My Photo

Categories

Roll Call

Become a Fan

« More Listserv Etiquette 101 | Main | "Monkey Butt Trumpet" »

Thursday, 20 December 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2df453ef00e54fac1aab8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Liberal Fascism: Two Words Next to Each Other:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Sadly, No! Investor Relations
I recognize I criticized Sadly, No! rather harshly not but three days ago

Where? What did we do?

SEK

Here. Thought I'd linked to it in the original post. Turns out, I'm stupid.

Michael Blaine

Goldberg engages in this inanity, and last week the US Congress effectively proclaimed Jesus Christ to be our national savior!

Read the details at:

‘Minnesota’s Own Version of “Verjudung,” or How Somali Refugees Threaten Christmas In The Upper Midwest’

at:

“Rudely Stamped,” www.rudelystamped.blogspot.com

Michael Blaine
www.rudelystamped.blogspot.com

Rich Puchalsky

Oh, sure, hang out on Scott's blog for ages writing stupid parody poems and does he ever say "poetry is fun?" No.... Well that's the last drinking song featuring you, SEK.

In re: Goldberg there's some weird inversion of time and space such that the fish so entirely fills the barrel such that when you go to shoot at it, the barrel momentarily becomes entire blogospheric world. Disconcerting.

SEK

My friend, your drinking song drives me to drink. Plus, it'd be vain to lift a song about myself from the comments and I'm not vain.

I mean, sure, I'm a blogger, but ...

Rich Puchalsky

I'll Email you a copy of the whole thing with the two errant verses in the right place. Just don't read it, or something, until you're drinking at MLA; I'd guess some people there might be willing to try it out. It is pretty funny that not only have the subjects of all of those verses actually happened (well, actually been blogged; we take it on trust that they've actually happened), there were so many that I actually had to combine two and eliminate of couple of other more minor ones.

Maybe Goldberg is trying to drive everyone crazy just as the beloved Capt. Kirk did with computers. "Anything this stupid must be parodied. Anything this stupid must be ignored. Oh no, basic directive conflict -- abort, retry, fail! Abort, retry, fail!"

Mike Russo

That's great that you actually got in touch with Goldberg about the Spencer thing -- I thought of you when I saw that post! Sounds like it went about precisely as I would have thought.

Also, I thought the subtitle was now "...from Hegel to Whole Foods"? Though I have it on good authority: Hegel, not American.

Carly Simon

You're ... so vain. I bet you think this post is about you.

John Emerson

Repeat after me: "Real scholars do their own research. Real scholars do their own research."

Unless they have graduate students, paid research assistants, or learned slaves captured when their nation was destroyed.

ben wolfson

You didn't link to my villanelle because I'm the type of person who points out that you mean "altar", and not "alter", isn't that right?

SEK

(Also, thank you.)

(In my defense, the deaf don't deal well with homonyms.)

Sadly, No! Investor Relations

Scott, the thing you have to remember in dealing with characters like Jonah Goldberg (and included in this category is Michelle Malkin, Ann Althouse, and Patterico, from the previous thread) is that they literally, expressly do not care whether what they say is true or false. They don't think in terms of truth or falsity, but are instead minutely attuned to the success or failure of the rhetorical tactics in play.

You might be like, "Sure, sure, I understand that," But I don't think you appreciate the lunar moral vacuum. When you say that they're acting in other than good faith, they don't even understand what you mean.

And I actually like Patterico personally, by the way. There's no current grudge between us that I'm aware of.

Nullifidian

“The main report to the [Tenth Plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International] did indeed seek to ‘intensify’ the Comintern line… The identification of Social Democracy with Fascism was completed, and Social Democracy became Social Fascism… For several months already the KPD’s [German Communist Party] propaganda had been claiming that ‘reformism is socialism in words and Fascism in deeds.’”

—Fernando Claudìn, The Communist Movement: From Comintern to Cominform (Penguin Books, 1975)

Is it dirty pool to point how much the New Right resembles the old Stalinist hegemony?

Thanks for your amusing response to Goldberg. I'm glad to know that Goldberg evinced the precise degree of intellectual honesty I would have expected of him in that exchange.

David

Spencer Ackerman also has a copy and is writing some great stuff about Liberal Fascism:

http://toohotfortnr.blogspot.com/

Frotz

I'm interested in reading the book, having placed my Amazon pre-order back in April. When I briefly talked to Jonah about it two years ago, he was somewhere in between Hayek and the professional political science literature, i.e., fascism as a movement of the left and fascism as an impossibly vague word that is more of an indication of disagreement than anything else. The sub-title "From Mussolini" is important, because it's there that we can see the important problem of conflating Nazism with Fascism. It's safe to say, even if some smart people will disagree with you, that Nazism is a kind of fascism, but that does not mean that Nazism is the sum total of what fascism means. Mussolini and Hitler spent the war papering over their deep ideological disagreements. I don't mean to give the impression that it's the last word on the subject, but I've found Allardyce's "What Fascism Is Not: Thoughts on the Deflation of a Concept", from The American Historical Review, Vol. 84, No. 2 (Apr., 1979), pp. 367-388, to be very informative.

Fritz

Two quotes:

"I have tried to be fair to the academic literature, though this is not an academic book."

And,

"Herbert Spencer, the supposed founder of social Darwinism, was singled out as the poster boy for all that was wrong in classical liberalism. Spencer was indeed a Darwinist--he coined the phrase "survival of the fittest"--but his interpretation of evolutionary theory reinforced his view that people should be left alone. In almost every sense, Spencer was a good--albeit classical-- liberal: he championed charity, women's suffrage, and civil liberties. But has was the incarnation of all that was backward, reactionary, and wrong according to the progressive worldview, not because he supported Hitlerian schemes of forced race hygiene but because he adamantly opposed them. To this day it is de rigueur among liberal intellectual and historians to take potshots at Spencer as the philosophical wellspring of racism, right-wing "greed," and even the Holocaust."

Jeffrey Kramer

Assuming SEK has given a fair summary of his interactions with Jonah, we really have a landmark moment in the annals of chutzpah here. In promoting his books, the message is 'Everything you thought you knew about fascism is wrong! Free yourself from the tyranny of liberal academic groupthink!' But, inform him that he's wrong about Spencer and the response is 'You can't be serious: everybody knows Spencer believed such-and-such; it's an Academically Acknowledged Fact!'

[Late arrival, drawn by Crooked Timber]

spencer

I don't know for sure, but I am pretty sure Goldberg isn't (despite his name) actually Jewish.

The comments to this entry are closed.