« Government denies journalists access to the Gulf oil clean up effort | Main | "smiling in our faces, while cursing us in their hearts" »

The seductiveness of Marxist thought

What follows is lengthier than your average YouTube video so I'm asking you to either take the time now (a little more than 11 minutes) to watch it or come back when you're not as pressed. 

I think it important to watch. Most important.  And it's brought to us by The Anchoress who opines:

As I told my son, I can see where the smart, almost charming visuals, accompanied by the pleasant delivery, could be downright seductive, for some.


So who is David Harvey, the fellow narrating the piece?

David Harvey (born 31 October 1935, Gillingham, Kent, England) is the Distinguished Professor of Anthropology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). A leading social theorist of international standing, he received his PhD in Geography from University of Cambridge in 1961. Widely influential, he is among the top 20 most cited authors in the humanities.[1] In addition, he is the world's most cited academic geographer (according to Andrew Bodman, see Transactions of the IBG, 1991, 1992), and the author of many books and essays that have been prominent in the development of modern geography as a discipline. His work has contributed greatly to broad social and political debate, most recently he has been credited with helping to bring back social class and Marxist methods as serious methodological tools in the critique of global capitalism, particularly in its neoliberal form.

...

Moving from Bristol University to Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore in the USA, he positioned himself centrally in the newly-emerging field of radical and Marxist geography. Injustice, racism, and exploitation were visible in Baltimore, and activism around these issues was tangible in early 1970s East Coast, perhaps more so than in Britain. The journal Antipode was formed at Clark University; Harvey was one of the first contributors. The Boston Association of American Geographers meetings in 1971 were a landmark, with Harvey and others disrupting the traditional approach of their peers. In 1972, in a famous essay on ghetto formation, he argued for the creation of "revolutionary theory", theory "validated through revolutionary practice".

Summarizing... he's someone who embraces and promotes radical Marxist thought. 

I find this fascinating.

And think you should too.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/39507.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The seductiveness of Marxist thought:

» Brutally Honest linked with The seductiveness of Marxist thought

Comments (85)

All that supposed 'educatio... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

All that supposed 'education' and he's still stupid.

#1 He and Barry have a lot ... (Below threshold)
914:

#1 He and Barry have a lot in common.

On reading about this clown... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

On reading about this clown's awards, honors, and various forms of recognition, does anyone else have the same suspicion: that the Reds arrange these things to promote and groom their own, and thereby to make them more plausible?

I call it the "Soetoro effect." Red #1 gets positions for Reds #2-3. Reds #1 and #3 gush about Red #2, while Reds #2 and #3 swing an award for Red #1, and Reds #1 and #2 arrange honors for Red #3.

Now all three Reds have lots of peer recognition and validation, regardless of their actual merit.

It's straight-up kabuki, kind of like Hollywood award ceremonies for ugly people.

Better said than I could Ja... (Below threshold)
Gmac:

Better said than I could Jay.

What's not to love about a philosophy that has killed more people in the last century than all the wars in the same time period. They make Hitler look like a saint in comparison.

914, great minds and all th... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

914, great minds and all that. Your comment apparently posted while I was typing mine.

Shorter version: Was David Harvey ever editor of the Harvard Law Review, by any chance?

No one - and I mean no o... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

No one - and I mean no one - gets that kind of recogntion on his own, legitimately. And as luck would have it, the superhuman guy is a Red. Hmmm. Clearly the fix was in.

The funny thing is that the Reds overdo it, and make it easy to spot the fix. They produce some guy who is an internationally-recognized authority in his field, an astronaut, a cowboy, a fireman, a policeman, a Medal of Honor recipient, a guy who has won the Nobel Peace Prize, the Pulitzer Prize, the Cy Young award, the Heisman Trophy, the US Open, the Preakness, the best of show at Cruft's, and American Idol, and they don't think we'll notice that something is amiss?

They don't give us much credit.

Then again, given November 2008, maybe they're right not to do so.

Jay G, kind of like how Kim... (Below threshold)

Jay G, kind of like how Kim Jong Il scored 13 holes in one on his first golf round?

And your little scenario sounded an awful lot like "house flipping." How's that for irony: such a strong parallel between Marxist "social promotion" and a capitalist scam.

I wonder which is more honest...

J.

Of Course David Harvey, alo... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Of Course David Harvey, along with other 'enlighten intellectuals' will run things for us poor morons. Wouldn't want any unofficial thoughts running loose in the populace.

It may well be "downright s... (Below threshold)
iwogisdead:

It may well be "downright seductive, for some" but there's nothing substantive at all--just platitudes and silly conclusionary leaps. Nice drawing, though.

