You guys seriously have to read this. It is well worth the toil.
I'm not convinced that it has any actual meaning in human English. To the extent that it does, it could be filtered down into an intelligible (but stupid) sentence or two. Perhaps this is some lunar dialect, spoken and understood only in the Inner Core of the Moon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
He does a tremendous job of actually defining Socialism. His use of capitalization is also inspiring. Last but not least, there is not one single shred of empirical evidence included.
ReplyDeleteIt seems he might be one of those Objectivists. "To destroy the principle of private property is to amputate an irreplaceable part of what it means to be human" is awfully Randian.
Seriously, can we finally knock off the "Socialism doesn't work" stuff? Socialism works about as well as any other social and economic philosophy, as much as those constructs can "work."
My favorite part: "The Inquisitor of Unreality approaches. The tangled mess of actual contemporary American medicine must compete with Free Health Care for All." This Inquisitor of Unreality sounds like a bad dude. Here's a picture (courtesy of Google Image Search).
Empirical evidence? This dude practices the Noble Art of Human Rhetoric. If he doesn't mention evidence, he doesn't mention evidence. It is as simple as that. It ain't about that at all. It's easy to sum it up if you're just talking about evidence. We're sitting here, and he's a Rhetorician, and we're talking about evidence. I mean listen, we're sitting here talking about evidence, not Rhetoric, not Rhetoric, not Rhetoric, but we're talking about evidence.
ReplyDeleteBut seriously, these dudes get away with bloody murder with the "socialism doesn't work" bit. It's hilarious because it masquerades as a reality-grounded, empirical argument when in fact it is totally devoid of any empirical support, except the worn out supposed coup-de-grace that the Soviet Union collapsed. Nice one, guys. Capitalist Cuba also collapsed. Guess capitalism "doesn't work."
I think this is a general problem with many right-wing arguments. They purport to be all, "we know how the real world works, you spoiled ivory tower fags... aren't you due back in hippie commune fairy-land?" but their core policies get their asses totally kicked in any serious empirical evaluation.
These dudes need to read this blog.
Regarding empirical evidence:
ReplyDeleteAlthough it only comes up in the comments section and not the original post, all these jerkoffs really get off on the whole " history proves socialism doesn't work" thing.
That ticks me off. History doesn't prove dick. The notion that the Earth and its 6b humans is a variable-free laboratory for evaluating the be-all-end-all effectiveness of policy is fucking whack.
"History proves socialism doesn't work, look at Russia," is like saying "history proves you can't commit genocide without getting caught, look at World War Two."
I apologize for expecting empirical evidence. He did make it very clear he's a Rhetorician. His undying respect for Cicero was obvious.
ReplyDeleteRhetoric is like hitting behind the runner, bunting, and olde tyme smashmouth no fair catches football-It'S a Lost Art!
And I third your complaints about "history proving socialism doesn't work." I was tired of that argument in college and I'm even more tired of it today. The aspect that really bugs is, as Ryan said, it is supposedly reasonable conclusion that's blindly accepted by far too many non-RWs. What really sickens me is that they get away with it!
ReplyDeleteQuestion for the field: Who do you figure has a more pompous writing style, so-called "Objectivists" or critical theory scholars? I have to say I think the Obectivists may have the edge here. And that's really saying something.
ReplyDeleteForgive me, Gentle Reader, that I dare to introduce a scintilla of noble Rhetoric into the neural architecture of your brain, for, though that structure be sound in its wholeness, the Socialism that inhabits it like so many Cadillac-driving welfare mothers, lurking in the unexamined corners of your human experience, is false. Yea, it's falsity infects the very fabric of your minds, but not so that the integrity of the entirety be compromised. Creeping Socialism is indeed a foe for the RHETORICIAN, that regal beast who aims in his (or, in these days of unparalleled social-rhetorical equality, perchance her?) persuasive dart neither at head nor gut, but, aims to bifurcate those poles of man's dualistical being, strives to affect-- sorry, effect, in the words of the immortal rhetorician Jonathan Bon Jovi, a "shot through the heart." In conclusion, etc., etc., etc., QED.
ReplyDeleteOk if you liked that nonsense, check this one out.
ReplyDeleteStar Parker, certified black woman, writes at GOPUSA on how black people should shut the fuck up and be happy because so many of them are already governors and billionaires:
GOPUSA Article
Star Parker makes a number of good points, among them that poor African-Americans in economically-walled urban ghettos can really have no complaints in a world where literally hundreds of African-Americans are professional athletes. However, I would like to focus on her reiteration of the self-evident truth that "no one can solve your problems but you." Self-evident though it is, I thought I might as well provide just a few examples, since, as a Rhetorician, I like to nail both the head and gut with the left right combination of my mighty rhetorical fists of Empiricism and Principle.
ReplyDeleteAuto-Soluble Problems
Problem 1: You live in a desperately poor neighborhood without access to jobs or education.
Answer 1: This one is easy; there are two "quick fixes," neither of which rely on the leadership skills of Moses. Lottery tickets and good old fashioned bootstrapping. Lottery tickets provide entrance into the ranks of the super rich, while, for those more modest in their ambition, lifting themselves by their own bootstraps immediately places them in the robust American middle class, where the only problem is how many times you need to mow your lawn because it's luxuriant growth is so incredible.
Problem 2: You have a terrible, terrible disease, your insurance does not cover the treatment, and the total value of everything you own is not enough to pay for the hospital ink used to fill out the entrance forms.
Answer 2: On the surface, this appears to be a real dilly of a pickle, but upon closer examination it is clear that it admits to a ready solution when doused in the "mighty stream of righteousness" gushing from Star Parker's rhetorical penis. Recalling that the Civil Rights movement was Christian, Ms. Parker reminded us that the Bible is an excellent source of guidance. Turning to the Bible, we see that illness is punishment for unrighteousness and sin. Solution: fervent prayer.
Problem 3: You are a child living in a third-world nation embroiled in a brutal and endless civil war. You are kidnapped by one side or the other, your family is dismembered, and you are pressed into service as a child-soldier, drugged with a combination of cocaine and gunpowder, and thrown into combat.
Answer 3: Just say no.
Brothers and Sisters:
ReplyDeleteI found Paul J Cella's column to be both clear and effective in its content and delivery. Mr. Cella is the kind of visionary that doesn't just admire and emulate the great rhetorician's - he advances their noble art.
Josh: In the use of rhetoric you have much to learn from people like Cella, but you likewise make some extraordinary points. I may disagree with your prescription of lottery tickets, but all other solutions seem viable.
The way I see it, the trouble is getting your message out to poor people. I propose the simultaneous launching of a cable TV network, internet site, and phone-call chain to better inform poor people how they can escape poverty. I leave the number crunching to the experts, but I estimate we could end domestic poverty and greatly expand GDP by 2010. Who's on board?