A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT Is anyone really surprised?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old January 26th 08, 06:54 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,092
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

On Jan 25, 1:10*pm, SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
On Jan 25, 12:47 am, "
wrote:

On Jan 25, 12:47 am, Ryan Cousineau wrote:


Let's just say that the totalitarian impulse can be summed up by the
phrase, "it takes a village to raise a child."


Oh come on. *Fascism was a basically nationalist
movement. *That's not "it takes a village."


He's talking about the background to the statement -- that is the
obfuscation. *It sounds good on the surface, of course, but is total
weasel language. *It is structured so that anyone who objects "hates
children." *I can't believe you swallow this retarded crap. *You are
focusing on a bunch of irrelevent superficial and peripheral crap so
you don't have to face reality. *This again is the birth-room of Ben
Franklin.


No, come on. When one says "the totalitarian impulse
can be summed up by ...'it takes a village'," the implication
is that totalitarianism can be directly deduced from "It
takes a village" without any other ideas. The only thing
lacking is presumably the army necessary to impose it.
This, I think, is silly. It's like saying that everyone who
insists on the importance of individual rights is
necessarily an anarchist.


"Don't be a dumbass, dumbass." -- BF, 1759

If you didn't learn it by middle-school, your first week of poli-sci
class should have taught you that once the descent is made to
authoritarianism, the path and language don't distinguish the result
-- that is the point being made.

Fascism, communism, and socialism all result in the same basic statist
structu rulers and the ruled. *Like Read pointed out, the
differences are merely incidental details.

You are a statist.


There are different degrees of statism. Life under Stalin
was different from life in Britain pre-Thatcher and both
are different from life in Sweden. Just as there are
different degrees of libertarianism. Hillary and I are
both commies, but we have different ideas about where
the balance between responsibilities of guvmint and
rights of the individual should be drawn. I think it's worth
preserving the distinction between guvmints that rule
you more than you like, and actual fascism or socialism.
IOW, I grew out of calling people fascists around the
age of 22. Except for Pat Buchanan, maybe.

Ben

Ads
  #242  
Old January 26th 08, 09:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article ,
Bill C wrote:

On Jan 25, 2:23*am, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article
,
*Bill C wrote:
On Jan 24, 2:06*am, Howard Kveck wrote:


* *People here had seen how bad the white led governments of Rhodesia were and were
supportive of the black's drive to get out from under that oppressive rule. Does
that seem like a bad cause to be in favor of? I don't think so. As I said below,
Mugabe didn't really come to the fore until almost the end of Smith's rule. So I
don't remember any rallies that were outright and directly supportive of Mugabe.
I was around then - in college, in SF and Berkeley around political people. I
don't recall Mugabe's name being used then, Bill.


I distinctly do recall his name being used as an icon of the People
here. Those People were being supplied their weapons by the Soviet
Union and assisted by Cuban troops and advisors on the ground. It was
pretty obvious what was in store for the Country after they took
power.
The regime WAS oppressive, no debating that.


Again, when they first took over, it was a very different situation - they weren't
doing the crazy **** that they're now known for, at least not openly. It didn't take
long to change.


They also, inclusive of the native population had the lowest infant mortality,
highest literacy rate, highest gdp, longest life expectancy, and fed the rest
of sub-saharan Africa.
How's that worked out?


Obviously badly. But I sure haven't denied that.

*Yep. They sure as hell weren't going to give a lot of coverage to a
marxist HERO doing what they almost all inevitably do after the
support for him as a "freedom fighter" had been so strong..


* Bill, please. Media has a short attention span, particularly on issues like this.
They move on. It really isn't because the media is (or was) all happy because a
Marxist was gaining power. "The Liberal Media" is a myth.


Howard that's your opinion. I think it's totally wrong, but it depends
on your position as an observer what you consider "liberal". I'd say
that you are far enough out that way that what most people would
consider either moderate, or slightly liberal you see as right wing.
There've been numerous examples of this.


You're trying an Overton Window maneuver here, Bill. Just because you've said I'm
so far out doesn't make it true.

*We're gonna agree to disagree. Neither of us can demonstrate the level of
coverage and support where we were back then, at least reasonably easily.