".... a leading social theo... (Below threshold)
Andrew X:

".... a leading social theorist of international standing....."

STOP. Done. That's all need to hear.

Moving along.....

Jay G, kind of lik... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
Jay G, kind of like how Kim Jong Il scored 13 holes in one on his first golf round?

Yep, or Mao Tse-tung swimming between two cities on the Yellow River in an hour? And then we find out the two cities were like 30 miles apart. Was he pulling water skiers behind him?

For my part, I'd think twice about swimming in any Chinese body of water called the Yellow River. But that's me.

Looks like those of us who ... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Looks like those of us who put our lives on the line to defend against communism quit the fight a little too soon. Maybe it is time to pick up where we left off. I have popped a few caps at communists in my time and am ready to pop a few more.

Step 1: Russia "loses" the ... (Below threshold)
BlueNight:

Step 1: Russia "loses" the Cold War.
Step 2: Hollywood makes lots of Communist scare films
Step 3: America thinks any real Communist plots are a bunch of redneck conspiracy theorists still living in the 80's.

Socialist housing policy (A... (Below threshold)
BlueNight:

Socialist housing policy (ACORN-enforced loans to lower-income workers) was the reason for the bubble in the first place.

Well, I notice none of the ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Well, I notice none of the commenters here have attempted to refute what the dude was saying. Just a half-baked conspiracy theory about how he got to be so "reknowned" (as if there was no such thing as Wingnut Welfare), and a couple of empty boasts about capping commies.

In other words hes just ano... (Below threshold)
rich K:

In other words hes just another wannabe Mao or Mao maker.I think Ill just watch cows making meadow muffins instead.At least with those I know where the stink is eminating from.

Funny!....I never thought i... (Below threshold)
Gaius Piconius:

Funny!....I never thought if it David's way. I
was born scant miles from him two years hence,
left school(compulsory) at 15 plus six weeks,
did not go to Cambridge,(or any university),
negotiated life in the capitalist system seeing
no gulags,pograms except from afar(on David's
side of the fence), went forth and multiplied,
retired at 50, celebrated my 51st anniversary
yesterday,never touch my capital, yet will bank
50%+ of my satisfactory income again this month
and not covet the wealth of my betters,love to read but have done other things besides (unlike
David), and am astute enough to know that western society (capitalist) has produced since
1945 a quality of life for low proles like me
that is unprecedented.Oh!....and as early as 2008 I saw through the total ballocks of Ebonicus Rex on the stumps. No I cant say that
I fancy the meal proffered by Prof. Harvey.It
resembles pure 'horse cock'(Clydesdale or Staffordshire is my guess)thus quite impossible to swallow. One billion Chinese also agree with me so I cant be wrong....what!



Bruce, my condolences on th... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Bruce, my condolences on the Fourth of July. This must be such a tough time for you. Will you be wearing a black armband, or a red one? Look on the bright side: the anniversary of the October Revolution is coming up soon.

So...what did Soetoro become "reknowned" [sic] for? What did he "win" a Nobel Peace Prize for? Why was he chosen editor of the Harvard Law Review, although he can't string two words together (not even "corpse" and "man") without a telemprompter?

Read (or have a grownup read to you) the books detailing the archive of Vasili Mitrokhin, a KGB defector.

(Vasili Mitrokhin and Christopher Andrew, The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archive and the Secret History of the KGB, Basic Books (1999), hardcover, ISBN 0-465-00310-9; trade paperback (September, 2000), ISBN 0-465-00312-5

Vasili Mitrokhin and Christopher Andrew, The World Was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World, Basic Books (2005) hardcover, 677 pages ISBN 0-465-00311-7

Unfortunately, there's no comic book edition.)

Mitrokhin's archive lays out in excruciating detail exactly how the Reds manipulated public opinion in the fashion I indicated.

Read about the Mitrokhin archive and the VENONA transcripts, the decryptions of Soviet cables that prove beyond any possible doubt the high-level Communist penetration of the US government during WWII, and prove that Alger Hiss was in fact a Soviet agent (at least the Soviets thought so), as was Harry Dexter White - Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, and the man who represented the US at the Bretton Woods conference. Read why FDR dropped Henry Wallace as VP in 1944.

Then come back and tell me about half-baked conspiracy theories.

Bottom line: the people gushing about Harvey's achievements are almost certainly doing so out of approval of his politics, nothing more. Which was my point.

Sorry, afterthought.<... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Sorry, afterthought.

