle a calamity.
      Three, never supported FOX, ut it is important to know how they craft arguments. I religiously support Democracy Now, check foreign press or other independent media, but I like the w ay you’re thinking.
      Last, agreed, but ya gotta hope, huh? As for the youth? With the Occupy movement…I’m pretty damned impressed.
      On your last point…couldn’t a gree more!
      Peace.

  • xPraetorius

    Look, I don’t agree with much at all of what you say, but you seem to care a great deal about right and wrong and what’s ultimately good for the country, and that’s wonderful.

    However, you HAVE to get out of the “just sayin'” mind set. You demonize all us Conservatives who have found in Fox News — FINALLY — an outlet that will give air to conservative views, without dismissive denigration. Yes, they slant to the right. ‘Bout 55-45 even, which is huge. But, that doesn’t even come CLOSE to counter-balancing the leftward lean of MSNBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS. So, give THAT at least a rest. You want REAL balance? get some more Fox News’es out there!

    You call us, and I quote, “dumbass-no-nothing-neverreadabook-can’tseepasttheirownnose-believeeverythingtheyhearonFOX-flagwaving-can’tgettheirgrosslydimpledassoffthecouch-dunces.” First, it’s “know-nothing” not “no-nothing.” If you’re going to rant, at least rant in a literate manner.

    For the sake of greater clarity, let’s condense all that down to a few words. What you’re trying to say is that we’re “stupid, lazy and ignorant.” Excuse me? First, you DO know that personal attacks and insults are the last refuge of the lazy and ignorant, don’t you?

    I won’t call you stupid, because plainly you’re not. However, If you saw my credentials, you wouldn’t even think of using any of those adjectives for me. And, if you bothered actually to look at the demographics, you would see that the viewers of Fox news (1) skew to the right (obviously), and (2) are more highly educated than the consumers of the other media outlets. Furthermore, this is true of the consumers of Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck as well. Now, don’t get all in a dither because I said they’re more highly educated, they simply are. However, education doesn’t mean, in any way, “more intelligent.” Remember, back in 1491 or so, to get the answer right on the geography quiz, you would have had to circle “B. Earth is Flat.” That wouldn’t have made you more intelligent than the kid who got it marked wrong because he circled “A. Earth is round.”

    Your “logic” regarding your relative and his or her comments about the “Occupy movement” is incoherent. It’s equally likely, in fact more so, that your relative “won’t be happy” until people in Africa are at least as well off as the poor in America; which would be a significant step forward for the Africans…and a very noble sentiment on the part of your relative.

    Listen closely to this: you need to be ready to examine other people’s views from ALL POSSIBLE ANGLES before you demonize them. And, yes, the entire continent of Africa, even the more “affluent” countries, is in a pretty bad way. Not a success story on the continent. By that, I mean a stable, long-term government, that respects human rights, has a means for orderly and regular power transitions, and has been free of bloody conflict for a significant time (let’s say 50 years). There’s not one country that can boast even THAT extremely modest level of achievement.

    Just to sum up. You’re flat out wrong about so much of what you wrote. Worse, I think you’re intelligent enough to know it, but simply chose not to. That opens you up to the charge of intellectual laziness, one of the very things with which you deride your ideological opponents. You bring together, Oprah, Reagan, Clinton, Fox News, into a disordered rant that could all be summed up by those two words: “Just sayin'” Yep. You were just sayin’ it. So what? Everything you write needs to pass AT LEAST the “so what” test. You’re just saying it. It reminded me of all those starry-eyed sillies who thought they were hearing surpassing wisdom when they heard: “All we are saying is give peace a chance.” Turned out that was pretty much all they were saying. And the bloodthirsty, tinpot dictators worldwide didn’t care two hoots. But, they could say it here in America — as can you — whereas they SURE couldn’t say it in tinpot-land!

    You’re just saying a bunch of stuff. You have no proof, and as a result, you never raise your argument above the level of those you so self-righteously scorn.