* *I was thinking about this earlier today and that's exactly what I realized. All I
can do is describe my experiences (coming from a highly politicized family and
spending a lot of time around other politicized people and situations), I just
didn't see what you're desccribing (active support for Mugabe) - it was all aimed
at the cause, not the personalitiies.


Howard, here it was both the situation, and the Cult of Personality.
The Heroes of The Revolution! Folks here still have their posters of
Marx, Castro, Gueverra, Ortega, etc...up. They are STILL perfect
heroes to lots of people here.


I don't deny that there are some people who have stuff that's supportive of those
guys around, but I'd say they're a drop in the ocean. You know, if you wanted to, you
could try to find me some articles that are pro-Mugabe from someone here in the US.

By the way, did you just now tell me that it's "the Left" who are driven by "Cult
of Personality?" Two words: Ronald Reagan.

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #243  
Old January 26th 08, 09:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article ,
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:

On Jan 24, 11:46*pm, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article ,
*Donald Munro wrote:

Tom Kunich wrote:
The same thing was said about you heathen chinks. Somehow I'd bet you'd
be
insulted by that yet you have no problem using precisely the same logic
on
Arabs.


The "heathen chinks" had a sophisticated civilization
going while your ancestors were still walking around
in loincloths.


* *True. And while I more or less agree with Henry's position on this (you
can't force it on them), I don't think that Arabs are incapable of having a
working democracy, rather they've never had the opportunity to really have one.


Of course they're capable, just not right now.

It takes a generation or more, once a nation starts going down that
path, to develop an independent judiciary. Without a tradition of an
independent judiciary a democracy cannot succeed.


You're absolutely right about the judiciary. That's a huge part of it.

Witness the failure of democracy in Pakistan.


I don't know if it's dead yet, but it's certainly on life support. Getting it back
to even the sketchy levels it was at will be tough.

Developing a successful democracy is a long process. It takes decades
of constructing strong institutions. It's not as simple as holding an
election.


Just look at the Iraqi Parliament. "We got to paint a finger purple - SUCCESS!"
Not.

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #244  
Old January 26th 08, 09:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article ],
Ryan Cousineau wrote:

In article ,
Howard Kveck wrote:


The 2008 version of this is Jonah Goldberg's recent book that purports
to show that liberals are fascists.


How I got involved in this political discussion, I don't know (actually,
I do know: because I am a dumbass).


You've stepped into the abyss.

But while I haven't read the book, I did hear him interviewed at length, and his
subject is, more precisely, that the statist impulses of fascism (and he's talking
generally about all the fascists here; Mussolini as much as Hitler, and probably
Franco too), and modern-day instances of the totalitarian dream.


Well, he does discuss that stuff in passing. But the thrust of the book is, as Ben
accurately described, name calling. I think it's really more insidious than that,
however. I believe he's attempting to convince people who aren't really paying all
that much attention (i.e. not his core audience) that liberals are up to what his
side actually is. It's trying to convict on a guilt by vague association. For
example, one of the earlier working titles was "Liberal Fascism: The Totalitarian
Temptation From Hegel to Whole Foods". In it he talks about how the Nazis tried to
promote nutritious, organic food. And, since liberals like organic food, they are the
same as Nazis. Mui estupido.

Goldberg's a pretty serious small-government, borderline libertarian
right-winger, and his real concern is that he wishes to avoid the
totalitarian dream. I doubt he mentions it in the book, but in the
interview he specifically called out Huckabee as a disaster-candidate
(in his opinion) for his essentially populist-totalitarian impulses.

Found it:

http://instapundit.com/archives2/013336.php


Yeah, he and almost all movement conservatives are appaled that Huck is actually
running. Ben hit that one on the head too. I'll add this: David Broder, long
considered the "Dean of Beltway punditry, said of Clinton, "They came in and trashed
the place and it wasn't their place."

Anyway, as for the libertarianism of Goldberg and Glen Reynolds, it's worth noting
that they have been big supporters of small govt. programs like the war in Iraq (and
a possible war in Iran) and that famously libertarian warrantless phone surveillance
program. In other words, don't believe their hype.

ObBike: why have the Germans never acquired a reputation for making
serious road bikes? Is there some boutique make I'm missing?