Also read Whitaker Chambers's Witness, and reflect on the facts that

a) Chambers's allegations have been totally borne out by the VENONA decrypts;

b) Chambers was personally and viciously flayed at great length (he was a nut, he was a drunk, he was a fag, he was a crook, when in fact he was only...a Red apostate) by the New York Times and Washington Post, who made clear where their support lay; and

c) many of the agents of influence or straight-up agents described in the Mitrokhin archives were journalists.

Two more names for you to Google: Elizabeth Bentley and Bella Dodd. Do it.

Also Google <a href=" <a hr... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Also Google Walter">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Krivitsky">Walter Krivitsky.

Yes, I know what you're thinking: these are all back in the day. The point is that we now have facts to hand that weren't known then, and it's clear now where the truth lay then. And now we have similar fact patterns now to then. What hypothesis should we entertain?

OK, Mr Guevara, let's say i... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

OK, Mr Guevara, let's say it's a fully-baked (as opposed to half-baked) conspiracy theory. And yes, I do know about Alger Hiss and Whitaker Chambers. I was reading about them before you were born, I'll wager.

But MY point was that none of you oh-so-vigilant anticommunist toughguys have even attempted to refute anything Mr Harvey asserts, choosing instead to advance your fully-baked theories about how he got where he is today.

As for your comment # 18, I can only ask, "Which is it?" Am I a committed communist or a naive child? Perhaps you didn't notice that I never said I personally agreed with the man, just noted that no one here has said anything to refute him.

And yes, I do know... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
And yes, I do know about Alger Hiss and Whitaker Chambers. I was reading about them before you were born, I'll wager.

Not unless you're in your 80s.

Refute this: socialism/ communism/ liberalism/ progessivism/ whateverism has failed without exception everywhere on planet Earth it was implemented. No exceptions. Zero. Zip. Nada. Nichevo. Nichts.

Every nation, every state, every city, every borough, every union or other organization that has implemented socialism/ communism/ liberalism/ progessivism/ whateverism has failed on its own terms, i.e., has not done well for its adherents, and has only staved off disaster by sucking the blood of others, and thus are parasites.

True, or false?

If you say "false," I will of course insist on details.

Am I a committed c... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
Am I a committed communist or a naive child?

There's no third choice.

Perhaps you didn't notice that I never said I personally agreed with the man, just noted that no one here has said anything to refute him.

A distinction without a difference. Sophistry won't cut it. So do you disagree with him? Yes or no?

Well, I would indeed have t... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Well, I would indeed have trouble defending "socialism/communism/liberalism/progessivism/whateverism," Mr Guevara. So I guess you got me there.

What are you, nine years old?

I will say that the American Liberal Consensus of, say, 1932 to about 1980 worked out pretty well for a while. And, despite your dismissive snark and ignorant over-simplification, "liberalism/progressivism" is not synonymous with "socialism/communism."

And if you say it is, I will of course insist that you are as stupid as your above comments have made you look.

I will say that... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

I will say that the American Liberal Consensus of, say, 1932 to about 1980 worked out pretty well for a while.

Kinda like Wile E. Coyote's running off a cliff? Worked out OK...for a while?

So, given your lack of response, can I take it that you're too embarrassed to say you disagree with Comrade Harvey?

If so, there's hope for you yet.

You tell me, Mr Guevara. On... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

You tell me, Mr Guevara. On what particular point that Mr Harvey made in this video do you disagree?

By the way, I don't respond to prosecutorial-style interrogation, tough guy. So you can dispense with the "Do you still beat your wife? Yes or no?" act.

"A distinction without a difference." If you're going to used tired cliches, at least make them APT tired cliches, Mr Guevara.

The great consensus of which I spoke worked out pretty well for a while...until the Reagan Revolution wreaked havoc with it.

Just my opinion, of course, and I suppose having that particular opinion means I must wear a red armband, or something, according to Real Muricans like yourself. Another reason I dislike conservatives. Always the self-appointed arbiters of political orthodoxy, arent you?

No, no, no, comrade. ... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

No, no, no, comrade.

I say again: do you disagree with Harvey? Yes or no?

Perhaps you didn't... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
Perhaps you didn't notice that I never said I personally agreed with the man

On what points, precisely, do you disagree, comrade?

That's the question before the house. You yourslef implied that you didn't agree with comrade Harvey. On what points? If you don't spell out any explicit disagreements, then we will assume that you are in uniform agreement with him, and therefore, by his definition, a Red.

So? On what points do you disagree?

For your information, I will not let off the hook. You will either have to lay out explicitly your points of disagreement, or accept all of Harvey's points as your own. There's no third choice.

Well, Mr Harvey made severa... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Well, Mr Harvey made several points. Some I thought were quite persuasive, others, not so much. I don't feel the need to swear allegiance to his every thought, if that's what you mean, Mr Guevara.