    For example, here’s your final paragraph — you know: the one that should be your big one-two punch, summing it all up to bring your crystal-clear prose to a tidy conclusion? — with reactions in-line in brackets:

    “And it wasn’t just Newt and Oprah and, R(eagan) and C(linton). Too many of the American people fell for that crap. [opinion. Says nothing. How many is “too many?” One? A million?] They let it happen. They let themselves be rolled over, and are now too dumb [More opinion, personal attack, the last refuge of the lazy and ignorant] not to know first that they are taking it hard in the caboose, and second that they don’t know who is giving it to them [Again: you’re just saying that. For instance: I know perfectly well who’s kicking my caboose.] (Hint, it ain’t the Black guy in the office who was “born” in Kenya) [Cheap misdirection, cheap indirect character assassination and an attempt to immunize yourself with an un-earned solidarity with President Obama]. And then when their kids, and people who have known all along about the shit-storm befalling this nation and planet stand up in mass protest for the 99% [Again, it is a perfectly valid remark that 99% of the 99% are vastly better off than the vast majority of the rest of the world. Sorry, it’s true. And the motivating force behind that remark is a strong desire to see the rest of the world prosper as well. It speaks really poorly for your reasoning and therefore your conclusions themselves, that you missed that crucial angle.], those poor-as-dirt vapid, dumbass couch-idiots cheer the police for pepper-spraying and beating them, or they call them filthy hippies and communists. [the “communist” charge is not all that far off…many embraced “Marxism” and “socialism” overtly and loudly. And, the “hippies” remark was self-evident. Personal hygiene and sanitation were not real hallmarks of the “Occupy” movement. And, regarding the beating, etc. again, you’re just saying it. There’s no evidence whatsoever that the police exceeded the “rules of engagement” by which they are bound. In the one case where there appeared to be a police-caused injury, there was, and is, a hugely public investigation]”.

    All in all, you just said a bunch of stuff. Much of what you said was demonstrably incorrect. Much of it was misdirection and cheap personal attack. Anyone can just say stuff. None of it passed either the “so what?” test or the “Who the heck are you?” test. As regards your “credentials” as summarized in the “About 900poundgorilla” paragraph? I’ll give you a LOT more credibility when I see you “agitate” for human rights in, say, Iran. That’s right: some place where it’s actually a bit risky to agitate for human rights. Otherwise, you simply open yourself to the accusation that you’re simply trying to make a living off the suffering of others. And it’s “activist FOR the cause of human rights…” Not “to.”

    Best,

    x

    • 900poundgorilla

      Dear X,

      I don’t censor on my blog, and I do appreciate the passion you brought to the argument. That said, 687 words in a blog makes for a statement not a detailed argument, but you may find a fair amount of that in my archives. And regarding standing up for Human Rights in a bad place? Would Serbia under Milosevic at the height of the Bosnian war suffice? I did not waver in my arguments that the Serbs were committing Genocide despite the UPI station chief being beaten half to death by Serbian Secret Police in my hotel, or when the US Consulate warned me that the going rate for “offing” dissidents in Belgrade was about $125USD. Standing on the frontlines under fire in Bosnia, I still did not waver from my arguments. I have put it on the line.

      Regarding education in the Right-wing media, Goebbels, I remind, had a Doctorate, and a great many well educated Germans whole-heartedly supported the Nazis. Rush admittedly did not attend college, and Beck…well, if anyone with more than a 4th grade education believes the nation is on the brink of collapse and should move to Texas, buy more guns, stock up on emergency meals for the coming apocalypse and buy more of his books, then they were drinking something more than milk with their peanutbutter and jelly sandwich. Are Limbaugh and Beck Nazis? No, but they are opportunists.

      “Liberal slant” is invented. As I pointed out, the flood of Right-wing books, refabricated-America-Centered books are on one hand propaganda, and on the other, fuel to a constructed culture to enrich people like Beck and Gingrich who are vultures to fears of average Americans. That culture relies upon the economic engine and marketing aspect of FOX news to perpetuate that culture. But all of it is merely a smokescreen to conceal the mass looting of the nation’s wealth by a small number of people, on the Right, and attmitedly on the Left as well. For that, evidence the Justice department’s complete unwillingness under the Obama administration to prosecute those responsible for raping and sinking this economy. I think you and I would both agree, someone needed to go to jail for what happened during Bush’s last year in office and extending into the current administration. We could haggle over the details.

      Back to putting myself on the line for human rights, which I have done. That accusation, tiredly over-used on the Right is a back-handed way of denouncing those who assert their freedom of speech. I doubt that you ment it that way, but that is the sort of “common” knowledge and blindly repeated talking-points I was talking about. In other words, what you are saying is that their voice has no merit unless they jet off to Iran. Funny, but the Constitution and the First Amendment don’t quite read that way.

