2005-06-08 06:46:52 PM cryptozoophiliac

Shhhh, you're not allowed to point that out, even when being sarcastic.

Didn't you see nerfball admonish me for it already? ;)

cryptozoophiliac:

Anyone find this statement ironic in the current neo-con climate?

no. we find it tiring that some people have to continuously revert to partisan political bullshiat in EVERY FARKING THREAD!

give it a rest. we know you hate our president. we don't care.

machinerevvingtension

Blindman:
Anyway the whole notion of 'progress' in society is kind of a ridiculous one when applied to human society.

Ultimate Warrior, is that you?

/ you owe me a new blah blah blah
// oh wait. you were serious.
/// Can one of you please explain what's with all the "commie" bashing. I mean, honestly. It's so 1985.

I'm wasn't bashing anything, merely pointing out that the fallacy implicit in the notion of 'social progress'. Technological progress, sure, because you can invent new and better things... but people are people and until you can change them you're bound to the same old systems that human beings have been able to concieve up to now.

If you want to talk about communism, that's fine. The belief in utopian ideas that engendered communist revolutions resulted in mass murder and suffering on an absolutely unprecedented scale. That was possible because people were ready to believe that human nature was subject to change, and that FUNDAMENTAL social 'progress' was therefore possible.

Hey, Local...

Look, if you want to argue the theory behind the evil, and rank it based on it's merrits, go right ahead. BUT if you look at the efect of the evil, I would say that communism is far greater, having occured all across the world, for the last 100 years, and racking up a body count of 80 million or more. VS. the relitively short, brutal and isolated nazi crap.

roughmarble
Is Drew a neo-con? say it aint so.

Before anyone does the whole "Drew says they balance the site - he said it in an interview" nonsense again, let me just confirm it. Yes. The picture is a start. Now go back to thinking about all the article ranting about "political correctness." Think about when the last time you saw a links as inflammatory on the left as "McCarthy was right" and "Orson Scott Card nails it."

When you boil it down, the fundamental political center of Fark is the quickly-becoming-overused term of "South Park conservative." There's no real rationale or binding ideology that holds it together. It's beer, boobies, and bombing the brown (and pretending like it's not their fault when the guy they voted for starts interfering with the boobies part of the arrangement.) "OMGWTF THEY'RE INTERFERING IN MY LIFE AND DIRECTLY AFFECTING ME BUT AT LEAST HE'S NOT KERRY - KERRY LOOKS FRENCH LOL"

MtLebanon: I like em' medium rare. And Republican.

/fires up Hibatchi.

give it a rest. we know you hate our president. we don't care.

Not caring is the problem

....(2) its central function was to further the interests and policies of a foreign country and great power--namely the Soviet Union;...

Hollywood controlled by the USSR? Bullshiit. Everyone knows that hollywood is controlled by the jews. :P

...it operated, as did all Communist Parties around the world, on the Soviet Unions own totalitarian model, where all independent thought was forbidden in the name of revolutionary discipline.

Forgive my laughter, but I would hardly consider the extreme right-wing as a model of tolerance. What a tard. As far a totalitarianism, everyone knows that Dumbya's adminstration is a model for open and transparent government.... not.

Major Thomb

Yea, he kind of reminds me of Howard "Velociraptor" Dean. Create an enemy based on stereotypes and try to grab power using it.

Howard Dean made some unbelievably foolish comments this week, but I don't think he's in the same league as a McCarthy.

Major Thomb

That's because no major communist country has ever been busted open for all the world to see what was happening. The Soviet empire collapsed internally and was able to keep its atrocities under wraps. Stalin was far worse than Hitler and came a whole lot closer to world domination.

Looking back with what we know now, I think Hitler was the bigger threat and came closer to total or partial world domination. In addition to keeping all of their atrocities under wraps, the Soviets did quite well at keeping anyone from finding out how much of an unstable mess their country had been since the beginning. They put on a good show and from the information we had at the time, we were justified in being afraid of them but in retrospect it appears that the Soviet Union was something of a paper tiger.

uselessgit
I have never understood why communism gets a pass, when it's killed 80 million people, yet liberals would be the first to scream about the evils of nazism. They only killed, what...18, 20 million people? Communism still kills people today, and is still somewhat of a threat (if in Asia at least). It's amazing to me that the liberals just write it off.

I think many Americans (not just liberals) are more comfortable dealing with and thinking about issues of class rather than issues of race.

As an idea, communism framed all of human history in terms of class and aimed to eliminate class distinctions. Even though the Soviet Union slaughtered millions putting these ideas into practice, Americans always sort of saw it as the lesser of two evils when compared with nazism (with which many equate fascism), which slaughtered millions putting its race-based philosophies into practice. I think this is one of the reasons Americans were more comfortable with the idea of supporting Stalin and the USSR during WWII, despite the fact that he was as aggressive and offensive as Hitler at the outset of the war.

I agree that it's unfortunate that many people (including SOME liberals) seem to see communism as a viable system, or at least have sympathies for those communist nations still left in the world. but for some reason, I think most americans (not just your liberals) have always seen nazism as more "evil" than communism.

2005-06-08 05:56:59 PM No Such Agency

Michelle Malkin is a clueless tool. If the people she supports had had free reign in US history, she'd be pressing shirts, not enjoying the beer and skittles as a Washington pundit.

Now, McCarthy, while he may very well have been correct that there were Communists all over America, did staggering damage to American democracy and freedom. The only person I can think of who did more to undermine America from an official position was Hoover (though I'm sure there are many worse who we never knew).

NSA, I was about to nominate you for pResident until I read the second part of your post. I think you forgot about Reagan/Reagan/Bush/BushII

/damn communiss
//writing this from camp x-ray
///currently being urinated on (along with my holy book)

L.Darte

...it operated, as did all Communist Parties around the world, on the Soviet Unions own totalitarian model, where all independent thought was forbidden in the name of revolutionary discipline.

Forgive my laughter, but I would hardly consider the extreme right-wing as a model of tolerance. What a tard. As far a totalitarianism, everyone knows that Dumbya's adminstration is a model for open and transparent government.... not.

If you really think, REALLY think (and I'm not talking inflated Amnesty International style silly rhetoric) that there is an analogy to be made between soviet totalitarianism and anything that has happened in the United States - ever.

You really need to open a book or two.

43

You be responsible for the deaths of 80 million AND nuclear proliferation AND then tell me something about being a paper tiger. Even so, they were were a tiger with teeth. I would not laugh off the threat that the USSR presented when it was at it's peak.

Un-American Activities! I always thought that was creepy BS buzzword for anyone who did not agree with the establishment/administration.
So what McCarthy was right, but what he did was wrong.
It is NOT Un-American to disagree with the political regime. It is not Un-American to be disillusioned with the government. So they were in a Communist party, who cares. I don't agree with the Communist ideolagy but there was no need to act like chairman Mao over it. I see the same crap erupting again, look at Sen Frist, look at the Patriot Act.

suebhoney:

Not caring is the problem

no its not. its a sign that some of us are tired of people who are the rhetorical equivilents of broken records. we know you hate the president. we heard you all through the past year and a half. we know you think that he is personally responsible for every problem on earth. we get your point. give it a rest.

you people are the equivilent of hemorrhoids in farkistan. every subject has to be a discussion of how much you hate the president and the fact that american is going through a phase of conservatism. well...every discussion doesn't.

Paranoia_Agent, as a registered Democrat (since 1974), I need to know how you can tell them babies are Republican. It would help come election time. Thanks.

haplo53

I agree that it's unfortunate that many people (including SOME liberals) seem to see communism as a viable system, or at least have sympathies for those communist nations still left in the world. but for some reason, I think most americans (not just your liberals) have always seen nazism as more "evil" than communism.

I'd suggest this is because nazism has never been much more or less than the blank and absolute veneration of the (Beyond Good and Evil style) will to power whereas communism is based on a lot of moral philosophy that suggests it is about helping people.

In practice they result in more or less the same thing (people are always more willing to be oppressed than to be truly generous), although nazism is more honest about it and therefore, in some sense... less insidious.

BlindMan

Progressive is a totally useless and loaded term. Who are progressives, oh people in favor of PROGRESS... who's against progress? No one! Only evil cavemen, probably.

No worse than most of the labels people self-apply nowadays. Everyone does it, and its all bullshiat. Though personally, I think more of the misleading labels and slogans come from the right these days.

"Pro-life" really means anti-abortion.
"Pro-family" really means anti-gay people.
"In favor of school choice" usually means "wants to give tax dollars to religious schools"
"Support our troops" is usually code for "support our war/president"
etc.

Caption is correct.
Stupid label is inaccuate.
McCarthy was not involved with HUAC. He was hamfisted, but he was right.
It's old, OLD news that there was secret, malicious involvement by the CCCP in American popular and governmental affairs.

Do you out there who believe otherwise also believe Walter Duranty was an objective journalist, with no ulterior motive?

2005-06-08 06:57:27 PM nerfball

Please point out the words "hate our President" in MY posts.

YOU said it, not I.

And pointing out the fact that our current admin. has similiarities to what was orginally commented on, well, the truth hurts. You get over it.

suebhoney:

And pointing out the fact that our current admin. has similiarities to what was orginally commented on, well, the truth hurts. You get over it.

as i said, you must be a lot of fun at parties.

haplo53, maybe at that time most Americans did not know how dangerous Communism was (is). The US was allied with the USSR to defeat the Nazis, but after the war was over, I think most Americans realized the threat the Communists posed.

"Pro-life" really means anti-abortion.
"Pro-family" really means anti-gay people.
"In favor of school choice" usually means "wants to give tax dollars to religious schools"
"Support our troops" is usually code for "support our war/president"
etc.


Thank you ,Doc I completely agree.
The ultru-right and their little code words like corporate buzzwords.

Interesting bit from the shirt site, by the way (pops)

http://www.space.com/news/spacehistory/nuke_moon_000514.html - THEY ACTUALLY PLANNED TO DO IT.
http://www.planetfusion.co.uk/~pignut/nukemoon.html

Yeah. This sounds like a totally rational ideology that I want to get behind.

nerfball: Who the hell discusses this crap at parties? If you do, trust me, you're the one bringing the party down.

I prefer to have fun :D

/enjoy your beer

McCarthy was a drunken paranoid asshat, and the whole notion of redeeming him in the name of conservativism gives their politics a black eye.

The Soviets did pour money into various communist organizations in the US, and the extreme "liberal" side did take up the cause in the 1950s (and earlier). Unfortunately, they were mostly already millionaire Hollywood types who weren't about to give up their own money, and everyone else was doing well enough (at the time) under capitalism to make the threat fairly innocuous. In my opinion.

I lived in Czechoslovakia immediately after the fall of communism. I have to say, with no conservative or rightwing bias, that that was probably the stupidest economic setup ever devised. Generally, it was a system that seemed to have been created by a bunch of well-meaning college kids, then promptly taken over by the alpha-male types to enrich themselves and then just degenerated into a system where no one could get ahead outside of corruption, or buy what they needed, thanks to total lack of supply/demand principles, or envision a life bigger than the state envisioned for you. In Czechoslovakia, the government used to subsidize meat, so anyone could buy beef or pork for nearly nothing, in order to skew the statistics and show that they had a higher standard of living, foodwise. Oh, and free healthcare for everyone (granted, you could become a doctor in about 6 years and they were 20 years behind in medical technology). Cuba, anyone?

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

/Doesn't make McCarthy right.

BlindMan

If you really think, REALLY think (and I'm not talking inflated Amnesty International style silly rhetoric) that there is an analogy to be made between soviet totalitarianism and anything that has happened in the United States - ever.

You really need to open a book or two.

So it's not a sign that a government is veering toward totalitarianism when a single federal agency has the power to abduct you, hold you indefinitely (without charging you with a crime), disallow you the use of the justice system, disallow your family from ever learning your fate...

You really need to open a bill or two, and examine what the hell you've been promoting.

suebhoney:

Who the hell discusses this crap at parties? If you do, trust me, you're the one bringing the party down.


it was a joke. i was being sarcastic. (why am i not surprised this evaded you?)

Bill Wick's FriendI'm pretty sure that anything you are attributing to McCarthy was really being said by Edgar Bergen.

An interesting theory. You mean it's like the way George Bush's voice changes whenever Cheney drinks a glass of water?

haplo...

They would be wrong.

America had no real idea of the depth of the evils of communism up to and durring WW2. Some of our leaders did, but this was still a time when the idea of concentration camps and the "Final Solution" was about as real to Americans as Flash Gordon and Superman were. We had no ide, and more the point, we had holywood types go over to the USSR in the 30's and come back and tell us about what kind of workers paradise it was. Mind you, the truth was hidden from them too.

No, I think that communism gets a pass from our liberals today because they borrow so much from it to justify socialism. If you found liberals to be racists and ant-jew, you would probably find them OK with borrowing from Uncle Adolph. Communism, is attractive to those soft headed types that like to use theory and crap, where as nazism appealed to those who like direct force and action. BOTH take advantage of idiotic elite thinking that use "science" as a justification for their actions.

\Grandpa was a nazi. I got a first hand education about it.
\\NOT a nazi.

inkdrinker

step away from the keyboard, get some fresh air.

Major Thomb: Oh, wait, it's a fake

Oh, well, if YOU say so it must be true. Thanks for that.

2005-06-08 07:04:09 PM nerfball

What say we go to the sarcasm store together? I'll treat us both to new meters :D

McCarthy and JE Hoover were both paranoid and closeted gays. Repression leads to really awful things. It is amazing, though, that McCarthy could weild such influence given his wackiness.

Today the fringe right seems to be doing similarly scary things. One problem is that leftists love disagreeing with eachother and, therefore, cannot unite such as the right has done.

I have hope that equilibrium will happen sometime soon. The only problem is that education has become so abysmal that, sadly, most americans blindly believe what they are told, thus reinforcing the groupthink that is so anathema to liberals and other freethinkers, such as libertarians.

I read an article in the Atlantic Monthly that predicted that Libertarians may well be the driving force in pushing out the extreme right.

I feel tinges of fascism on the fore. As a Jew, I am very sensitive concerning into what this could evolve.

I don't agree with the Libertarian platform, mostly because I don't have a huge amount of faith in the judgement of the average citize; however, I would vote for a libertarian candidate, should I ever get the chance.

I used to wear a tin hat concerning these things, but then I read a lot about the roman republic/empire, and other historical cultures. Worse has happend and worse will. In the end, who knows what is right? A zen approach is helpful regarding these issues.

you people are the equivilent of hemorrhoids in farkistan. every subject has to be a discussion of how much you hate the president and the fact that american is going through a phase of conservatism. well...every discussion doesn't.

Please shut-up

AttackBeta
No.

Doc Daneeka

BlindMan

Progressive is a totally useless and loaded term. Who are progressives, oh people in favor of PROGRESS... who's against progress? No one! Only evil cavemen, probably.

No worse than most of the labels people self-apply nowadays. Everyone does it, and its all bullshiat. Though personally, I think more of the misleading labels and slogans come from the right these days.

"Pro-life" really means anti-abortion.
"Pro-family" really means anti-gay people.
"In favor of school choice" usually means "wants to give tax dollars to religious schools"
"Support our troops" is usually code for "support our war/president"
etc.

Oh you're right, those words are euphamisms. Everyone uses those, though.

Pro-Choice = Pro Abortion
Homophobia = Disapproving of homosexuality for ANY reason

Blood for Oil, Tolerance... blah blah blah.

Those are going to be used by both sides of any debate forever. I personally make an effort not to use them regardless of my position though.

Is it Whore-o-witz?

Or Horror-witz?

The man's a complete nattering nabob.

So's his dumb-fark magazine.

DMammoth, thanks for bringing knowledge to the table.

inkdrinker: No.


*snicker*

You sure told me, big guy.

what's the frequency Kenneth

I'd really like to believe that libertarians can do it. But I'm pretty skeptical. I think back to something that happened here in CO where a Republican county clerk was shown to have had an affair with a coworker and promoted her and spent nights at fancy motels with her on county dime. Total cost was around $100k a year. This story broke a week or two before the election.

Election rolls around. He wins by a landslide because the competitor is libertarian. People are too married to that letter by the name of their candidates.

(epilogue: eventually the local party decided to clean up their act and got him recalled AGAIN ON COUNTY DIME basically costing the county half a million dollars between recall, legal fees, and money lost to this embezzling crook, all because voters here are retarded.)

Serious question: Is there anything less appealing than a bottle-blonde skank who votes for Puritans?

Who should know more about front groups than those whores at CSPC?

America IS going through a phase of conservatism, and eventually as things do, it will swing back around to a liberal point of view. I say liberal not to be confused with leftist. Two very different terms no matter how hard the right tries to merge them together to make the liberals look like evil communists. Sound familiar?
Swing pendelum, swing

I love all you farkwards who associate McCarthy with the HOUSE Un-American activities committee. McCarthy was a SENATOR you idiots.

AttackBeta
Sure did. Care to post something relevant? Or are you trying to unload a little more smugness so you'll have room for an opinion?

LincolnLogolas

BlindMan

If you really think, REALLY think (and I'm not talking inflated Amnesty International style silly rhetoric) that there is an analogy to be made between soviet totalitarianism and anything that has happened in the United States - ever.

You really need to open a book or two.

So it's not a sign that a government is veering toward totalitarianism when a single federal agency has the power to abduct you, hold you indefinitely (without charging you with a crime), disallow you the use of the justice system, disallow your family from ever learning your fate...

You really need to open a bill or two, and examine what the hell you've been promoting.

I'm promoting perspective and a reduction in inflammatory and factually dishonest rhetoric. I've promoted any political party 0.0% of my adult life.

You can cite twenty examples of how such and such might seem kinda mean and unfair. I can too, for that matter (about things you would think are peachy keen)...

But portraying that as being one step from a totalitarian mass murdering state is simply, nuts. I know you hate bush, I know you hate republicans, great. Show me an influential political figure representing either that suggests the mass rounding up and reeducation of citizenry with violent death to anyone who opposes such. That was the open rallying cry for communism, not some tinfoil hat conspiracy theory.

Alarmism can be fun, heaven knows it's more exciting than dry discussion about why exactly a certain law might be good or bad. But when you see every decision you don't like as next stop 1984, you're substituting sensationalism for rationality. If that's what we're going for let's just leave off politics all together get the weekly world news in here and see what Bat Boy is up to lately.