But, again, Mr Guevara, please enlighten us. On what point of his do YOU disagree, and why? I mean, if you can't articulate why you disagree, perhaps we should assume you do agree, and that this has all been a clever ploy to establish your Commiefighter Cred. Is that it? Are you a secret pinko, Mr Guevara?

Yes or no?

I say again:Eve... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

I say again:

Every nation, every state, every city, every borough, every union or other organization that has implemented socialism/ communism/ liberalism/ progessivism/ whateverism has failed on its own terms, i.e., has not done well for its adherents, and has only staved off disaster by sucking the blood of others, and thus are parasites.

There are no examples - none - of socialist/ liberal/ communist/ progressive / whateverist governments that have proven sustainable in the long term. None. Not the USSR. Not the PRC. Not Castro's Cuba. Not Tito's Yugoslavia. Not Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnam. Not Najibullah's Afghanistan. Not Honecker's East Germany. None.

Liberalism is to communism as a small tumor is to a large one; they differ in magnitude, but not in kind. There's a straight line between Detroit and North Korea. "Progressives" have taken on that discredited title (the original progressives were the proponents of eugenics, specifically Planned Parenthood, to minimize the reproduction of the genetically inferior - in Margaret Sanger's case, blacks) because "liberal" has become a dirty word, now that Americans have seen what liberal policies lead to.

They guy plainly states (at... (Below threshold)
Paul:

They guy plainly states (at 3:45, if you missed it) that his take is coming from a Marxist perspective... and you are "fascinated" after your crack sleuthing to discover that the man embraces and promotes radical Marxist thought?

You must be really easy to surprise at Christmas.

Some I thought wer... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
Some I thought were quite persuasive, others, not so much.

Which were which? That's the point that you've been evading.

By the way, Mr Guevara, who... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

By the way, Mr Guevara, who died and left you King of Wizbang?

"You will either have to have to lay out explicitly your points of disagreement, or accept all of Harvey's points as your own."

I beg to differ. I "have to" do no such thing, your lordship.

The only thing I "implied" is that you and other commenters were so busy claiming the existence of some kind of good-ol'-boy-network-for-commies that you failed to address any of the issues he raised. I implied neither agreement nor disagreement with Mr Harvey myself.

Besides, as I said, it was kind of a long piece. There were some points I found persuasive, and others not so much. But again, I'm not arguing for or against Mr Harvey. Just pointing out that you, apparently, CAN'T do so.

Another Red cocksucker oute... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Another Red cocksucker outed.

What say you, Wizbang community?

You're hilarious, Mr Guevar... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

You're hilarious, Mr Guevara.

You guys should really patent this style of internet "argument." Call it the Guevara-Drummond Method. Just argue beside the point for a while, call your opponent names, and then declare victory. Works like a charm for DJ. You bucking for a Wizbang gig, Mr Guevara?

BTW I notice that you emplo... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

BTW I notice that you employ homophobic imagery when frustrated, Jay.

I won't explore why, but you should think about it.

So you admit to being a Red... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

So you admit to being a Red cocksucker?

I'm not surprised.

So you admit to being nine ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

So you admit to being nine years old?

I say again: on what ground... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

I say again: on what grounds, if any, do you disagree with Harvey, a straight-up Marxist?

So far we've heard a lot of bullshit, multiple Red herrings thrown out to stract, but still not heard an answer from you.

IN WHAT RESPECTS DO YOU DISAGREE WITH HARVEY?

It's a simple question. And yet you continue to prevaricate. Should we draw the obvious inference?

Still no answer I see.... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Still no answer I see.

Just to be clear, I'm not g... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Just to be clear, I'm not going to be distracted by your attempts at obfuscation. I want an answer to my original - now oft-repeated question - in what respects, if any, do you disagree with Comrade Harvey? Hmmm?

That shouldn't be a tough question. Really, it shouldn't.

But apparently, it is.

Sorry, went to bed after ou... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Sorry, went to bed after our oh so mature round of namecalling.

I asked you first.

Although it wasn't phrased as a question. Way way back in comment # 15, I said, "Well, I notice that none of the commenters here [that would include you, Mr Junior Prosecutor] have attempted to refute what the dude was saying."

In response I got some recommendations for reading about the KGB which sound interesting; perhaps I will check out the books you were so impressed with, Mr Guevara.

Oh, and then a round of McCarthy style questions: "Do you now or have you ever agreed with this commie rat about anything? Well? Do you?"