      Rather than you and I creating what amounts to an epic, one final point. That is not what the relative was saying, and you are being disingenuous if you truly believe that. Limbaugh also says it constantly. It is the Oligarchic way of telling poor people to shut up when they dissent about their own pain and struggle. However, nothing ever gets fixed if no one ever acknowledges there is a problem, which there clearly is. Of course, poor people in this country-by in large- are better off than say people in parts of Africa and others living in the decades long vacuum of de-colinized countries, but that is akin to saying blacks had no right to eschew their slavery because they lived better than their ancestors who were brought over in the holds of ships in chains.

      Again, I do appreciate your passion, and I did read carefully your POINT OF VIEW, which I defend your right to say while vigorously arguing against. And the reason for that argument? Your logic simply does not hold up to the standard of real human pain and suffering…and that is the only moral standard.

      900 pound…

  • xPraetorius

    Dear 900:

    The only way to respond to your response is to do it in-line again. Below:

    I don’t censor on my blog, [I never said you do] and I do appreciate the passion you brought to the argument. [Thanks] That said, 687 words in a blog makes for a statement not a detailed argument, [Ok, but again, your statements were nothing more than assertions] but you may find a fair amount of that in my archives. [K. I’ll check it out] And regarding standing up for Human Rights in a bad place? Would Serbia under Milosevic at the height of the Bosnian war suffice? [Probably] I did not waver in my arguments that the Serbs were committing Genocide despite the UPI station chief being beaten half to death by Serbian Secret Police in my hotel, or when the US Consulate warned me that the going rate for “offing” dissidents in Belgrade was about $125USD. Standing on the frontlines under fire in Bosnia, I still did not waver from my arguments. I have put it on the line. [All to your credit. Are you, by the way, standing up for human rights in Iran? Publicly? In Iran? Personally, I think it’s intelligent if you’re not, but it is IMPORTANT to have the perspective that so many “agitate” for human rights from the comfort of a very free country.]

    Regarding education in the Right-wing media, Goebbels [a man of the left, by the way, NOT of the right], I remind, had a Doctorate, and a great many well educated Germans whole-heartedly supported the Nazis. [If you TRULY read what I wrote, you’d realize that I made a clear distinction between education and intelligence. Goebbels may have been educated, but hardly intelligent] Rush admittedly did not attend college, [Nor is lack of education synonymous with unintelligent] and Beck…well, if anyone with more than a 4th grade education believes the nation is on the brink of collapse and should move to Texas, buy more guns, stock up on emergency meals for the coming apocalypse and buy more of his books, then they were drinking something more than milk with their peanutbutter and jelly sandwich. [Again, personal attacks that are unwarranted, mean-spirited, and the real reason for Rush Limbaugh and the rest. Trust me, when you’ve been falsely accused of being a Nazi for the thousandth time, you start to yearn for someone who will turn the tables] Are Limbaugh and Beck Nazis? [Of course not, but that you have to pose the question proves my point. YOU ask the question, because those on YOUR side have made the bogus, toxic accusation for decades.] No, but they are opportunists. [The list of opportunists on the left is so long it’s impossible to enumerate. With the current President at the top of it.]

    “Liberal slant” is invented. [Your naïveté here is strange. left-wing bias in the established media is so well documented that even the left doesn’t deny it, but instead justifies it as a necessary counter-balance to Fox News] As I pointed out, the flood of Right-wing books, refabricated-America-Centered books are on one hand propaganda, and on the other, fuel to a constructed culture to enrich people like Beck and Gingrich who are vultures to fears of average Americans. [Again, you just say this. Doesn’t pass the “so what” test. The flood of left-wing-focused books is also just propaganda. Again, so what?] That culture relies upon the economic engine and marketing aspect of FOX news to perpetuate that culture. But all of it is merely a smokescreen to conceal the mass looting of the nation’s wealth by a small number of people, on the Right [do you mean the bankers? The ones who so overwhelmingly contributed to the Democrats in the last few Presidential and Congressional election cycles?], and attmitedly on the Left as well. For that, evidence the Justice department’s complete unwillingness under the Obama administration to prosecute those responsible for raping and sinking this economy. I think you and I would both agree, someone needed to go to jail for what happened during Bush’s last year in office and extending into the current administration. We could haggle over the details. [we’d haggle over the details, but the looting is a direct result of legislation formulated, and abetted, by both parties. This legislation — let’s face it, leftist-inspired — seemed well-intentioned, but fell victim to the law of unintended consequences. That was naïve, but not criminal. What’s criminal now is not doing away with CRA, Fannie, Freddy, etc.]

    Back to putting myself on the line for human rights, which I have done. That accusation, tiredly over-used on the Right is a back-handed way of denouncing those who assert their freedom of speech. I doubt that you ment it that way, but that is the sort of “common” knowledge and blindly repeated talking-points I was talking about. In other words, what you are saying is that their voice has no merit [Again, you’re inappropriately putting words in my mouth. I didn’t say anything about merit. I indicated that I’d give YOUR assertions more credibility if your credentials were better. Otherwise, you came off as simply trying to make a living off the suffering of others. The truth is the truth is the truth — the source is unimportant, but it HELPS if the source has credibility.] unless they jet off to Iran. Funny, but the Constitution and the First Amendment don’t quite read that way. [never suggested they needed to be interpreted that way.]

    Rather than you and I creating what amounts to an epic, one final point. That is not what the relative was saying, and you are being disingenuous if you truly believe that. Limbaugh also says it constantly. It is the Oligarchic way of telling poor people to shut up when they dissent about their own pain and struggle. [Again, you’re just saying this.] However, nothing ever gets fixed if no one ever acknowledges there is a problem, which there clearly is. Of course, poor people in this country-by in large- are better off than say people in parts of Africa and others living in the decades long vacuum of de-colinized countries, but that is akin to saying blacks had no right to eschew their slavery because they lived better than their ancestors who were brought over in the holds of ships in chains. [One does NOT lead to the other. But perspective IS important! And it’s important to direct your efforts to where they do the most good. YOUR efforts would bring about MUCH greater good if you would direct them toward telling the vast majority of America’s poor to work hard, obtain marketable skills, don’t pretend they are owed anything by anyone else, and don’t turn down any honorable work.]

    Again, I do appreciate your passion, and I did read carefully your POINT OF VIEW, [No you didn’t] which I defend your right to say while vigorously arguing against. [big of you…when the day comes that I WON’T have the right to say what I believe, it’ll be your ideological confreres preventing me.] And the reason for that argument? Your logic simply does not hold up to the standard of real human pain and suffering…and that is the only moral standard. [and YOUR point of view, taken to its logical conclusion (which it already has been), would institute a human-crunching, hyper-hierarchical, inhuman system called “socialism,” the belief system responsible for more violent, premature death than any other single thing in recorded history, except time.]

    As regards whether or not we produce an epic, surely the truth is worth an epic? Surely finding out the truth is worth an epic? Do you truly wish to languish in any ignorance or lack of perspective, just to move things along? WELL-argued points are done ONLY by hashing things over thoroughly. If that requires an epic, then so it.

    Best,

    x

    • 900poundgorilla

      By calling Nazis Leftists, you are betraying your own credentials. There is no debate that Nazis were Right-wingers. Even they described themselves as of the Right. I’ll reference, Danieal Goldhagen’s Hitler’s willing Executioners, Norman Davies “Europe,” William L. Shirer’s Berlin Diary, Hanfstaegl’s Hitler the Missing Years,or Hitler, Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet, or how about Fascist Modernities, Italy 1922-1945 by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, and I Will Bear Witness by Victor Klemperer, a contemporary acount of the rise of Nazism as it happened. National SOCIALISM must be seen in its historical context and not in the contempory falsehood propagated by the sensitive souls you believe are above calling names. You see, this person with no credentials, who has authored 3 published books, a successful play, has a successful career in logistics, been to war, organized relief to Rwanda and was at the forefront of Americans supporting democratic reforms for China in 1989, is an expert in Nationalism and Genocide, an expert in Balkan and Southern European history to the Neolithic period and is supremely educated in Classical history-primarily concerning the Roman Republic.
      No one is coming to throw you into a gulag, more of the apparently innate paranoia on the Right. As for the term Socialism, the root is Social, i.e., society, or more precisely relationships between people.
      The Soviet Union was Oligarchic, and anything but Communist. Communism was never tried among nation states(Though it has existed in tribal societies for thousands of years), because it is antithetical to human relationships, but there is one brilliant example of Socialism succeeding famously, and that is the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. “ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL…”?? “WE THE PEOPLE…”??
      What is at stake here are the true essence of those words. You level accusations then smugly retreat to proclaim yourself the victim, a common tactic of the Right, with the purpose of confusing arguments that are morally(and Biblically) indefensible. It really does not lend itself to proper debate, bacause we have found ourselves less in an intellectual exchange to discover common ground as a tit for tat slap fight. personally, I know we can do better, and from many of your comments, when your heels are not dug in so deeply(admittedly mine are a bit as well here)I have no doubt you do too. Not putting words in your mouth, but I assert the animosity, or disagreement here is not complete.
      Hope you have a wonderful New Year, but I have to go.

  • xPraetorius

    Your intemperate name-calling, incessant credentials flogging, and strange compulsion to put words into my mouth that I never said, or even hinted at, betray the insecurity of your beliefs. Someone who truly believes in the strength of his position has no need for that kind of rhetorical legerdemain. Your words are saying: “Don’t really examine what I say, ’cause THAT guy’s just a big, racist dummy, while MY history proves just how GOOD AND CORRECT I am!” And, of course, that is the FIRST rhetorical resort of the American left.

    Again, below in brackets:

    By calling Nazis Leftists, you are betraying your own credentials. [Nope. A growing school of thought is coming to the conclusion that the Nazis sit much more comfortably on the left. A simple thought game. Why was it so difficult for Chamberlain and Churchill (according to YOUR theory, much closer ideologically to Stalin) to obtain an alliance with Stalin? Yet when Hitler proposed it, Stalin was all over it. You can cite pre-war strategy all you want, or delaying tactics, but the point is: all indications are that Stalin felt a kinship for Hitler, while loathing the weak bourgeois West.] There is no debate that Nazis were Right-wingers. [That one’s easy: There was no debate that the Earth was flat…until there was debate. Calling any thought – especially something as nebulous or subjective as “who’s-on-the-right-and-who’s on-the-left” — “settled” is profoundly anti-intellectual.] Even they described themselves as of the Right. [And Pol Pot’s psychos described themselves as “liberators.” I don’t think I’ll use Nazis or Pol Pot as references for what to call them. I can match you irrelevant reference for irrelevant reference if you’d like.] I’ll reference, Danieal Goldhagen’s Hitler’s willing Executioners, Norman Davies “Europe,” William L. Shirer’s Berlin Diary, Hanfstaegl’s Hitler the Missing Years,or Hitler, Diagnosis of a Destructive Prophet, or how about Fascist Modernities, Italy 1922-1945 by Ruth Ben-Ghiat, [Mussolini was a committed Marxist for years, and only stopped calling himself that when he realized that he needed to compete with Marxists for the allegiance of the same portion of the Italian population. Mussolini and Hitler had no problem with Marxism; their problem was with Marxists. A huge distinction.] and I Will Bear Witness by Victor Klemperer, a contemporary acount of the rise of Nazism as it happened. National SOCIALISM must be seen in its historical context [ << Uhhhhh…O-o-o-o-k! Who ever said otherwise?] and not in the contemporary falsehood propagated by the sensitive souls you believe are above calling names. [And I'll reference, as mentioned above, an equal number of equally eminent thinkers and historians who see the Nazis as most comfortable on the left. Big deal. Their ideology is nearly indistinguishable from that of their Communist rivals for the heart of Germany's 1930's working class, except for the Nationalist angle. Then, during the War (Ummm…the "Great Patriotic War.") Stalin made the move to hard-core nationalism, and basically, with a tiny adjustment, became a Nazi. He was even as virulently anti-Semite as Hitler, though kept it under wraps 'til after the war.] You see, this person with no credentials, who has authored 3 published books, a successful play, has a successful career in logistics, been to war, organized relief to Rwanda and was at the forefront of Americans supporting democratic reforms for China in 1989, is an expert in Nationalism and Genocide, an expert in Balkan and Southern European history to the Neolithic period and is supremely educated in Classical history-primarily concerning the Roman Republic. [What is this need to chest thump in front of me? This credentials shouting is (1) unseemly, (2) an unworthy attempt to stifle disagreement with you by insisting you're the most educated. You have no idea who I am even! Could be my several doctorates make you look like a piker! (<< see how silly that sounds?) And, (3) it's a sign of insecurity. Some of the most credentialed experts in history, have been, simply, wrong. Neither education nor experience confers infallibility on you, me or anyone else.]

    No one is coming to throw you into a gulag, more of the apparently innate paranoia on the Right. [Were you sleeping when the torrent of toxic, and in retrospect, demonstrably false rhetoric – 1,000 times more vituperative or paranoid than anything I've EVER used – was leveled at the Bush Administration? From the left.] As for the term Socialism, the root is Social, i.e., society, or more precisely relationships between people. [<< irrelevant. So what. You know the etymology of the word “socialism.”]

    The Soviet Union was Oligarchic, and anything but Communist. [Yep. Also irrelevant] Communism was never tried among nation states(Though it has existed in tribal societies for thousands of years), [Ok…you have a, shall we say, “flexible” definition of communism.] because it is antithetical to human relationships, [<< you can't say that AND your phrase immediately before it. Perfectly contradictory one to the other.] but there is one brilliant example of Socialism succeeding famously, and that is the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. “ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL…”?? “WE THE PEOPLE…”?? [I'm a firm believer in socialism in private relationships. Heck, that's just called Christianity. It's when government gets hold of it that it goes horribly, horribly wrong.]

    What is at stake here are the true essence of those words. [“…essence of those words” is such a nebulous phrase as to be perfectly meaningless. However, as I understand it, it's likely that their “essence” is ALWAYS different from their meaning in the general lexicon.] You level accusations then smugly retreat to proclaim yourself the victim, [Nope. Never did that. I simply stated a fact: Many times I've been called a Nazi, or a fascist, or a racist, or a this or a that, for the simple fact of disagreeing with someone on the left. Nothing more than that. Never called myself a victim, and, again, you should stop trying to put words into my mouth.] a common tactic of the Right, with the purpose of confusing arguments that are morally(and Biblically) indefensible. [Wow! You're REALLY calling my arguments morally and Biblically indefensible? And you say I make accusations?!? Please don't forget ALL THE WAY AT THE TOP of all this: YOU're the one calling MY friends and ME “idiots” (<< your word, not mine.)] It really does not lend itself to proper debate, because we have found ourselves less in an intellectual exchange to discover common ground as a tit for tat slap fight. [I didn't bring us there. I think I hit some nerves. You should pursue this vein. Now I'm going to intellectualize a bit: MY credentials mean that YOU should pursue why I'm disagreeing with you AND getting under your skin (as you graciously admit below).] Personally, I know we can do better, and from many of your comments, when your heels are not dug in so deeply (admittedly mine are a bit as well here)I have no doubt you do too. [Now THAT's a nice rhetorical touch!] Not putting words in your mouth, but I assert the animosity, or disagreement here is not complete. [<< I don't know what that means.]
    Hope you have a wonderful New Year, but I have to go. [I hope you have a wonderful New Year too.]

    Best,

    x

  • 900poundgorilla

    Dear X,

    before we get too far afield. I will leave you with the last word. This would have been a better conversation over a beer.
    Be blessed

  • Trying a New Thing with the Left. Trying to Challenge Them to be Better. (WARNING: LONG posts below…I reproduced in full my discussion with a blogger on the left who seems like a nice enough guy, but just can’t seem to refrain from speaking in

    […] So, 900pound’s points are in normal text, while my rejoinders are bolded and italicized in in-line brackets. The bolding and italicizing are meant merely to make a more effective visual difference between 900pound’s text and mine. Note I removed a couple of responses to 900pound’s original post that were not by me. Please feel free to visit 900pound’s blog site to see all the responding posts: (https://900poundgorilla.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/warning-explicit-language-on-unionsfox-and-idiots/)  […]

  • Trying a New Thing with the Left. Trying to Challenge Them to be Better. (WARNING: LONG posts below…I reproduced in full my discussion with a blogger on the left who seems like a nice enough guy, but just can’t seem to refrain from speaking in

    […] So, 900pound’s points are in normal text, while my rejoinders are bolded and italicized in in-line brackets. The bolding and italicizing are meant merely to make a more effective visual difference between 900pound’s text and mine. Note I removed a couple of responses to 900pound’s original post that were not by me. Please feel free to visit 900pound’s blog site to see all the responding posts: (https://900poundgorilla.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/warning-explicit-language-on-unionsfox-and-idiots/)  […]

  • Trying a New Thing with the Left. Trying to Challenge Them to be Better. (WARNING: LONG posts below…I reproduced in full my discussion with a blogger on the left who seems like a nice enough guy, but just can’t seem to refrain from speaking in

    […] And, now, 900′s last word. I think he’s saying, “no mas,” here. As I said, he seems like a nice enough fellow, but at no point in any of that did he address any of my arguments. He kind of just listed all his credentials — an impressive array, by the way — and insisted all along that I was attacking him. His resignation, though, is very gracious. I’ll try to re-engage as time goes on. Note my Nota Bene, below. Reply […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: