June 26, 2004
fig-leaf
Instapunk has a great essay on how leftizoids use Rush Limbaugh as an excuse for their most egregious excesses...without, of course, contaminating themselves by actually listening to the man.
...The only problem with all this is that it's not true. Limbaugh's fabled ego is in large part a manufactured persona, one that cleverly counterpoints his confident and often satirical monologues about politics. Every time he returns to his standard self-congratulating refrains -- "I, in my infinite wisdom, have figured out more than the amateurs in the audience can do by themselves," "I, who can discover the truth, making zero mistakes, with half my brain tied behind my back" -- he is winking through the airwaves at his ditto-heads, reminding them that they are hearing personal opinions inflated with sarcasm and a profound sense of fun. He is sharing his most important message of all, not to take it all too seriously, because in that direction lies misery.The caricature Limbaugh, (and the caricature dittoheads) are part of a larger caricature, the "wingers," proto-fascist knuckle-draggers, cartoons cherished by people who would never dream of asking an actual right-winger (like me) if the story has much connection with reality.That's why one of the most enduring, and sometimes infuriating, aspects of Limbaugh's radio persona is his insistence on a Reagan-like optimism. Many of the ditto-heads, far from echoing his pronouncements, try to penetrate that optimism with anecdotal evidence from the heartland of the myriad ways that American liberty and culture are in decline. He is unfazed by such sermons and seeks to reassure them that all is not lost....
...Nor is he mean. He is courteous to callers, and even when it becomes obvious that the angry person at the other end of the phone has lied to the screener in order to vilify him, he allows them to make their principal point, and he attempts to respond with reason or humor rather than hostility. He may hit the kill switch after an exchange or two, but usually he does so only after a caller has begun repeating himself -- the equivalent, on radio, of the dreaded 'dead air.'...
It's all rather pathetic, but, well, I suppose if you are going to undercut your country and your President in time of war, and lend moral support to blood-drenched fascist dictators, you need a wee bit of a fig leaf. So you invent some new "fascists" on the right, and, presto, the left is once again "anti-fascist."
I myself don't think "fascism" actually exists, either now or in the past. All those regimes which are generally agreed to be fascist are actually socialist movements tricked-out in some scraps of right-wing or nationalist or conservative rhetoric to try appeal to a wider audience. Which is why scholars have found it impossible to agree on a definition of fascism.
But it's one of those things which, since it didn't exist, had to be invented. Leftists find fascism essential to justify their brutal usurpations, and the so-called fascists get to claim to be fighting "socialism." It's win-win.
Just as the Left was anti-anticommunist, so too then are they anti-antiterrorist --Robert Spencer
I agree with you on fascism. I've often wondered what it is people mean by it, but it turns out that it's just another leftist form of government.
I've had a particular view of this left vs. right political spectrum going back 30 years. It might be described as Misean or Hayekian. Its basis is the degree to which a political philosophy allows individual liberty. The true libertarian subscribes to what many, including myself, would consider the unworkable notion that almost nothing should interfere with individual liberty, no matter what the individual would like to be free to do. That would include drugs, consensual sex of just about any kind, pornography. The restriction to such liberty would be that freedom and well-being of others must not be disturbed. Lengthy discussions may ensue as to what might be considered a disturbance to the well-being of others.
On the other hand the socialist or communist seeks to secure material well-being of the individual, with little regard for individual freedom. Sure, they talk the talk about freedom, but freedom from fear, and freedom from want are what they really mean. The graduated income tax is a very leftist notion. Confiscatory taxes for the material support of those less fortunate. I should probably take the time to look up Robert Spencer, but being the lazy lout that I am, I won't. Well maybe later. But the statement you quote about the left being anti-communist is nonsensical. How can one be against one's self? Oh yeah, I almost forgot about Barbra.
Anyway I wish more people would look to issues with a realistic eye toward the impact on indivual liberty. The sheer practicality of liberty is so evident and becoming more so every day. One of these days I'll put up another post about it.
The term "fascism" is thrown around very freely in certain circles, but it really has little relevance outside of Italy - rather like trying to call someone who isn't Chinese a "Maoist" - as the term itself has origins in Ancient Rome and was coined in a deliberate effort by Mussolini in order to replicate some of the trappings of Imperial Rome for his socialist government.
Posted by: Lance Jonn Romanoff at June 27, 2004 06:12 PMFascism and Communism both seemed to have evolved out of the desire of 19th century intellectuals to devise a form of government compatible with reason rather than tradition, especially religious traditions.In this way they are both descendants of the French revolution . . .
Fascism does have a definition other than whatever beliefs the person to your right holds. Both fascism and communism were concerned with creating a stable society when the difference in social class could no longer be explained as a divine ordinance or evidence of our fallen nature. Communists and anarchists sought to obliterate class difference altogether; fascists sought to build a society where loyalty to the nation or racial identity trumped class distinction.
It's remarkable that by this definition McCain is more of a fascist than Bush is, but a lot of progressives who despise Bush get dewy-eyed at the thought of a President McCain.