It's not about me, Mr Prosecutor. It's about you. Can you refute anything this guy says? I don't care if you call him (or if he calls himself) a Marxist, a Fascist, a Moonie, or a follower of the Emperor of Pluto, can you refute what he is saying?

I never heard of this guy until I saw this video. You and your fellow wizbangers are the ones talking shit about him. If he's such an empty suit, only prominent because of his socialist/progressivist/whateverist connections, it ought to be easy to refute him, yet 27 comments later, despite my challenge, you have not made any attempt to do so.

But I tell you what. Since I asked you first, go ahead and try, THEN I'll tell you on which points I agree or disagree with those made by Mr Harvey.

I pinky swear I will. But y... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I pinky swear I will. But you first.

Gmac says the Marxist/Lenin... (Below threshold)

Gmac says the Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist Communists make Hitler look like a saint in comparison.

And by doing so demonstrates how efficaciously the Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist/Communist Socialist "Democrats" have fooled folks into forgetting that the socialist, Hitler, was but a "modified" Marxist.

As, with only a slight degree of difference, is the sail-eared simpleton - the moronically-marijuana mumbling mobbed-up Mussolini-modeled modified-Marxist murtadd-Muslim Mothers' milquetoast presently pretending to what these days passes as the "presidency."

Dear Rick,Thanks f... (Below threshold)
Highlander:

Dear Rick,

Thanks for the video produced by the Cambridge guy, a guy from a school that the redneck fundies could never get into in a million years. ("But hey, is it really as good as the world-renowned University of South Alabama?")

Still no answer. </p... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Still no answer.

Color me surprised.

Crickets...... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Crickets...

Like I said, you first, Gue... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Like I said, you first, Guevara.

Nah, the hell with it.... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Nah, the hell with it.

Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that I agree with every single word of what Harvey says in this video. Actually, with the exception of "any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization," that's pretty close to the truth. (I still think that capitalism can and should be reformed and retained as the basic operating system.)

This is not to say I agree with everything Marx said. Just that I find myself in agreement with much of what Mr Harvey says in this 11 minute video.

But perhaps I have been "seduced." Please tell me, if you can, what Mr Harvey said IN THIS VIDEO that you disagree with. And why.

Try not to use cliches, homophobic insults, or hyperbole. Don't tell me in general what is wrong with Marxism. I already know all that. What I want to know from you - what I have been asking for since comment # 15 - is how you can refute what the Commie Gentleman said IN THIS VIDEO.

Can you do it, in a thoughtful, reasoned presentation? I doubt it.

Let's just say, fo... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that I agree with every single word of what Harvey says in this video.

Yeah, let's. You know, just as a debating position, right?

Only now, after much tooth pulling, do you finally come out with the truth: you don't disagree with anything that Harvey said. (I know, you dressed it up with qualifiers, but we both know that that was purely a face-saving measure.)

This is not to say I agree with everything Marx said. Just that I find myself in agreement with much of what Mr Harvey says in this 11 minute video.

Ah. This is where we came in. You "find yourself in agreement with much of what Mr Harvey" - a Marxist by his own account - says, and with much of what Marx said, in both cases somehow just not quite coming up with anything of theirs that you disagree with.

That makes you a Marxist, my friend. Admit it. Own it. Or are you ashamed of it? If so, why do hold beliefs of which you are ashamed?

So, if a Marxist says it is... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

So, if a Marxist says it is 5:00, and it IS 5:00, and I agree that it is 5:00, I'm a Marxist?

Or, if a Marxist says that some things about capitalism are unfair, and I agree that some things about capitalism are unfair, I'm a Marxist?

I ask again: Are you nine fucking years old?

A Marxist can indeed talk for 11 minutes and say a lot of things I agree with. So, I imagine, could a Fascist, a Moonie, or a follower of the Emperor of Pluto, to re-use an earlier analogy. To say I agree with most of what was said in an 11 minute video from a Marxist no more makes ME a Marxist than being a fan of "Red Dawn" makes me a rightwing nutjob.

But I know that's a difficult concept for you, Guevara. Being nine years old, you don't really have a very sophisticated view of the world.

Are you religious, Jay? No, don't answer that, I don't care. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that you are a Methodist. Think you could listen to a Catholic priest, or a Rabbi, or a Jehovah's Witness for 11 minutes and agree with most of what they say? OK, forget the Witness, but how about the other two?

But now that I've established my Commie Credentials to your satisfaction, why don't you go ahead and take up my challenge?

You know, let's hear, specifically, WHAT you disagree with this guy about, and why. And again, no cliches, cocksucking references, or telling me in generalities what the history of Marxism is. Again, what I want from you is a reasoned, coherent refutation of what this guy says IN THIS VIDEO.

