Telling the tale of the Left: apostates and escapees
I write a great deal about what I call “political changers,” those people who have had some sort of political conversion or political evolution experience. As I explained here, this change is ordinarily unidirectional, from Left to Right; and (as I explained here) its origin and course tend to follow certain universal patterns.
The Left fears and loathes changers, with a revulsion and anger akin to that which religions such as Islam claim towards apostates. In the case of the Left, there are several reasons why this might be so. One of the milder ones is the phenomenon of condescension on the part of the changer (which I described here):
Inherent in the idea of anyone changing his/her mind from one position to another is that the person must think the second position is superior to the first””else why the change? So, whether or not the changer intends to be condescending, the reader/listener hears condescension because in fact it is implicit in the situation.
But among the doctrinaire far Left, much more is going on to make the resentment and fear of the apostate reach fever pitch. The changer who was once a political operative him/herself, such as David Horowitz (see my posts about him here) is especially hated and feared. Not only is his betrayal greater because his commitment was greater and his personal relationships with those on the Left tighter and therefore more trusted, but he is possessed of inside information that can be very helpful to the enemy. He knows the mind of the Left and its strategy, and therefore he is more of a defector than a changer. He has gone over to the Left’s enemy and he is ready to tell the tale, as well as to sound the warning for the future.
A changer of this type can spot clues that the rest of us have trouble seeing. That’s why some of the people who were earliest at calling Obama a man of the far Left were those who knew the Left from having been there. They could spot the “tells” and call Obama out on it, but their voices were neither heard nor believed by the vast majority of Americans.
Another group with the ability to spot Leftist tendencies, especially of the tyrannical hard Left type, are the escapees. These are either people who grew up in Communist countries and managed to leave, or who were born in freedom as the children of such refugees and were raised on tales of the horrors that prevailed under the previous regimes. Another closely related group are the populations of Eastern European countries who used to be under the Soviet umbrella and were liberated during the breakup of the USSR about twenty years ago. Twenty years is not such a long time, and most of the populations of these countries recall only too well how it was, and know what to look out for.
It’s more difficult for the Left to discount the testimony of these types of people because they have the power of experience on their side. For example, the Left can’t deny the fact that Horowitz was a major player on the Left for many years; all they can do is call him a right-wing lunatic who’s now gone off the deep end for his own nefarious reasons. As for those who escaped from countries on the Left and are saying “it can happen here” (see this), I’m not sure the Left has a response to them at all.
As for people like me—who used to be a liberal Democrat but hardly a political operative nor a refugee from Communism—the easiest and most common mode of attack, and one I hear all the time, is that I’m lying about my political past. I never was a liberal at all, don’t you see?
Why I would pretend such a thing is never explained, of course. And the second most common charge I get is that I heard about 9/11, panicked, and immediately became a person of the Right because of my overwhelming fear.
The goal is to discredit the process of change itself, especially its deeply cognitive and thoughtful nature, in order to keep people from understanding what would make a person do such a thing. The danger is that someone might follow the reasoning involved, and leave the fold as well. The fact that I’ve written what amounts to a small book on the subject of how and why I changed (as well as how slowly it occurred) doesn’t matter to these critics. The idea is to discredit the teller of the tale and therefore neutralize the tale itself, and whatever threat it might represent to the Left.
I’m not saying I reach that many people or change that many minds. But apostates and escapees as a whole represent a sizeable force to drive a wedge into the approved “narrative” of the Left, and as such they have a special authority and authenticity that is hard for the Left to deny.
Neo,
Have you been following Robin of Berkeley over at American Thinker? She writes some great columns on her “defection” from the Left, and her current “imprisonment” living in that notorius city. Full of good humor as well as insights.
A changer of this type can spot clues that the rest of us have trouble seeing. That’s why some of the people who were earliest at calling Obama a man of the far Left were those who knew the Left from having been there. They could spot the “tells” and call Obama out on it, but their voices were neither heard nor believed by the vast majority of Americans.
actually, we just didnt add information, excuses, or things to fill in blanks and just accepted that what we saw was what we saw.
the tells are what we try to use to show others who cant see the gorrila with the red hat among the basketball players waving at them…
and were raised on tales of the horrors that prevailed under the previous regimes.
they werent tales… they were histories.
hansel and gretel is a tale
walking over a row of bodies whose faces are so smashed and with nails in the head, that you try to find your son, or husband by the clothing.
rooms you were told had plastic on the walls, and drains in the floors, all tile. like the movie SAW, were real. and worse. and you can now see pictures and tour those rooms.
then they tell you the history of your cousin. show you images… and these stories seem to always end at some point where their happiness turns to sadness, and they turn the page to start another story. later whn you are older you find out what happened “in between the pages”.
but the hardest thing to grasp that they kept trying to nail home was how removed this was from normal life everywhere. that it wasnt just like another culture or strange place.
Twenty years is not such a long time, and most of the populations of these countries recall only too well how it was, and know what to look out for.
yeah… when you get bit by the monster in all its glory, your run.. you never forget the monster and you know it when you see it coming for you again. its a nightmare persuit.
when your running from something intent on hurting you, do you forget what and why you started running and just stop and let them have you?
no… you never forget why you ran, and had no choice.
most people never know the level of angst in just packing a suitcase, and leaving what is literally hundreds of years of your family history.
to go to a land of promise and safety, and which you cante even speak the language.
think of how bad things have to be in order for you to get up this afternoon, pack a bag, and get on a boat to a foregn land where you have not met the people, only read aobut tem, and you cant even ask for the bathroom. oh… and you have no money when you get there. how bad does it have to be to leave lands, homes, family, freinds, language, and more?
They understand socialism. They understand tyrants. But none of us have ever had it here. We don’t even know what it looks like.
and they refuse to listen to those who do know what it looks like. we are thrown in with the tin hatters who are blockers. which is why MOST of us shut up.
but you only have to know where their from and whether they were part of what was there or not to know waht to say to connect. and under our breaths we talk as if we know, and we see them all asleep. and the scary part is that no matter who you talk to, romanians, chinese, russians, hugarians (now serbs? and croats?), etc… the song is the same..
The idea is to discredit the teller of the tale and therefore neutralize the tale itself, and whatever threat it might represent to the Left.
actually once you leave its not about you or what you say or discrediting. its about keeping who you left behind on track.
once a fruit is spoiled its spoiled, you have to spend your time protecting the unspoild fruit.
you are giving such too much credit.
none of them have ever stopped a change.
not one.
in the honduras, they had experienced such before, and so it was still fresh enough to them.
however, this is why they eradicate so many people when they completely take over and there is no meaningful (as i can do anything) opposition.
you can find the papers and theories, they talk about removing about 1/3 the population through some manner of disposal. this creates a sub critical amount of people to transmit prior cultuer forward. then its easier to pick off the few left. it results in a breeding program where the favored types can continue to breed. (but just as we favor the whild stalion over the more domesticated because of its richer personality, etc… germany, russia, and china had lost most of its vibrant creative people).
and its this constant practive of preventing going back by eliminating connection to the past that makes the trip irreversable.
they dont care about apostates… not the leaders… they are chew blocks for the useful idiots to act upon and have things to do that keeps them.
any one thinking of joining them is the target. they ahve to be made too scared to leave, or oppose or anything like that.
A third group, although unknown to the Left, is those of us who spent years (involuntarily) in proximity to them and observing them all the while in their natural habitat, a la Jane Goodall.
In my case, years in Berkeley watching the leftists roll out the new spring line of causes every year, and the same people mouthing the same platitudes, in the same stilted leftist phrasing, about fundamentally unrelated issues, after a while helped me to develop the political equivalent of gaydar.
Even now, encountering certain phrases, arguments, perspectives, or debating tactics set my commie -detecting antennae to quivering uncontrollably.
One more person you should add is Ms. Tammy Bruce. She, like Horowitz was also an insider who became a Reagan Democrat. Does a good radio show also.
Republicans need to wake up and realize: In the eyes of some Republicans and most conservatives, our nation’s enemies are the Taliban, AQ, and any foreign nationalistic leader or group that would either deny basic human freedoms to its citizens, or take action that threatens ours. In the eyes of Democrats and other members of the left, our nation’s greatest enemies are the Republicans and conservatives. And the last several national election campaigns have been waged based on those premises.
OlderandWheezier, in a recent discussion with some liberal friends I said that there were some really bad people in this world, and not just Republicans either.
No one laughed.
As Leftie I don’t recognize myself from the description of my view on these pages. I guess most Righties would say the same thing about their readings of Leftwing blogs.
Mostly both sides put devil’s horns and forked tails on the other side, which is incredibly easy to do on the internet.
BTW there are just as many who journey from right to left, and write about it. I don’t think this is all that unusual, if fact many people travel all over the place in the course of their lives, unless they are incredibly closed minded and unthinking individuals.
I like people who go through this, losing their religion and finding another one, or maybe abjuring doctrine altogether. That’s why I was drawn to this blog, it was the mystery of a mind in evolution.
I hope Neoneocon continues her travels and never settles anywhere permanently, it makes such interesting reading.
spoot, nice try, but I dispute your contention. In my many decades I’ve never known anyone who went from pro-American to liberal. Not a one.
I’m sure such exist, but they are rare. Most people grow up, not down.
I only disagree in one area, neo. You stated it can happen here. It IS happening here. Period. Present company excluded, it is my opinion, anyone who doesn’t see that, doesn’t want to.
Artfldgr, your posts may be long at times, and at times hard to read (I get the feeling you are writing at break neck speed [typos] with only a couple minutes until you must be doing something else) but like the post above, I stay riveted to them until I have read them through. Sometimes more than once.
I fear the light of freedom is slowly going out in this greatest of nations. I have three children and a grandson, and many friends with children, nieces, nephews, etc. I can’t bear the thought of leaving them behind in a nation that would put them in chains – figuratively if not actually. Even liberals.
Pol pot, Stalin, many others. Look at what has been done. We can’t let that seed sprout here. We already know the end of that story.
With the ever increasing debt load being dumped on our children, only a fool would do all he could do to become the most he could become, only to be forced to pay for those who will not. Even those inside the belt way know that much.
They are fully aware of what they are doing.
The hard left absolutely will run when confronted with an escapee. I’ve seen it for years. Just meeting one who has experienced the bad old CCCP will send them crashing out of the room.
OlderandWheezier Says:
“In the eyes of Democrats and other members of the left, our nation’s greatest enemies are the Republicans and conservatives”
I think that sunk in on me over the last two or three years….
Occam’s Beard Says:
“spoot, nice try, but I dispute your contention. In my many decades I’ve never known anyone who went from pro-American to liberal. Not a one. ”
Yeah, if people get fed up with the republican party or the conservative ‘movement’ they don’t tend to jump to the left. They go libertarian or independent… but not leftwing…
If the Right to Left change were at all common it seems there would be a website like neo’s dedicated to those changers — especially in the last few years when Bush, Republicans, Cons and Neocons were massively reviled.
However, I am unaware of any such site.
In 2008 there were those from the Center and Right who voted for Barack “Blank Screen” Obama but I don’t think those votes indicated true Right to Left shifts as much as wishful thinking.
I get the feeling you are writing at break neck speed [typos] with only a couple minutes until you must be doing something else
that is exactly what i am doing…
most of the time at work, other times not to paint others into a corner to the point there is no wiggle room. i can pull so much together so fast because i remember most of it, and the internet magnifies my recall.
I don’t think this is all that unusual, if fact many people travel all over the place in the course of their lives, unless they are incredibly closed minded and unthinking individuals.
Or incredibly squishy, selfish, moral cowards with no core beliefs, who cannot be counted on for anything beyond their own comfort.
C’mon, take a chance and believe in something….
Christopher Hitchens is another changer though he says his conversion began about the time the Ayatollah sent assassination orders to take out a private citizen of another country for the offense of writing a book critical Islam … any criticism of religion is seen as intolerable or a hate crime, thank God for freedom speech and all of our human rights, they are worth defending.
Artfuldgr — Get some help, professional help. If you are only sleeping four hours a night, that’s a sign that something needs checking into.
Otherwise lose the breakneck typing and lack of editing. If you don’t want to come across as a tinfoil hatted crank, don’t post like one.
Don’t flatter yourself that you are sparing anyone your deadly laser-like ability to paint others into a corner with no wiggle room. Frankly, I would welcome that compared to your ongoing logorrhea.
Apparently, you have some fans here. I am not one. I find your posts a tiresome and a blight. I think you’re capable of better, but you seem either too lazy or too grandiose to bother.
Or perhaps you are to some extent mentally ill, in which case I apologize for treating you as a person from whom I could expect something normal.
any criticism of religion is seen as intolerable or a hate crime, thank God for freedom speech and all of our human rights, they are worth defending.
Well, any criticism of Islam or the religion of Secular Leftism, anyhow. You cannot get a Hollywood movie made without crapping on christianity.
Hello Da Vinci Code….
So, no: not any criticism of religion.
Occam’s Beard, yes there are quite a few in that “third group” I agree — I will tell you a secret… Many, many visual artists (mostly the men) are quite far away from being Left/Liberal. I was only really “leftist” when compared with my male peers! Go drinking with some painters and you’ll see what I mean. Not the ones that get the NEA grants, of course.
We have to make it on our own, maybe with some small money for teaching, maybe some selling out (I do a lot of selling out) – but working artists are entrepreneurs, really, and we get killed with taxes. Now that I’m in the professional design field, there are MANY more liberals here. Here I have to be more careful what I say. But things are changing, even here, even among the young designers . . .
Huxley,
Since you wanted more reasoned and artfully crafted dialogue with more thought, I thought I would accommodate you, this time.
I have little time to waste on such wasteful things, so I will just take one point and quote you.
If you are only sleeping four hours a night, that’s a sign that something needs checking into.
I appreciate the thought of looking out for my health but methinks thee are not as honest as the day is long. Each person’s sleep requirement is different, and I am sorry but you’re letting your ignorance show much sir.
Here is a list of others who only sleep four hours (unless otherwise stated):
1. Jay Leno
2. Madonna
3. Florence Nightingale
4. Anton Ballard
5. Michelangelo
6. Napoleon Bonaparte
7. Bill Clinton 5-6 hrs
8. Winston Churchill 5 hrs
9. Nikola Tesla – two hours
10. Leonardo Da Vinci — 15 mins every four hours (ie. 1.5 hours)
11. Margaret Thatcher
12. Martha Stewart
13. Thomas Edison
“Thomas Edison slept 3-4 hours at night, regarding sleep as a waste of time”
“Requirements for sleep vary widely. Most adults need the traditional seven or eight hours of sleep a night, but some adults are “short sleepers” and function well on only three or four hours. http://www.mckinley.uiuc.edu/health-info/dis-cond/misc/insomnia.html
Now if you want to ‘ad hominem’ someone, you really should be careful that you either know what the heck your talking about, or go back to the blind fools and pretend you’re a one eyed man.
Given my ability to read early and have much more time than everyone else, I have to find ways to keep busy. So I read, study, work puzzles, write music, develop my arts, go walkabout, paint, exercise… but mostly read… so I don’t disturb others. I have done this since early childhood, keeping me busy and interested was a hard thing and got harder the more competent I became.
Lets look at this an interesting way, actual lifetime vs effective lifetime. The fact of it is the kind of thing that is upsetting to some.
Let’s say you and I are the same age, but you sleep 8 hours, and I sleep my 4.
I am 45, and we will say that you are also 45, so our real ages are exactly the same.
But let’s look at our effective ages… that is, the time we spend awake defines us.
We live while awake, and study and learn while awake. So depending on sleep your effective age can be different. If you don’t like this idea, you can sue hollyweird as it was shown to the public in the movie awakenings with Robin Williams and Robert DeNiro. The patients went to sleep for decades, and so they woke up thinking only a day or so had past.
So the number of hours you spend awake is your defined life, your effective lifetime.
So at 45, I have 65,700 hours awake more than someone my age that sleeps 8 hours.
(I hope you don’t mind that I didn’t work out the leap years)
That’s 7.5 years solid awake time with zero sleep.
Or 9 years with 4 hours sleep a night.
Or 11 years and change for an 8 hour sleeper.
You would have to be 56 to match my effective lifetime if we were born the same day.
But here’s the fun part that tends to piss people off.
If you and I both lived to be 90, you would still not have lived as much as I
For in those 90 years I would have crammed the waking life of a man 112 years old.
So I hope you enjoyed the life experience better when I take the time.
After all, I am only here for your amusement, no?
I do a lot of work…
Some of us are prodigious producers.
Why would I want to slow down for you and then slow down those other things too?
Neo–it is those aware people who have escaped to the U.S. from some form of Communism or dictatorship and who are posting, now, that they are seeing the signs–that just don’t register on us–of this same type of dictatorship coming to America who should be paid the most attention, since they have the experience and knowledge base we, thankfully, have not had the misfortune to have acquired up to this point.
I don’t want to get between Art and Huxley, both of whom appear to be intelligent and frequent commenters here.
I would simply say that I echo br549 “I stay riveted to them until I have read them through.”
A few weeks ago Neo did a post re: Kent State. I was not even born when that happened. I read through all of Art’s llloooonnnggg comments on that topic and found them fascinating.
Thanks Artfldgr.
I was accused of being a conservative when I was about nine, because I enjoyed Ronald Reagan on “Death Valley Days”. So I guess I never really was a liberal, even though I voted for Gus Hall over Jimmy Carter!
I just popped off to do a few things, so here is what I came back to put up that is thread relevant.
A person I posted to look into was Bella Dodd. She too had a change of sides, but unlike Neo, and unlike David Horowitz, or H L Mencken, she has a serious CV.
A brilliant woman who graduated from Hunter College here in NY, and also graduated NYU law school (note this was prior to feminism during the time they claimed that women weren’t allowed to do things. truth is, women didn’t WANT to do stuff, cause they liked life with their families. Most of those nasty feminist quotes on this tend to point out that women would make this choice if allowed or permitted).
She became head of the NY State Teachers Union and was a member of the CPUSA council until 49. She had been a leader of the CPUSA since the 30s, and was a key player in everything.
Her book, which I have previously mentioned is School of Darkness. Its available online, and I have previously linked to it. (but when I put a link no one reads it, and when I put it here, they complain as to length I am saving some more time).
The Communist Party operates by infiltrating and subverting social institutions like the churches, schools, mass media and government. Its aim was “to create new types of human beings who would conform to the blueprint of the world they confidently expected to control.”
Dodd describes Communism as “a strange secret cult” whose goal is the destruction of Western (i.e. Christian) Civilization. Millions of naé¯ve idealists (“innocents”) are tricked by its talk of helping the poor, but it cares only for power. For example, Dodd found there was no social research at party headquarters. “We are a revolutionary party, not a reform party,” she was told.
In the book she reveals that the CPUSA (who she was a leader and council member in) had 1100 members become Catholic priests in the 30s. She pointed out in the book that many have been assisted to rise up and have prominent positions. It is assumed others had nastier proclivities and so entered the church with the specific purpose of discrediting it through pederasty and such.
Worked pretty good… no?
“The party did all it could to induce women to go into industry. Its fashion designers created special styles for them and its songwriters wrote special songs to spur them…. War-period conditions, they planned, were to become a permanent part of the future educational program. The bourgeois family as a social unit was to be made obsolete.” (153)
Same chime as the feminists, no?
So Neo, the truth is that they don’t care that much about the apostates. They have been writing damning things for 100 years and no one reads them. you can find such all over, weeks ago I linked to an excerpt by a German who described and detailed what it was like to be a person and get caught up in it rather than the history of who did what when. The how did it happen book. No one looked.
So I can even prove this point and case here. You can’t get them to look and learn from these people, we get put into tin hate land. (no its not a typo).
Dodd helped organize the Congress of American Women, a forerunner of the feminist movement.
“Since it was supposedly a movement for peace, it attracted many women. But it was really only a renewed offensive to control American women… Like youth and minority groups, they are regarded as a reserve force of the revolution because they are more easily moved by emotional appeals.” (194-195)
The women have been the biggest force in all this change around us. The men do what women want in exchange for women wanting them. In the past they wanted a great civilization good living and that’s what they wanted, after Dodd and her ladies (sorry Elise but this is history you never read) got through with them, well, they have been following the program.
And all this is a well known documented undercurrent that if you read their dull works and theory papers you see all this same theme and goals for more than 70 years.
Go check. Sotomayer’s year book entry she quoted Norman Thomas. Norm was the Socialist Party candidate for years, he eventually quit running announcing the reason was there was nothing to distinguish his party from the democratic party. He was also the one that said a paraphrase of Stalin that “that the American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.
Of course all the people who know this and knew this have been shouted down as tin hatters since the 50s. so they shut up. Just as the apostates are attacked and that makes the others scared, and so they stay loyal.
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
OlderandWheezier Says:
“In the eyes of Democrats and other members of the left, our nation’s greatest enemies are the Republicans and conservatives”
I think many Democrats and most other members of the left consider themselves citizens of the world first and foremost, or even above that in some grandiose way. Being citizens of the evil US is something for them to be ashamed of and to shame others with.
Thus our nation’s greatest enemies are not necessarily their greatest enemies.
Because Republicans and conservatives are a direct competitor for power, and consider themselves citizens of the evil US first and foremost, they are Democrats’ and other members of the left’s greatest enemies.
Someday I’ll figure out how to close italics.
Slash before the i.
Andrew Sullivan might qualify as someone who has moved from right to left.
There are some who move from right to left. Going to Washington to work, whether elected, appointed, or commenting, seems to be involved. Journalists who call themselves “still conservative” but adopt more and more liberal stances have appeared over the last decade or so. They usually pick one or two iconic conservative principles and hold to those, while giving away everything else.
A second group are those who grew up in religious homes that tied politics too tightly to the faith. That is usually a change that starts young, however.
It is hard to be socially isolated, and given the theory of rational ignorance, it is hardly surprising that those who live or work where liberals hold social dominance are tempted to get fuzzier and fuzzier around the edges.
BlackOrchid – the backstage theater guys, even the ones with MFA’s, tend more conservative. You might pick up a few more like-minded folks there.
Neo:
That’s right. The John Birch Society instructed me to vote for McGovern and for Jimmah. That JFK poster that hung on the door of my childhood bedroom was actually flashing subliminal “Vote for Nixon” messages. Or was that “Fallout is Good for You?”
I recently reestablished contact with some friends from my childhood, some of whom I hadn’t seen for decades. All were Obama supporters, which is no surprise, given the liberal Democratic milieu I grew up in. In all but one case, they informed me in one way or another of their support for Obama before I brought up politics. Just like the Xmas card I got in ’04 from a cousin who informed me how sad it was that Kerry lost. Perhaps the case could be made that I am a traitor to my class. I don’t spend a lot of time discussing politics in those situations. We are not going to convince the other, so why bother? Yellow dog is yellow dog, and they are definitely yellow dog liberals.
Re BlackOrchid’s comment that artists are not necessarily all that left wing: my artist cousin is married to another artist who has made a very good living free-lancing. My cousin- not the one who wrote the Xmas card- was for years the epitome of the “bleeding heart liberal.” If there was a cause, she signed up for it. These days, she is more open to other points of view. Some of this may be monetary: she notices that many of her husband’s best customers are Republicans. She accepts my evil-right-winger points of view on Latin America because, as she admits, my viewpoints are based on observation of facts on the ground and extensive research. She doesn’t get on the soapbox as much as she used to. Perhaps that comes from lesser energy from aging. Perhaps she is also seeing the contradiction between being an entrepreneur, paying humongous private school fees for offspring, and also being a socialist.
While I was never a Weatherman, I once supported SDS for its stance on Vietnam before it went ballistic. A year as a hippie dropout in Berserkeley showed me the self-righteous, dogmatic side of the far left. From that era: “Like, North Vietnam is a really great society. Like, every one gets a pound a day ration of rice.” Gee, ain’t life grand in the North of Vietnam. While I was on the left, that went too far for me. OTOH, here the Berkeley left got it right: calling then City Councilman Dellums “Ron Vote For Me Dellums.”
While I was on the left, two factors prevented me from ever going over to the loony left and endorsing Marxism-Leninism. First, an outstanding high school politics course convinced me that Marxism-Leninism was both immoral and incompetent, courtesy of 1) writing a book report on Solzhenitsyn’s A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch and 2) writing a term paper on Soviet agriculture.
The second factor was that I grew up with too many refugees from Hitler and from the Iron Curtain to have a sanguine view of what they fled. It wasn’t that the refugees said anything. On the contrary, they didn’t want to discuss it. It was rather their being here as mute witnesses. Hearing that someone didn’t want to discuss politics as a result of from having lived through as a child both the Nazi and the Red Army invasions of Estonia was sufficient reason for me. She was very reserved, albeit charming. Und such a lofly aksent.
Another anecdote from back in the day. An SDS honcho at the school I attended before I dropped out, told me that Lenin should be added to the university syllabus, accorded the same respect as Freud, Plato, or Newton. Not to mention Marx, of course. Even back then, that was too much for me. Why, I said to myself, should we devote much time to study the man who set the foundation for Stalin- except maybe as an illustration of poor thinking. That SDS honcho today has been elected to office. I doubt that SDS honcho ever became a Weatherman, though.
On a thread like this, we miss Fred.
huxley Says:
July 10th, 2009 at 8:35 pm
Huxley, if you want to actually sway someone, try a little tact. Attacking them with a +5 maul of insult really won’t sway anyone. If your intent is just to insult, cool, but thought you might want to know if you wanted a result instead of to vent.
Right To Left Shift-
The only person I can think of that is kinda sorta right-to-left switch would be Mr. Sullivan, but I’m kind of reluctant to say so– he’s more like right-to-raging dislike. I *KNOW* there’s more to the left than that, even though he does seem a lot more leftward-trending than before. His priorities shifted, desire over former philosophy. (Sucks, because I enjoyed reading him– same thing for Mr. Shea, really, but that’s another rant.)
Right to left conversion: bright soul from the provinces goes to university and adapts the “enlightened” view predominant in the university. Especially so when coming from a rural environment.
That is a right to left conversion that most have ignored, though AVI touched on it re those growing up in religious homes where politics was tied up too much with faith.
Implicitly my assertion above had the qualification “as an adult,” i.e., as someone whose opinion could potentially be worth considering.
Sure, kids go off to college and move to the left, but they’re scarcely even weaned, and indulge in Marxism in between trying out growing a beard and smoking a pipe. They’re simply auditioning for roles in the adult world, and their views at that age – in common with my own at the same age – are not worth considering.
As for Sullivan, whom I hold and have held in the deepest contempt, the explanation for his behavior lies somewhere between the oft-noted proclivities of queens to flamboyance and AIDS-related dementia. Note that the wedge issue for him was Bush’s refusal to endorse homosexual marriage, which apparently sent Sullivan over the edge. The left is welcome to him.
Foxfier: — “Attacking them with a +5 maul of insult really won’t sway anyone.”
LOL. I Can recognize a fellow AD&D player from a mile away.
Ooops. I’m not getting any chicks with this, am I?
Damn!!!???
Occam: “As for Sullivan, whom I hold and have held in the deepest contempt, the explanation for his behavior lies somewhere between the oft-noted proclivities of queens to flamboyance and AIDS-related dementia.”
Yup. I think that about sums him up, don’t it?
Many, many visual artists (mostly the men) are quite far away from being Left/Liberal.
I’ve found painters to be slightly less rabid in their Lefty political views. They seem to be more independent minded. In my experience the poets are the most Lefty. I have associated with both types. I have an idea that some in the arts may be secret un-Leftists, which is a term I just made up because I doubt many of the un-Leftists are what any conservative that posts here would call conservative. They are probably centrist or just Right of center in the political spectrum. But they might as well kiss their standing in the arts community goodbye if they speak up — or speak out.
James Dickey, a favorite poet of mine, was ostracized by poets and intellectuals because he was not against the Vietnam War. It ruined what had been a bright career full of accolade and sent him into a depression from which he never recovered.
James Jones never received the recognition that was his due. “From Here to Eternity” gets my vote as the best American novel ever written about military life. It could be the best American novel, period. See the movie if you haven’t already and then read the novel because the novel is even better. Jones was too patriotic; he loved America too much. The Left won’t stand for that sort of thing.
At first they respected Jones for the great artist he was but by the time of his second novel, “Some Came Running,” they had realized that he was definitely not one of them and the novel was panned. Not that Jones gave a damn. “From Here to Eternity” had already been a critical success and that couldn’t be taken away — not then and not in the future. But the Left was not near as strong in Jones’s heyday as it would become.
“The Naked and the Dead,” the novel usually praised as our best novel with a military theme, gets the nod from the intelligentsia because it portrays the military and America as sick entities. It fits in perfectly with two of their favorite memes. In reality Mailer was not half the novelist that Jones was but he had the goods that the Left wanted to buy.
Andrew Sullivan might qualify as someone who has moved from right to left.
I used to read Sullivan years ago, when the internet was relatively new. But he caught BDS early on and was worthless after that. I hear that he still calls himself a conservative. I also read that he’s gone off his nut with conspiratorial theories of several types — some of which involve our Sarah. All that cognitive dissonance and pretense, I guess.
MikeLL Says:
July 11th, 2009 at 1:23 am
I don’t know, seems to have worked fine with Elfie. (my husband)
Bonus, if you find a lady while being a geek, there’s a good chance that she’ll be a geek, too, and you can share that (sometimes expensive) hobby.
Gringo-
there are very few 18 year olds that have their own politics, worked out and all. Most of them basically “believe” what their parents believe, if they have to answer.
The ones that already have a political view, as opposed to the prior described sort, tend to keep that political view.
Hey! Thought of another possible conversion! Wasn’t Hillary Clinton some kind of a conservative in college? Goldwater Girl or something?
Domestically, I am a father first, a Virginian second, an American third. Internationally, I am an American. So there is my bias.
Politically, I suppose I am conservative, and I do vote party line republican – even though I realize that I too can benefit from the gimmes available to agreeing with a liberal mind set. But all the really good stuff is upstream.
I can’t remember whether I’ve said this before, but when I was very little I had a great Aunt who was “a little old lady in tennis sneakers”. She might have stepped out of central casting she was so perfect. I remember how excited she was when the Kennedy 50 cent (?) were issued. “There!”, she say, pointing to a little engravers mark on the coin, “Do you see it? …the hammer and sickle!” She was a loon of course, as were so many of the noisy right back then. The “respectable” right would have happily locked them all in a closet and thrown away the key.
So I think many of us have a hard time facing the possibility that this time the loons are on to something. We have plenty of testimony and warning from refugees from the left and survivors of communism. Still, they sound so feverish, so much like the Birchers & assorted crazies around during the Cold War years, that we’re still blocking our ears.
I’m pretty confident (if that’s the right word here) that coming events will make us all start listening.
Boy foxfier, can one be more than 180 degrees out?
Clinton was an Alinsky lover even way back then. She did here thesis on him. Look it up. Alinsky wanted her to follow in his footsteps, to continue his work.
Somehow, I think you already know that……..
oh, more funky stuff is flying through..
we just got licks at Ginsberg admitting that the abortion industry still fulfills its original purpose of race control.
now we have Obamas Science Czar having wrote a book which advocates planetary regime, which would require forced mass sterilizations and abortions.
These are the ideas of John Holdren, Obama’s newly appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, i.e., Science Czar. In a book he co-authored in 1977, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment, he wrote that:
– Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
– The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation’s drinking water or in food;
– Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise [which would seriously jack with Cloward-Piven];
– People who “contribute to social deterioration” (i.e. undesirables) “can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility” — in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
– A transnational “Planetary Regime” should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans’ lives — using an armed international police force.
what incredibly funny to me is that they think i am tin hat cause i report it.
but what are people doing about the people who actually write this stuff, believe it, persue it, get into high office of power to execute it, and when i mention this kind of stuff i am wacky?
[edited for length by neo-neocon]
Obama’s Climate of Fear
townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=2409dc7e-2e40-4093-822d-db2559f59da3&t=c
MikeL.: I don’t play D and D so I don’t know about its babe-attracting capabilities, but I can tell you that for some reason talking about your rotisserie league baseball team and demonstrating that you can quote pretty much all of “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” doesn’t seem to work, either.
Grackle: If you ask me, and I know you didn’t, Jones’s “The Thin Red Line” is a far superior book to “The Naked and the Dead” which, as you point out, satisfies critics’ biases and anyway is a very self-conscious and consciously literary work. I haven’t read everything, but based on what I have, “The Thin Red Line” and “Guard of Honor” are the two best American novels to come out of the war.
Neo talks about leftist feelings of betrayal when someone changes sides and I think this is an important part of the phenomenon. For leftists far more than conservatives politics is a form of psychodrama, an opportunity to demonstrate one’s virtue, good heart, and moral superiority. So when you change sides it is seen as a personal betrayal.
My own brother, highly intelligent, well-educated, and by no means a loony, when he found out I was voting for McCain asked me if it was because Obama was black–and he knew that I had been living in an almost entirely black neighborhood for nearly twenty years.
Here’s one small proof of my contention, and I’m serious about it. Think of all those cars you’ve seen with the entire rear of the car plastered with bumper stickers. Almost invariably these are progressive stickers.
It’s one thing to have a sticker to promote a candidate, show support for your favorite team, or that your child is an honor student at Ezra Taft Benson High School. For that matter, my “Save Tiger Stadium” sticker is still clinging to my bumper.
You don’t plaster a dozen stickers on your car to try to gain support for an issue or a candidate…no one is going to read them. You do it as a moving demonstration of what a good person you are.
Another reason for this leftist rage when someone changes his mind is because as I have learned, authoritarianism isn’t a leftist anomaly, it’s inherent in the idea; so to speak it’s not a bug, it’s a feature. But that’s another post.
Foxfier
br549
br549
Hillary Clinton was a Goldwater Girl in high school.She held her political views strongly enough to canvass the South Side of Chicago after the 1960 election- when 13. She was a campaign volunteer for Goldwater when she was a high school senior. She became a devotee of Alinksy at Wellesley
Foxfier, how much an 18 year old has simply adopted the political thoughts of the parents, or how much the 18 year old has devoted much thought to politics, is not readily ascertained. One’s opinions are one’s opinions. When an 18 year old converts from being a Methodist to a Roman Catholic, one does not determine how deeply the 18 year old had previously delved into the theology of the Methodist Church: a conversion is a conversion. Similarly so in politics.
Hillary Clinton would be a case of a right-to-left conversion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton
Gringo: Well, it may be somebody’s definition of conversion in politics, but I have explicitly exempted conversions (on either side) that occur when a person is still in the formative years—which usually last in our culture somewhere through a person’s mid-20s or so, or at the very least through the end of college.
During those years a person is engaged in forming his/her own identity separate from the identity (including the political identity) of the parents. There is normally quite a bit of flux at this time, and young people can wrestle with the question of the parents’ political identity by either adopting it (and then perhaps later rejecting it) or rejecting it (and perhaps later adopting it).
True political conversions, in my book, happen only after this period. If a person has established a fairly stable adult political identity and then changes, that’s a conversion.
“True political conversions, in my book, happen only after this period. If a person has established a fairly stable adult political identity and then changes, that’s a conversion.”
Neo, couldn’t agree more. True conversions happen later, and in my experience at least, almost imperceptibly over a good deal of time. I found myself in Wyoming for a decade for part of the year without a tv or daily newspapers. Somehow during this time there were a whole slew of new influences who and which planted seeds in my thinking that came to fruition as time went by. I look back and am amazed because my own conversion back to conservative principles was never anything that I intended.
“True political conversions, in my book, happen only after this period. If a person has established a fairly stable adult political identity and then changes, that’s a conversion.”
Neo, couldn’t agree more. True conversions happen later, and in my experience at least, almost imperceptibly over time. After many years in liberal politics and working for a liberal newspaper, I found myself in Wyoming for a decade for part of the year without a tv or daily newspapers. Somehow during this time there were a whole slew of new influences who and which planted seeds in my thinking that came to fruition as time went by. I look back and am amazed because my own conversion back to conservative principles was never anything that I intended.
Based on the healthcare issue, I’d say rightwingers like Neo believe not only that deadbeats don’t need affordable healthcare (which would at least be some justification of merit) , but a good percentage of working people of lower incomes shouldn’t have it either. Why? Because any true to principle winger congressperson who proposed anything serious would soon have his/her base saying it was going to cost them too much. Many of you here, likely. So, in effect, this is the kind of moral highground Neo has ascribed to.
What light has she seen? Surely she’s mistaken the light of the fires of Hell for truth.
And to pretend that ANY healthcare change is going to be cheapest without everyone pitching in, murders logic itself.
But, as always, you have the choice to keep things easy for yourself and let it all go. Those that can afford it will get good care, and those that can’t, get emergency services, until the hospital can dump them. But don’t pretend it’s the moral high ground or principled. That’s laughable.
br549- I know she became scary-left, which is why it would be reliant as a conversion. Googled around, and she was a “I believed it because that’s what my parents did” type Goldwater girl, by her own claim.
Gringo –
I know that I have a vastly different response to folks who left the Church as a teen because “we hate women, worship Mary and are forbidden from reading the Bible” than someone who actually knew what they left.
Shoot, more than half of my classmates in high school “converted” away from their parent’s religion– their new “faith” wasn’t any more solid than the old, and they wouldn’t actually defend it, it was to annoy their parents.
So, I figure if you believe something for the response of your parents, it counts a great deal less than a view you can defend on its own merits. (granted, a lot of folks “Defend” them with personal attacks, raving and really bad pop psychology to explain why you’re evil)
For most anything that matters, you have to actually *believe* in the thing that matters for the change to effect folks– see the folks trying to claim Neo wasn’t ever really a lib.
Logern –
Oh, grow up.
Disagreeing with taking money from person A to help person B doesn’t mean you disagree with helping person B, it means you don’t want to steal money from people.
Speaking of the left, so now they are starting to admit what many of us suspected the UN was about with the “global Warming” scare. http://www.climatedepot.com/a/1893/Gore-US-Climate-Bill-Will-Help-Bring-About-Global-Governance
“I’m not saying I reach that many people or change that many minds.”
Ah, Neo. if we only knew. I suspect way more than you’re aware. I know I’ve sent people with similar histories this way ,and I also suspect that the majority of folks here share “the change” in common.
Don’t you know that the world is upside down now and that the Leftist State is the status quo? Leftist ideology has been so entrenched in the rest of the world for so long, (and our own mainstream institutions), that free market, capitalist ideas are now revolutionary.
The Neo-right is the new underground, a breeding, testing ground of news and ideas of resistance to Statism!
Not to make you paranoid, but you’re a dangerous girl.
Logern,
Many people have a right to your house by your logic. Open the door and put a welcome sign.
Over the last 200 years health care has changed very dramatically.
With technology and regulation and lawsuits costs have changed dramatically, and for you to suggest that someone who makes $5 per hour should have the same coverage as somebody who bought into a premium insurance plan over the years is .. well… ridiculous.
It used to be that any health care insurance was purchased as catastrophic insurance. Doctor visits were paid out of pocket and poor people did what they could bartering and trading services and doctors gave health care service for free in many cases.
Now, times have changed. Insurance has morphed from mostly catastrophic to providing really platinum/gold/diamon coverage allowing people to pay $10 for a visit and picking up the tab of everything else.
People protest higher copays. People protest higher premiums. Yet people expect that their insurance pays for everything.
To be clear, there still are insurance plans that are cheaper and give less coverage but people gripe that their insurer didn’t pay for this or that when they have such plans.
Logern, get a grip on being an adult here.
The debate is not about poor people getting care. Hospitals HAVE to give care and their budgets are in the red in areas where there are lots of illegal immigrants or Medicare recipients.
The debate is about how much ‘coverage’ to give to people who fall into a few groups.
1) Are are between 19 and 29 and feel they don’t need the expense of insurance ( about 10 million)
2) illegal immigrants (about 10 million)
3) there are even a group of people who earn near $60K to $75K and don’t carry insurance because their small business they work for doesn’t offer it and they don’t pay for an individual plan.
Now here is the trickiest thing that the legacy media have a hard time reporting:
Why is it going to cost at least 1.3 trillion yet not cover all uninsured? There will STILL be a significant amount of uninsured.
Why is it we have to have a plan that costs sooo much and doesn’t solve the problem.
There are issues to be solved here:
1) Costs – high because of liberal policies and lawyers
2) Access – Not solved with Obama/Democrats plan.
So when you grow up Logern. You can address this post in it’s entirety without strawmen arguments.
Let me address each of Logern’s substantive points:
There. That didn’t take long.
Mommy, she has a lollipop and I don’t!
It’s about personal responsibility.
It’s better to teach a man to fish than give a man fish.
It’s born of love Logern that we think the way we think.
We want people to succeed.
If Obama/Democrats succeed in implementing this plan – more people will suffer.
That isn’t what we want.
Address the problems of tort reform for health care costs.
Address the problems of costs through personal responsibility (obesity, lack of exercise) rewarding good personal choices.
Address access for those who are non-able bodied, elderly or children with a limited plan that takes care of people’s health related issues by reimbursing hospitals/doctors who treat people who need care and can’t afford it.
Logern — “What light has she seen? Surely she’s mistaken the light of the fires of Hell for truth.”
That was funny. How come anyone who disagrees with a liberal is instantly labeled EVIL?
I have always been a “rightwinger.” I have never experienced the conversion you are all talking about. So, I guess I don’t understand the strange minds of “progressives.” I’m just a caveman.
By the way, it seems to me that “Progressive Liberalism” is an oxymoron.
When I was a kid I used to listen to Rock and Roll all the time. Dio, Metallica, Ratt, etc.
I remember watching shows on TV where little old conservative ladies would pronounce this music “Evil” and say that we were all going to go to hell. Apparently, if you play it backwards you can hear the devil. LOL. I never played it backwards so I don’t know the truth of that.
Anyway, is it just me or have the liberals in our society taken over the preaching of good vs. evil. Like in Logern’s comment above.
I remember reading an article not too long ago about global warming. The author said “You will drive your SUV to hell!!!”
Reminds me of those old ladies.
br549 Says:
“Politically, I suppose I am conservative, and I do vote party line republican – even though I realize that I too can benefit from the gimmes available to agreeing with a liberal mind set. ”
I’ve checked into it, there is still a lot more money to had by having a job than going on disablity and or other government programs. 🙂
When anyone who can tax you, spend your tax dollars, or affect your rights proposes new legislation, regulations or procedures that will benefit some group of people, and justifies this by using phrases like, “its a fairness issue,” “spread the wealth around,” “level the playing field,””it’s for the people,” “it’s for all those who have been excluded or neglected,” “it’s for the people in the shadows,” “its for the “downtrodden” or the poor,” “we owe it to them,” “it is for those least able to help themselves,” or, my favorite, “its for the children,” I recommend the folliwng procedure.
We should–after putting our hands firmly on our wallets, and after re-familiarizing ourselves with the Bill of Rights and the Constitution–ask them to very carefully, fully and specifically:
Identify just who these people are, where they are located–in the U.S. or in another country, and how many of them there are, specify if they are U.S. citizens or not and, if not, if they are here in our country legally or illegally, tell us what the specific justifications might be for giving them these benefits or why they might be entitled to these new benefits, tell us–in detail–what benefits they are planning to give them, giving us exact dollar amounts or credible estimates of how much these benefits will cost initially, and on a continuing basis in out years and, very specifically, tell us, in comprehensive detail, how giving these people these rights or benefits will effect us.
Alex Bensky Says:
“MikeL.: I don’t play D and D so I don’t know about its babe-attracting capabilities, but I can tell you that for some reason talking about your rotisserie league baseball team and demonstrating that you can quote pretty much all of “Monty Python and the Holy Grail” doesn’t seem to work, either.”
Depends… I hear there is this whole ‘larp’ scene… and some women are into it…
MikeLL,
Indeed, it should be “Regressive Liberalism”.
Regression to primitive tribalism.
Alex, interesting point about the stickers, being an old car enthusiast, once when leaving Coronado Island I saw an early 60s Porsche as it passed coming up from behind, slowed down to get a look as it passed and it looked very well restored, nice paint and chrome, as the guy drove past I saw the back plastered with “bush is Hitler” type stickers and I mean plastered! I thought “there’s a nut right there”
On topic, the military converts quite a few to the right, and remains an overall conservative organization. In the last few years that may have diminished with the constant deployments but those thinking things would be better under Obama will soon find out as I did in the 80s and 90s, Democrats loathe the military and have since Vietnam.
Right now it looks to me like they are trying to create another hollow force from what has happened to our budgets so far this year. We are told it is going to get worse.
Thomass,
OK. I googled it. LARP = Live Action Role Playing.
Sounds kinky. I’ll have to check into it.
Wolla Dalbo, all of the bleatings you cite (re, e.g. the “downtrodden,” “poor,” the “children”) are straight-up attempts to guilt people into following the leftist line, and make it hard to disagree on policy. (“How can you oppose this? It’s for the children!?)
For this reason, I think it is important to undercut the premise, namely, that citing any of these groups makes the proposal unassailable. To that end, when someone bleats, “It’s for the children!” I reply, “Eff ’em. What did they ever do for us?” and then proceed to address the policy consideration.
Besides providing a moment of comic relief at their reaction, it’s wondrous to behold their consternation. Their whole argument was premised on playing that as a trump card. Now it’s gone, and they have to either respond substantively re the policy argument or storm off in a huff. I’m good either way!
Alternatively, it’s fun to intentionally misunderstand their point and turn it around to another liberal talking point that contradicts the first one.
For example, in response to an “It’s for the children” argument for X, agree that that’s why we shouldn’t do X, because there are too many children, we’re overburdening Gaia as it is. Surely they agree that we must protect the environment, don’t they? Then we must oppose X – it’s for the environment!
The hardest part is keeping a straight face while they grapple with that dilemma.
Hey logern: before you wax eloquent on what you imagine I do or don’t believe about who should and shouldn’t get health care, why don’t you perform the amazing exercise of attempting to find out? It’s called “research,” and it’s really not all that difficult to do. I have a search function right on this blog which could help.
And if you’d like a little more help than that, try reading this, where I say [emphasis mine]:
In the US, we don’t lack for proposals to solve our health care system’s problems, but my guess is that all of them are flawed because they all involve difficult choices about allocating resources. I think most people would agree (although not the most extreme Social Darwinists) that we need to have some sort of bottom line health care for everyone, although we don’t agree on how to provide it, how much is enough, or at what point it would kick in (at death’s door, or preventatively, or somewhere in between?). The answers to these questions depend on the answers to the larger questions: how far are we willing to go towards health care equality, and how low will our standards of general health care have to dive in order to attain it (and isn’t it the case that the rich will always find a way to get better care under any such system—and, might that not even be a good thing in some ways, since it provides motivation and energy for work and achievement )?
/putting the Logern liberal cap on
Neo, you just don’t care about the little guy. It’s unfair that Warren Buffet can have his hip, elbow, heart and lungs replaced but the poor man picking lettuce for you and me can’t even go in when he has a cold to make sure he doesn’t have bronchitis.
How would you like it if you were poor and destitute and making minimum wage and couldn’t even get your teeth cleaned.
My neighbor makes 6 figures and he gets his teeth cleaned and whitened, liposuction and his wife gets breast implants.
It’s just not fair!
/taking the Logern liberal thinking cap off
Whoa my head hurts… 🙂
Huxley, if you want to actually sway someone, try a little tact.
Foxfier: I have tried tact with Artfldgr, as have others. I’m not the only person here who has expressed annoyance with his lengthy, rambling, multiple-posting, hundreds-of-lines-at-a-time, self-indulgent style. He is chastened for a while, then returns to his usual blathering.
For some time I have been ignoring his posts but now he is defending his style as some kind of unavoidable virtue on his part.
I also am not comfortable with the possibility that he is mentally ill. My mother and cousin went crazy and it wasn’t pleasant watching them unravel. They could be interesting, amusing and even persuasive, but they were truly sick and came to bad ends.
So far we know that Artfldgr claims to sleep only four hours a night, possess a remarkable eidetic memory and logical ability to construct arguments allowing his opponents no wriggle room, writes in his rambling free-associational often paranoid manner lest he unleash his terrible power of logic, and is forced to post on the blogs of others because some “they” is out there who would take action if he set up his own blog.
I’m no professional but that sounds not only immodest but nutty. It seems increasingly likely to me that Artfldgr doesn’t have as much control over his thinking and writing as most commenters on this blog.
Or perhaps he is just a narcissist in love with his own words and has colorful ways of justifying himself, who assumes that the rest of us are similarly entranced and have nothing better to do than wade through his stream-of-consciousness mush.
If the former, I do hope he is getting help — for his insomnia if nothing else. I went through a patch where I was sleeping less than four hours a night for six months and I was pretty wrecked by it.
If the latter, I wish he’d be more considerate and realize that writing is more than relieving internal pressure and a desire for attention.
huxley – is this blog your assignment? How much are you getting paid?
You don’t have to read his posts; you say you don’t, but then know everything he has stated. Instead of disagreeing with what he says, which is a good thing, and a great reason for coming here, and part of the structure of the blog as I see it, you attack him personally. Not that he needs defense from or by anyone else in here, he sure can eat my lunch on an intellectual basis – as well as yours.
Thomass – you are correct. But, you have to be willing work to pull that off. It is easier to settle for less, if you don’t have to do anything for it. A lot of people do that. That’s why I hate to see the minimum wage keep rising. The gubmit even has direct deposit all set up for you, even vehicles and drivers to take you to the grocery store if you know how to ask right. I was being a mean spirited right wing type.
Also, as far as radio beacon ankle bracelets for criminals, most of us already have one. It’s called a cell phone. Your cell phone is constantly broadcasting who it belongs to and where it is. How do you think you can receive a call no matter where you are? Now it can’t pin point where you are exactly (if you have an older phone), but you can be traced to within a triangulated area (50 square miles?) between a couple cell towers, with your phone itself being the third point. Now the newer cell phones have built in GPS. So you can now be traced to within a few feet, unless your phone is off. Even then, some phones actually need to have the battery removed to make them quit working in GPS mode. It is a good thing if you get lost in the woods while hiking I suppose.
Huxley-
if it bothers you, don’t read his posts!
If I find myself getting annoyed with his style, I just scan and move on– there’s usually good stuff there, but I don’t always need to work it out.
Frankly, I think you just wanted an excuse to be rude, and now you’re pissy because several folks pointed out you were rude.
Huxley – I’m with you. I appreciate your concern about Artfldgr’s mental health and you put your finger exactly on his blog behavior and weak justifications. Perhaps only Neo herself could have done a better job. It’s obviously her call as to what to do, if anything. I can’t and won’t speak for her of course, but if I were in her shoes my reasoning would be that he doesn’t really harm anyone, he hasn’t quite crossed a line, and anyway, if his way of blogging helps him in blow some steam, then that might be a good thing in a small way. Note that she has reined him in on occasion, but he’s back to his old ways in a few days as you point out. As for me, I’ve long since stopped reading Artfldgr. I’ll venture that most regulars in here don’t read him either. My guess is that they know he could say what he wants to say in a single paragraph of decently tuned writing most of the time. Don’t ask for evidence because I can’t remember exactly who and when has complained about Artfldgr over the past year or so, but I know Fredhjr was in that group, that group of thoughtful ones, and he wasn’t nearly as kind about it as you have been. Skip over Artfldgr.
I rarely agree with Artfldgr but I like to browse a variety of opinion. In the past I’ve thought of him as too conspiratorial minded but here lately with the Obama power grabs I’m reassessing. He usually has his facts in order — it’s his interpretation with which I generally find fault. The John Holdren material was interesting — a bit disturbing, really.
I’m one that doesn’t mind some long comments, although if the Dodger reads this I hope he does not think I’m advocating that he redouble his efforts. If I get tired of reading I find it easy to skip to the next comment. Tolerance. It’s a quality worth cultivating.
I’m not sure I represent a true conversion. For starters, I don’t seem to easily fit on the political spectrum. I don’t see my own conversion as one toward the Right. I was never Left. I viewed politics as boring. I was apolitical and then gradually realized that I had better pay attention. A lot of things influenced me.
The aftermath of the Vietnam War, after we had abandoned the South Vietnamese, was disturbing. I came to realize that the intelligentsia was pathological and intent on rationalizing their deep-seated hatred of the USA, the loathing being simply the manifestation of their own sickness and unwarranted anxiety.
I don’t like to be manipulated. I don’t like folks that want to boss everyone around and make everyone behave in a certain way when there is no need except to satisfy their own sense of order or decorum. I see this tendency in the extremes of both the Left and the Right.
I wonder if we need another Presidential candidate who, like Reagan, changed from being a liberal to a conservative. If you need a former Leftist to understand your enemy than there’s no one on the playing field who qualifies. Mccain, God bless him, did his best but was outmatched probably because he didn’t really understand his opponent and how he thought. Who’s a former Leftist whose now a conservative Republican politician? I can’t think of a one.
By the way, it seems to me that “Progressive Liberalism” is an oxymoron.
Couldn’t agree more. When I think of something that’s Progressive I imagine arthritis and scoliosis. Both ‘progress’ in a negative, painful way that distorts and deforms the body. Liberalism is the arthritis of the mind and soul. Obamanomics will do the same to our economy.
huxley, I appreciate your concern about artfldgr, but this is properly Neo’s role.
artfldgr has better times and worse times. He does best when he takes the time to capitalize and punctuate before posting. Artfldgr, you have more impact when you take your time.
I’m one that doesn’t mind some long comments, although if the Dodger reads this I hope he does not think I’m advocating that he redouble his efforts
no no no no no no no grackle..
i want to write better… and sometimes writing here has given me the chaince to learn.. (especially when neo cuts somethign down… ).
i have met very few people who can keep up with me, and even fewer that can do that accross domains. thats just how it is.. i cant help it.
there is no real way to come at these things and know what level to come at them. so i usually write for the ignorant… the lowest denominator… so the more edumacated dont like it… and if i write for them, well the ignorant are even nastier cause thyen i am arrogant.
when your smart you cant win no matter what you do. you are the tall poppy, or the bent nail, and your going to get it if you participate.
oblio…
i am not really going for impact, just discussing the facts and such. most of the time if your careful you will note that i am not taking much of a side in things. and you cant necessarily figure out what side i am on by what i post.
i adapt easily to things, so which side people take usually matters little to me… even now, with this all happening. as long as i dont get marched off someplace, i will do well… my issue is having others do well as well.
i guess from time to time someone will get annoyed and think that they are representatvie of the masses, and they will pop up again like huxley and they will say similar (happens all the time. but they all think it doesnt).
if you read the posts, what it was was a social power play… and not what it seemed to be over. the idea is that they may gain power by getting otehrs to side with them when they find some common ill to commiserate over.
its the us against him…. he tried to be the leader of us, and found out no one was standing behind him that he respected…
like napoleon leaving elba, and nothing happens.
happens all the time. but they all think it doesnt
forgot to mention. i am a red head… you would think that clever people would realize that the red head has heard all their jokes… jibes, and things.
i also have a big nose… same thing.
its why the response they get is never waht the expected. since they think they are so clever..
You may go or, tell me why are you staring at my nose! Stepping up to him Does it astonish you? Your grace misunderstands my- Is it long and soft And dangling like a trunk? I never said __ Or crooked, like an owls beak? A pimple ornaments the end of it? Or a fly parading up and down? What is this portent?
and on intelligence, my nose, and my hair, i often feel exactly the same way…
Smallmy nose? Why
Magnificent,
My nose! You pug, you knob, you button-head,
Know that I glory in this nose of mine,
For a great nose indicate a great man
Genial, courteous, intellectual,
Virile, courageous as I am and such
As you poor wretch will never dare to be
Even in imagination. For that face
That blank, inglorious concavity
Which my right hand finds
on top of you
Is as devoid of pride, of poetry,
Of soul, of picturesqueness, of contour,
Of character of NOSE in short as that
takes Meddler by the shoulders and turns him around, suiting action to words
Which at the end of that limp spine of yours
My left foot
[heck it was so true there is a japanese samurai version. heh hehe]
It’s obviously neo’s call as to what to do, if anything.
JohnC, Oblio — True enough. I do understand that I’m just a guest at this particular dinner table.
However, assuming that Artfldgr is not mentally ill, then he is a rude guest with such an inflated opinion of himself that he feels no compunction about talking far longer than anyone else.
And, for the most part, he does not converse, but simply dumps big chunks of whatever he knows or remembers or associates or imagines about the subject at hand.
When 25-50% of a comment thread is Artfldgr blather it is hard to follow the flow of conversation. That’s primarily what I object to.
So I’m content to ignore his posts, if he keeps them down to the polite size and frequency that the rest of us somehow manage to live with.
“All the other large and small nationalities and peoples are destined to perish before long in the revolutionary world storm… these residual fragments of peoples always become fanatical standard-bearers of counter-revolution and remain so until their complete extirpation or loss of their national character… [A general war will] wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names. The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.” — Friedrich Engels, “The Magyar Struggle,” Neue Rhenische Zeitung, January 13, 1849
then he is a rude guest with such an inflated opinion of himself that he feels no compunction about talking far longer than anyone else.
and are you the host? then if not, who is ruder?
the host has me here, she allows me to post, when they are too long, she edits them.
so what is you f n problem?
[edited by neo-neocon]
the revolutionary world storm = holocaust