Hmm, they do seem to have a nice boutique components market going.

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #245  
Old January 26th 08, 09:08 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article ,
" wrote:

On Jan 25, 6:50*pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
In article ,
*Michael Press wrote:

ObBike: why have the Germans never acquired a reputation for making
serious road bikes? Is there some boutique make I'm missing?


Warning: Gratuitous Ethnic Stereotyping. Hide the kiddies.
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,SoldierTech_Leopard2A6,,0...


That's not UCI-legal. Some kind of recumbent?


I'm pretty sure "Economical Uberpanzer" was an late-80s
early-90s industrial band. I might have seen then opening
for The Fall once. Howard probably remembers them
better than I do.


I wasn't so much into KrautRock then...

That actually would be a great name for a band, though I still believe that the
best and most accurate name for a band is "Negative Cash Cow."

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #246  
Old January 26th 08, 09:14 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Howard Kveck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,549
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

In article ,
" wrote:

On Jan 25, 1:10*pm, SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:


You are a statist.


There are different degrees of statism.


It's a matter of distinctions that are not being made. Kind of like the difference
between trimming one's nails and having an arm amputated.

IOW, I grew out of calling people fascists around the
age of 22. Except for Pat Buchanan, maybe.


David Duke?

--
tanx,
Howard

Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
But I've already got a pitchfork...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
  #247  
Old January 26th 08, 10:19 AM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Donald Munro
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,811
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

Howard Kveck wrote:
In it he talks about how the Nazis tried to promote
nutritious, organic food. And, since liberals like organic food, they are
the same as Nazis. Mui estupido.


Sounds like a new branch of logic known as Kunichian logic(tm).

  #248  
Old January 26th 08, 04:15 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Bill C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,199
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

On Jan 26, 3:08*am, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article ,
*Bill C wrote:





On Jan 25, 2:23*am, Howard Kveck wrote:
In article
,
*Bill C wrote:
On Jan 24, 2:06*am, Howard Kveck wrote:
* *People here had seen how bad the white led governments of Rhodesia were and were
supportive of the black's drive to get out from under that oppressive rule. Does
that seem like a bad cause to be in favor of? I don't think so. As I said below,
Mugabe didn't really come to the fore until almost the end of Smith's rule. So I
don't remember any rallies that were outright and directly supportive of Mugabe.
I was around then - in college, in SF and Berkeley around political people. I
don't recall Mugabe's name being used then, Bill.


I distinctly do recall his name being used as an icon of the People
here. Those People were being supplied their weapons by the Soviet
Union and assisted by Cuban troops and advisors on the ground. It was
pretty obvious what was in store for the Country after they took
power.
*The regime WAS oppressive, no debating that.


* *Again, when they first took over, it was a very different situation - they weren't
doing the crazy **** that they're now known for, at least not openly. It didn't take
long to change.

They also, inclusive of the native population had the lowest infant mortality,
*highest literacy rate, highest gdp, longest life expectancy, and fed the rest
of sub-saharan Africa.
*How's that worked out?


* *Obviously badly. But I sure haven't denied that.

*Yep. They sure as hell weren't going to give a lot of coverage to a
marxist HERO doing what they almost all inevitably do after the
support for him as a "freedom fighter" had been so strong..


* Bill, please. Media has a short attention span, particularly on issues like this.
They move on. It really isn't because the media is (or was) all happy because a
Marxist was gaining power. "The Liberal Media" is a myth.


Howard that's your opinion. I think it's totally wrong, but it depends
on your position as an observer what you consider "liberal". I'd say
that you are far enough out that way that what most people would
consider either moderate, or slightly liberal you see as right wing.
There've been numerous examples of this.


* *You're trying an Overton Window maneuver here, Bill. Just because you've said I'm
so far out doesn't make it true.


Just because you deny it doen't make it untrue.

*We're gonna agree to disagree. Neither of us can demonstrate the level of
coverage and support where we were back then, at least reasonably easily.


* *I was thinking about this earlier today and that's exactly what I realized. All I
can do is describe my experiences (coming from a highly politicized family and
spending a lot of time around other politicized people and situations), I just
didn't see what you're desccribing (active support for Mugabe) - it was all aimed
at the cause, not the personalitiies.


Howard, here it was both the situation, and the Cult of Personality.
The Heroes of The Revolution! Folks here still have their posters of
Marx, Castro, Gueverra, Ortega, etc...up. They are STILL perfect
heroes to lots of people here.


* *I don't deny that there are some people who have stuff that's supportive of those
guys around, but I'd say they're a drop in the ocean. You know, if you wanted to, you
could try to find me some articles that are pro-Mugabe from someone here in the US.

* *By the way, did you just now tell me that it's "the Left" who are driven by "Cult
of Personality?" Two words: Ronald Reagan.

--
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * tanx,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *Howard

* * * * * * * * * *Now it's raining pitchforks and women,
* * * * * * * * * * *But I've already got a pitchfork...

* * * * * * * * * * *remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


As for Reagan it's a mixed lagacy. I'm on the things were better
during and after his Presidency than Carter's bandwagon.
I have yet to see people on the right marching with posters of
Somoza, or Baby Doc. I do see Gueverra.
We're gonna agree to disagree. I have friends in Texas and Florida
who think I'm a raving leftie due to my positions. It's all about
observer position. Where'd you score on that quiz? I was just off
center right.
Bill C
  #249  
Old January 26th 08, 04:26 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Tom Kunich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,456
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

"Bret" wrote in message
...
On Jan 25, 8:50 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Bret" wrote in message

...
On Jan 24, 10:37 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
Ahh yes, the old saw that if something bad is bad than anything else
is
equally bad.


I didn't say anything was bad. You made an absolute statement that
state funded altruism is evil. Tell me why the fire department doesn't
fit that statement. Or are you not committed to the absolute truth of
your statement?


Because a fire department isn't altruistic and if you even tried to
think
about it for a minute you'd realize that.


"In the two male-dominated fields (more than 97 percent of
firefighters and 96 percent of CEOs nationally are men), the fact that
number one was a tie between the altruistic, brawny fireman and the
bring-home-the-bacon CEO speaks volumes about what we find sexiest in
men." -- hot-firefighters.com


Thanks for the demonstration that you haven't a clue why the PUBLIC funds
fire fighting. I suggest you now go elsewhere where you can hold a
conversation with someone at as low an intellectual level as yourself.

  #250  
Old January 26th 08, 08:05 PM posted to rec.bicycles.racing
Bret
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 797
Default OT Is anyone really surprised?

On Jan 26, 8:26*am, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"Bret" wrote in message

...
On Jan 25, 8:50 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:





"Bret" wrote in message


....
On Jan 24, 10:37 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
Ahh yes, the old saw that if something bad is bad than anything else
is
equally bad.


I didn't say anything was bad. You made an absolute statement that
state funded altruism is evil. Tell me why the fire department doesn't
fit that statement. Or are you not committed to the absolute truth of
your statement?


Because a fire department isn't altruistic and if you even tried to
think
about it for a minute you'd realize that.


"In the two male-dominated fields (more than 97 percent of
firefighters and 96 percent of CEOs nationally are men), the fact that
number one was a tie between the altruistic, brawny fireman and the
bring-home-the-bacon CEO speaks volumes about what we find sexiest in
men." -- hot-firefighters.com


Thanks for the demonstration that you haven't a clue why the PUBLIC funds
fire fighting. I suggest you now go elsewhere where you can hold a
conversation with someone at as low an intellectual level as yourself.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I'm not quite done with you yet. If it's evil to use public funding
money for altruism, what would you call it if public funding is used
for evil purposes? Evil squared? How do they rank as relative evils?
Is the former a misdemeanor and the latter a felony? Both felonies?

Bret
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who's Surprised? [email protected] Racing 39 October 22nd 07 05:38 PM
I'm surprised... MagillaGorilla Racing 3 September 5th 06 03:50 AM
Surprised it hasnt been said but... [email protected] Racing 0 February 20th 06 12:07 AM
Surprised, not surprised db. Recumbent Biking 0 January 23rd 06 11:48 PM
Surprised you people aren't talking about this Lame Acer Racing 1 August 20th 04 06:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.