Think you can do that, you failure-as-a-schoolyard-bully? Because I doubt it. I don't think you're as smart as Mr Harvey. Hell, I don't even think you're as smart as ME.

I see we need a booster sho... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

I see we need a booster shot, so let's try again: with what exactly in the video or Marx's writings do you disagree?

I've already mentioned one ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I've already mentioned one thing, Mr Guevara. Are you blind as well as stupid?

I said I disagreed with Mr Harvey's statement that "any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization." And I told you why I disagree with that statement.

As for Marx's writings, well, Marxism, as you have so intelligently pointed out, is pretty much discredited. That doesn't keep a Marxist from being right about this matter or that every now and then. As in this video, someone who adheres to a failed ideology can be right about specific points.

But, again, I asked you first, way way back in comment # 15. Now that I've told you what I disagree with this dude about, and why, as well as what I agree with him about (pretty much everything else he says IN THIS VIDEO), perhaps you can return the favor.

Can you tell me, in a coherent fashion, without references to oral sex or general history lessons from my 11th grade Americanism vs Communism class, what you disagree with Mr Harvey about, specifically, and why?

Yes or no?

I've already menti... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
I've already mentioned one thing, Mr Guevara.

What was that?

"The seductiveness of Marxi... (Below threshold)
retired military:

"The seductiveness of Marxist thought"

Now we know how Rev Lee Ward Wright actually lost his virginity.

Goddam, Guevara, you ARE bl... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Goddam, Guevara, you ARE blind as well as stupid. I even REPEATED it in the VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH.

Can you read at all, Jay? H... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Can you read at all, Jay? Have I been talking to a brick wall for the last 24 hours?

Don't see it.... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Don't see it.

Enlighten me.... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Enlighten me.

Comment # 49:"Actu... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Comment # 49:

"Actually, with the exception of "any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization," that's pretty close to the truth. (I still think capitalism can and should be reformed and retained as the basic operating system.)

And comment # 53:

"I said I disagreed with Mr Harvey's statement that any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization."

Blind, stupid, or drunk. Is there a fourth choice?

Now how about holding up your end?

Wait, re-read what you're arguing with, first. And you also might want to re-watch the video. I know it's getting late, but I'm pretty sure the grammar school you go to is not in session tomorrow, so ask your Mom if you can stay up late. Don't tell her you're arguing with a grown-up, though. She might not approve.

"Actually, with th... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
"Actually, with the exception of "any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization," that's pretty close to the truth. (I still think capitalism can and should be reformed and retained as the basic operating system.)

And comment # 53:

"I said I disagreed with Mr Harvey's statement that any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization."

Vague general pap. Get specific.

Actually, that was quite sp... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Actually, that was quite specific, Mr Drummond. Er, um, I mean, Mr Guevara.

The guy made a statement: "Any rational person would join an anti-capitalist organization."

I disagree with that specific statement. And, as I said, I pretty much agree with everything else this Mr Harvey said in this video. How much more specific can I get, genius?

So, if you are done with your delay tactics and denial of obvious reality, can you NOW refute Mr Harvey's assertions in a rational, coherent fashion?

What do you disagree with r... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

What do you disagree with re his economic analysis and policy, not throwaway lines like this.

For all we know, you disagree because you think the comrades should join terrorist cells instead of generic anti-capitalist organizations.

You're not being sincere, J... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

You're not being sincere, Jay. You asked for something I disagreed with Mr Harvey about. When I give you an example, you declare it's not good enough.

You can do this all night. Whatever I say, apparently, will not be enough to satisfy you. Not only is this insincere, it's cowardly. But it's about what I expect from a disciple of Drummond and Thayer.

Remember, Guevara, the original challenge was FROM me TO you. Remember that? Way, way, way back in comment # 15?

I repeat what I said back then. No one here, least of all you, Mr Guevara, has even ATTEMPTED to refute the substance of what this guy says in this video. I have declared that I agree with practically everything this guy says in this video, but, according to you, that's not good enough. Well, I say it is good enough.

Now, can you, or can you not, refute Mr Harvey's assertions? Are you inadequate to the task? Or are you capable of it? You assert that this dude is an empty suit who is only reknowned because of his secret commie connections - why are you afraid to address his points?

Who's Drummond and Thayer?<... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Who's Drummond and Thayer?

Leaving for the evening now... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Leaving for the evening now, Mr Guevara. I'll check back in in the morning - got the day off. Try to say something smart. It'll be the first time in 2 days.

Jay G, I suspect he's refer... (Below threshold)

Jay G, I suspect he's referring to Alfred Thayer Mahan, "the most important American strategist of the nineteenth century." He's been one of my greatest influences -- I've lost track of how many times I've read and re-read "The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660-1783."

ATM was kind of what liberals like to call a "chickenhawk." He was a mediocre (at best) sailor and ship commander, but an absolutely brilliant man when it came to the big-picture stuff, the grand scope, the abstract. His theories on naval warfare are still taught -- and still relevant -- to this day.

But damn, was he a lousy ship driver.

I've always felt a certain affinity for the guy...

J.

Good morning, Guevara.... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Good morning, Guevara.

I hope you've been preparing to go beyond your stale, lame Jack McCoy act overnight. But I have a feeling you haven't.

Just so you know, re # 65, cowardly internet bully DJ Drummond is an "author" on Wizbang. J.G. Thayer is the secret identity of tubby agoraphobe Jay Tea (thanks, BryanD!), also of Wizbang. Apparently you got your argument techniques from them.

If you aren't prepared to refute Mr Harvey's assertions, I ask that you refrain from engaging with me from now on. It was a pretty neat trick, akin to throwing a flaming bag of dogshit on my porch, and I indeed stomped on it, but evidently that one trick is all you've got. And that one trick is fucking tiresome. You wasted my time, I should have seen you were wasting my time, and you knew you were wasting my time.

So do me a favor and don't address me in the future. Or be prepared to debate like an adult, without the hairsplitting and the wistful oral sex references.

Bruce, I can guarantee that... (Below threshold)

Bruce, I can guarantee that Mr. Guevara will not address you directly again. And it's an option you have available to you, as well -- the removal of you from this site.

Would you care to exercise it? Shall I?

You dragged me into your petty squabble, Bruce. I had no interest in the discussion until you decided to emulate your hero, BryanD. Shall we continue this dance on to the same conclusion?

J.

No, Mr Tea, you're right. I... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

No, Mr Tea, you're right. I apologise for dragging you in, and for bringing up the t.a. thing. It was uncalled for. I was out of line. I'm sorry.

But Guevara is still an idiot.

You guys should really p... (Below threshold)

You guys should really patent this style of internet "argument." Call it the Guevara-Drummond Method. Just argue beside the point for a while, call your opponent names, and then declare victory. Works like a charm for DJ.

We looked into it, Bruce. Turns out Lee Ward had gotten to it a long, long time ago. And when we saw what he did with it, we realized it was a really, really, bad idea.

Unfortunately, Ward himself ran afoul of the law when he expanded it to "...and ban all who disagree or criticize you." Charles Johnson has some fierce lawyers...

J.

Um, OK.?... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Um, OK.

?

"What has been seen, cannot... (Below threshold)

"What has been seen, cannot be unseen."

A word of caution, Bruce: if you actively seek to emulate BryanD and Lee Ward, you may end up being treated like them.

And no, I haven't read this entire thread carefully to see who "crossed the line first" -- you or Jay Guevara.

And I don't really care. Because my interest was piqued when you decided to rope me into this pissing match -- by pissing on my leg.

I'm here now. You wanna say anything to me directly? Or do you prefer to slam me in threads where I'm not an active participant?

J.

You seem confused, Bruce. T... (Below threshold)

You seem confused, Bruce. That's understandable. I'm using two tones here.

The first is the slightly humorous one, where I am putting a bit of spin on the discussion to lighten it up and, it is hoped, defuse some of the tensions.

The second is more serious, where I am trying to make it clear that I am fully aware that you are yanking my chain, and I do not appreciate it. Further, I am making certain you understand that you are succeeding in irritating me -- and I am fully capable of expressing that irritation in a multitude of ways. Some quite severe and disproportionate.

You get to decide if you want to deal with Jay Tea #1 or Jay Tea #2. #1 is willing to tolerate jibes. #2 is more likely to recognize an out-and-out attack and respond in kind. Or worse.

J.

I already apologised, Mr Te... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I already apologised, Mr Tea. I apologise again. Again, I admit I was out of line, and again, I'm sorry.

You do what you want, Mr Tea, but remember that I apologised for my offense. Twice.

I'm not going to grovel. But again, I was out of line, and again, I'm sorry. That's all I'll say about it.

Except that Guevara is stil... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Except that Guevara is still an idiot.

If I'm still allowed, Mr Te... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

If I'm still allowed, Mr Tea, I would like to address you directly. You WERE an active participant in this thread, briefly. (Comment # 7.) At comment # 15, I noted that no one had attempted to refute Mr Harvey's assertions. After what did indeed turn into a long "pissing match," it's obvious the Mr Guevara isn't up to the task.

Are you?

The more important question... (Below threshold)

The more important question, Bruce, is "am I interested?"

The answer is "no, not really."

What caught my interest then was Guevara's "Soetoro effect," and a parallel to house-flipping.

Drawing connections between seemingly-unrelated things is one of my specialties. Seeing patterns that others don't. Sometimes they're just artifacts of my too-active imagination, sometimes not. I find them interesting; sometimes I think others might, as well.

Jay Guevara has stated that, IRL, he's an academic. I'm not.

Here's a confession: I didn't watch the video. Still haven't. I poked in the comments, saw the "Soetoro Effect," and it triggered my observation. I popped back in to see if it might trigger further discussion (it didn't, not really) and moved on. (Had it, I might have constructed a full posting out of it, there being interest.)

Then, when scanning comments in general, I found your attempt to drag me into the fight.

And nothing's really motivated me to get down into the nitty-gritty of the topic. Communism and socialism are, at their core, fundamentally at odds with human nature, and their implementation has led to the deaths of hundreds of millions. Going into the minutiae doesn't appeal to me as other topics do.

J.

Fair enough, Mr Tea.<... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Fair enough, Mr Tea.

But Guevara is still not off the hook, in my opinion. And is still an idiot.

If he's an academic, it must be at Liberty University or some such faux "institution of higher learning."

I see someone is willing to... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

I see someone is willing to take the time to go back up and down the thread casting votes, but is unwilling to comment.

Any time you're ready, Mr Creepy Anonymous Vote Caster.

Bruce, I just polished off ... (Below threshold)

Bruce, I just polished off over 1400 words of my own -- a piece I've been working on for a couple of days now. And it doesn't have a damned thing to do with communism or socialism.

You think he's an idiot? Fair enough. I think you're an idiot for gratuitously insulting and trying to drag into a fight someone who has the authority to edit or delete your comments at will, and even ban you, for no apparent gain or even reason.

You deliberately chose to try to push several of my buttons at once, Bruce, for absolutely no reason at all.

Congratulations. You succeeded. You irritated me. And I will remain irritated for some time.

At this point, I don't plan on acting on that irritation. But you've pretty much exhausted any good will you might have had, and will not get the benefit of the doubt from me in the future.

I hope whatever you thought you'd achieve by irritating me was worth it.

J.

No, I read your piece, just... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

No, I read your piece, just now, and thought it was pretty good.

I've been coming back to this thread to check to see if someone else had visited. I thought you were through with it.

I didn't expect to see you here any more. The only thing I did find was a Creepy Anonymous Vote Caster. I was calling that person out, not you, Mr Tea.

Now, I've apologised for my offense multiple times. And I meant that apology sincerely. Gratuitous namecalling, as I was guilty of in comment # 68, is childish and can be hurtful, and I shouldn't have done it.

But I figured Mr CAVC was Guevara. I was trying to get him to commit.

You can do what you think is fair and best, Mr Tea. If you decide to ban me, I'll be sad. It gets awfully hot here in July, and arguing with conservatives on Wizbang is as good an excuse as I need to stay in the A/C.

And no, I haven't ... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:
And no, I haven't read this entire thread carefully to see who "crossed the line first" -- you or Jay Guevara.

Sorry, I don't understand this. How did I cross the line?

Communism and s... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

Communism and socialism are, at their core, fundamentally at odds with human nature, and their implementation has led to the deaths of hundreds of millions. Going into the minutiae doesn't appeal to me as other topics do

.

Exactly. Going through Marxist drivel - of any source - to find pieces of corn in the crap isn't worthwhile. It's of a piece with trying to find items of merit in homeopathy, crystal power, or 9/11 trutherism - a waste of time. Marxism, and more generally socialism (which subsumes Marxism into it), has been weighed in the balance of history and found wanting.

Well, I can't speak for Mr ... (Below threshold)
Bruce Henry:

Well, I can't speak for Mr Tea, but maybe implying that, because my political opinions differed from yours, I would view the 4th of July as a day of mourning, would be considered "crossing the line."

Or maybe it would be when I was called a "Red cocksucker." That could be considered, by some, as "crossing the line," I think.

Not that I'm offended, you understand, Mr Guevara. No more than I'm offended by the shenanigans of any other unruly nine-year-old.

So, now that you've had plenty of rest, are you ready to dismantle that damn commie's arguments? Or do you want to go back to lurking and casting anonymous negative votes?

By the way, Jay, I have a couple of questions. I agreed with everything Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount. Does that make me a Christian? Should I "own" it? I agreed with everything Ronald Reagan said the night the Challenger blew up. Does that mean I'm a Republican? 'Cause I don't wanna be a Republican!




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy