| Entry | Pageviews |
|---|---|
Ukraine
|
37
|
United States
|
30
|
Russia
|
22
|
South Korea
|
14
|
Ireland
|
2
|
Canada
|
1
|
France
|
1
|
Lithuania
|
1
|
Mexico
|
1
|
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Thursday, November 7, 2019
KATE MCKINNON'S RERFRESHING FRANKNESS DOESN'T EVEN LIKE ANY MEN AT ALL GREAT STUFF A MAN HATER!
That kind of view nicely frosts the asses of the liberals re LGBTs.
THE JEFFERSONIAN DELUSION OF DEMOCRACY
"...whether the citizens of the United States now have enough understanding of, or belief in, our government, to make it work effectively...Today, only lawyers--not students of history--know anything about British legal and constitutional precedents, and almost no one knows anything about the political history of ancient Greece and Rome. Our fellow countrymen, I would suggest, do not know about this history of legislative inquiry as a check on executive power....Sanders,...Warren, still believe in this model of government, but how many voters do?...How many of them care that the Trump Administration is ignoring much of the bureaucracy....how many...have a real commitment to public education...And how many believe in interventionist foreign policy? Without the right training, few Americans can make sense of our complex government and our complex world. " DK
I agree with this.
I would just add that few Americans ever had enough of the kinds of understanding or commitment he lists above.
Certain founders, most notably Jefferson recognized this lack of understanding and commitment very well, but promoted popular informed and erudite self government as a given nonetheless, holding other faux truths also to be self evident as well.
I agree with this.
I would just add that few Americans ever had enough of the kinds of understanding or commitment he lists above.
Certain founders, most notably Jefferson recognized this lack of understanding and commitment very well, but promoted popular informed and erudite self government as a given nonetheless, holding other faux truths also to be self evident as well.
THE FLINTSTONES CIVIL WAR
"...In the civil war, the passionate, emotional aristocrats of the South lost to the more rational merchants and teachers of the North...." DK
This post is dedicated to David Reich.
This post is dedicated to David Reich.
DAVID REICH NEXT QUESTION
Is Power's topic, genocide, 2002 book, A Problem From Hell, really anything new in human history or prehistory?
Maybe it is better, more thoroughgoing genocide, as I had pointed out against Reich re his account of modern admixture, which he has claimed is nothing new at all, even of degree or extent.
How then can genocide be a problem from Hell? Especially if it is called for by a holy war, sanctioned by God himself!
What is Hell?
Genocide has been a commonplace for millions of years now. Bibically, enemies of the Hebrews were "ground fine as dust."
Reich has noted some pretty Goddamn good total prehistoric genocides, total population replacements, more thoroughgoing than even the long drawn out Neanderthal genocide, which took several thousand years of struggle over a vast area, with a token admixture.
Isn't it, genocide, therefore, rather like inequality, or asymmetrical admixture, or extreme racial and ethnic endogamy, as Reich postulates, nothing new at all?
None of them are or ever were from Hell.
Maybe it is better, more thoroughgoing genocide, as I had pointed out against Reich re his account of modern admixture, which he has claimed is nothing new at all, even of degree or extent.
How then can genocide be a problem from Hell? Especially if it is called for by a holy war, sanctioned by God himself!
What is Hell?
Genocide has been a commonplace for millions of years now. Bibically, enemies of the Hebrews were "ground fine as dust."
Reich has noted some pretty Goddamn good total prehistoric genocides, total population replacements, more thoroughgoing than even the long drawn out Neanderthal genocide, which took several thousand years of struggle over a vast area, with a token admixture.
Isn't it, genocide, therefore, rather like inequality, or asymmetrical admixture, or extreme racial and ethnic endogamy, as Reich postulates, nothing new at all?
None of them are or ever were from Hell.
STALIN FDR TEAMED TO JAM LEFT HEGELIANISM UP EUROPE AND ASIA'S ASSES NOT JUST UP GERMANY'S JAPAN'S RIGHT HEGELIANS
That says it in a short sentence even you can understand.
No candycoating there.
No candycoating there.
NYT EDITORIAL: ARE YOU A SOVIET ASSET OR STOOGE BUT DON'T KNOW IT?
If you don't know the answer, and Professor Kaiser acknowledges that most Americans know little even about their own system, then it's very likely that you are, and have long been, a Soviet stooge.
One must first distinguish between, for example, a stooge, and an asset.
A stooge is by definition, unreliable. A stooge often now does not know even that he is a stooge! He is an unwitting stooge!
An asset is reliable. He knows, or strongly suspects, that he is an asset.
Is Donald Trump a Soviet asset?
Answer: No, a Soviet stooge.
Was FDR a Soviet asset?
Answer: Yes.
Are most Democrats and Republicans Soviet stooges?
Answer: Yes.
Are most Democrats and Republicans Jews' stooges?
Answer: Yes.
Are most Jews Soviet stooges?
Answer: Yes.
Are Soviets Jews' stooges?
Answer: No.
Are there double stooges?
Answer: Yes, liberal and conservative Christians are stooges both of Jews and of Soviets simultaneously, although Soviets are not also Jews' stooges.
This is dedicated to the memory of Hannah Arendt.
One must first distinguish between, for example, a stooge, and an asset.
A stooge is by definition, unreliable. A stooge often now does not know even that he is a stooge! He is an unwitting stooge!
An asset is reliable. He knows, or strongly suspects, that he is an asset.
Is Donald Trump a Soviet asset?
Answer: No, a Soviet stooge.
Was FDR a Soviet asset?
Answer: Yes.
Are most Democrats and Republicans Soviet stooges?
Answer: Yes.
Are most Democrats and Republicans Jews' stooges?
Answer: Yes.
Are most Jews Soviet stooges?
Answer: Yes.
Are Soviets Jews' stooges?
Answer: No.
Are there double stooges?
Answer: Yes, liberal and conservative Christians are stooges both of Jews and of Soviets simultaneously, although Soviets are not also Jews' stooges.
This is dedicated to the memory of Hannah Arendt.
TAX ON SUPER RICH LIBERAL PLACEBO
I am not against it.
It cannot accomplish much now, as Krugman says.
Some things are true even if Krugman says them (TLF fallacy re Trump).
He is one of those who made it happen, after all, late in the economists' game.
Warren is focussed on using the money for healthcare.
When only 50% of your workforce is needed, the other half on tittitainment, and falling, why fund their healthcare?
Why not continue funding, for the moment but only the monent, the cheap labor foreigners of color who replaced half of them already?
You'd be better off investing in Gates toilets for the third world.
Warren is focussed on using the money for healthcare.
When only 50% of your workforce is needed, the other half on tittitainment, and falling, why fund their healthcare?
Why not continue funding, for the moment but only the monent, the cheap labor foreigners of color who replaced half of them already?
You'd be better off investing in Gates toilets for the third world.
MANJOO THEY BABY HINDU HERMAPHRODITE GOD WEARING MAKE UP
SO MANY WRITERS HAVE PRODUCED “I went offline, and here is what I learned” stories that they became a tedious cliché years ago. Cliché or no, however, those stories had one thing in common: the writers of them all actually went offline. Farhad Manjoo, technology columnist for The New York Times, took a different tack. He didn’t go offline at all: he just said he did, in a widely discussed column. Manjoo wrote about what he learned from his two months away from social media, and dispensed avuncular advice to his readers about the benefits of slowing down one’s news consumption.
But he didn’t really unplug from social media at all. The evidence is right there in his Twitter feed, just below where he tweeted out his column: Manjoo remained a daily, active Twitter user throughout the two months he claims to have gone cold turkey, tweeting many hundreds of times, perhaps more than 1,000. In an email interview on Thursday, he stuck to his story, essentially arguing that the gist of what he wrote remains true, despite the tweets throughout his self-imposed hiatus.
ICYMI: While ABC, CBS, and NBC all had special reports on student walkout, Fox went a different direction.
It seems likely that Manjoo isn’t lying, and that he really believes he had unplugged, and really believes that his weak-sauce explanations don’t belie the point of his column. It could be that Manjoo’s column really does serve as a warning about the pernicious effects of social media. Just not in the way he meant it.
Supposedly tired of the “misdirection” and “mistakes” that happen on social media as news breaks and wearied by the constant flow of news on social media, Manjoo decided he needed to slow things down. And so:
He got most of his news from the papers, he wrote. His one caveat: he “allowed for” podcasts, email newsletters, and books and magazines.In January, after the breaking-newsiest year in recent memory, I decided to travel back in time. I turned off my digital news notifications, unplugged from Twitter and other social networks, and subscribed to home delivery of three print newspapers — The Times, The Wall Street Journal and my local paper, The San Francisco Chronicle — plus a weekly newsmagazine, The Economist.
But he also “allowed for” continued Twitter use. And not just a little: he tweeted nearly every day during the 58 days of the experiment. During the first two weeks of February, he tweeted, on average, more than 15 times a day. He refrained completely from tweeting on only five days—all on weekends. That’s far from obsessive, but it’s even farther from “unplugged.” It is, in fact the opposite of “unplugged.”
Manjoo objects to that characterization. “I think it’s clear that I meant I ‘unplugged’ from Twitter as a source of news, not that I didn’t tweet at all,” he wrote.
But he had written, quite plainly, that he had “unplugged from Twitter,” not that he had used it only to post news stories. Reactions to his column on Twitter make it clear that many readers took him as his word.
But also: He didn’t use Twitter only to post news stories. He retweeted news stories from others and commented on others’ tweets about the news on most days during his period of being “unplugged.” In February, he retweeted Sean Hannity, commenting: “You gotta read this thread, it’s amazing.” He was clearly using Twitter to follow the news—albeit less so than he had been before starting this experiment.
You gotta read this thread, it’s amazing, it really makes you ask the big questions about where we are as a society and where can I get some hemlock https://t.co/4MSoMxNAgn— Farhad Manjoo: ask your friends to follow me (@fmanjoo) February 13, 2018
Having laid the groundwork with the notion that he had “unplugged” from social media, and describing how beneficial it was for his mental health, and expressing how much more time he had for the truly important things in life, Manjoo encouraged his readers to follow his example, and rather throat-clearingly issued a Michael Pollan-like heuristic: “Get news. Not too quickly. Avoid social.”
Presumably, readers are encouraged to come up with their own definitions of “avoid.”
A Times spokesperson said the paper doesn’t view his assertion as a falsehood, and won’t be issuing a correction.
A Times spokesperson said the paper doesn’t view his assertion as a falsehood, and won’t be issuing a correction.
ICYMI: A reporter attended a school board meeting for 3 hours, longer than other journalists. That ended up being a very good decision.
Starting around the turn of the century, Manjoo made a name for himself as an insightful chronicler of the tech world, writing for sites such as Wired News, Salon, and then Slate, where he became well-known enough over his five-year tenure that the Times hired him to be the paper’s lead tech columnist (after a very short stint working for The Wall Street Journal). In 2008, he wrote an excellent, generally well-received, and prescient book chronicling the various assaults on facts and truth in our public discourse.
But toward the end of his tenure at Slate, and continuing to the present day, Manjoo started to become known for his sometimes out-there “takes.” Some of them seem akin to the tin-eared musings of Henry Blodget, the disgraced former stock analyst and founder of Business Insider (a publication that Manjoo once praised as a “rapacious news aggregator.”) Others are more like the affected “contrarianism” of Nick Bilton, a former Times staffer who once wrote that pens are just so squaresville, daddio, and also that we should all stop writing “thank you” in email, in part because it’s a time-sink.
Manjoo’s last column for Slate was not about technology at all; it was an argument that “men should wear makeup” in which he featured a whole bunch of close-up pictures of himself. Earlier, he had defended BuzzFeed for its decision to publish a video of a man killing himself with a gunshot wound to the head after a car chase that had aired live on Fox News. “People are talking about a thing on Twitter,” he wrote on Twitter. “Posting stuff [that] people are talking about is what BF does. This is their job.”
Last year, he defended President Donald Trump’s lack of literacy in a column headlined: “So Trump Makes Spelling Errors. In the Twitter Age, Whoo Doesn’t?” That one must have done wonders for morale on the Times’ copy desk, which had just suffered a round of layoffs.
Manjoo’s latest column seems to be of a piece with these earlier works. After trying, and failing, to get him to own up to the fact that his assertion that he had “unplugged” from social media was not true, I asked him whether perhaps his use of social media was messing with his own self-perception. He didn’t respond to that question.
Starting around the turn of the century, Manjoo made a name for himself as an insightful chronicler of the tech world, writing for sites such as Wired News, Salon, and then Slate, where he became well-known enough over his five-year tenure that the Times hired him to be the paper’s lead tech columnist (after a very short stint working for The Wall Street Journal). In 2008, he wrote an excellent, generally well-received, and prescient book chronicling the various assaults on facts and truth in our public discourse.
But toward the end of his tenure at Slate, and continuing to the present day, Manjoo started to become known for his sometimes out-there “takes.” Some of them seem akin to the tin-eared musings of Henry Blodget, the disgraced former stock analyst and founder of Business Insider (a publication that Manjoo once praised as a “rapacious news aggregator.”) Others are more like the affected “contrarianism” of Nick Bilton, a former Times staffer who once wrote that pens are just so squaresville, daddio, and also that we should all stop writing “thank you” in email, in part because it’s a time-sink.
Manjoo’s last column for Slate was not about technology at all; it was an argument that “men should wear makeup” in which he featured a whole bunch of close-up pictures of himself. Earlier, he had defended BuzzFeed for its decision to publish a video of a man killing himself with a gunshot wound to the head after a car chase that had aired live on Fox News. “People are talking about a thing on Twitter,” he wrote on Twitter. “Posting stuff [that] people are talking about is what BF does. This is their job.”
Last year, he defended President Donald Trump’s lack of literacy in a column headlined: “So Trump Makes Spelling Errors. In the Twitter Age, Whoo Doesn’t?” That one must have done wonders for morale on the Times’ copy desk, which had just suffered a round of layoffs.
Manjoo’s latest column seems to be of a piece with these earlier works. After trying, and failing, to get him to own up to the fact that his assertion that he had “unplugged” from social media was not true, I asked him whether perhaps his use of social media was messing with his own self-perception. He didn’t respond to that question.
OK BILLIONAIRE OK BOOMER OK WHITEY OK BLACKIE OK MULATTO OK CHINK OK HINDU OK ROOSKIE OK FARHAD MANJOO OK NYT
OK LGBT OK WOMEN OK WHITE MEN OK HINDU MEN OK ASIAN MEN OK POOR PEOPLE OK WESTERN CIVILIZATION HINDU CIV ASIAN CIV ORTHODOX OK JAPANESE CULTURE
WHY SINGLE OUT?
WHY SINGLE OUT?
Manjoo has a lot of postmodern multicultural baggage:
Manjoo was born in South Africa in 1978 to a family with ancestral roots in India.
A cisgender man, Manjoo prefers to be referred to with singular they pronouns.
In September 2013, Manjoo joined The Wall Street Journal as a technology columnist.[1]
Their final column for Slate, in which they urged men to wear makeup, was published on September 20.[6]
They later moved to The New York Times.
They are the author of the book True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society
This guy is a walking Amherst Common Language Guide Multiculturalist Fallacy poster child.
The Manjoo Fallacy.
He has thrown off the veneer of deference, and is unconstrained by inherited identities or allegiances.....
"Individualism is a word recently coined to express a new idea. Our fathers only knew about egoism....Individualism is a calm and considered feeling which disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of his family and friends....Individualism is of democratic origin and threatens to grow as conditions get more equal...aristocratic institutions have the effect of linking each man closely with several of his fellows....Aristocracy links everybody, from peasant to king, in one long chain. Democracy breaks the chain and frees each link." Tocqueville, v2 pt 2 ch 2
A cisgender man, Manjoo prefers to be referred to with singular they pronouns.
In September 2013, Manjoo joined The Wall Street Journal as a technology columnist.[1]
Their final column for Slate, in which they urged men to wear makeup, was published on September 20.[6]
They later moved to The New York Times.
They are the author of the book True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society
This guy is a walking Amherst Common Language Guide Multiculturalist Fallacy poster child.
The Manjoo Fallacy.
He has thrown off the veneer of deference, and is unconstrained by inherited identities or allegiances.....
"Individualism is a word recently coined to express a new idea. Our fathers only knew about egoism....Individualism is a calm and considered feeling which disposes each citizen to isolate himself from the mass of his fellows and withdraw into the circle of his family and friends....Individualism is of democratic origin and threatens to grow as conditions get more equal...aristocratic institutions have the effect of linking each man closely with several of his fellows....Aristocracy links everybody, from peasant to king, in one long chain. Democracy breaks the chain and frees each link." Tocqueville, v2 pt 2 ch 2
WHAT IS NEW SPECIAL AND DANGEROUS IS GLOBAL DEMOCRATIC EQUALITY IDEOLOGY
His very ideological case, criticizing age old unequal admixture between dominant males and subject females, in favor of the new and special liberal admixture of equality, epitomized by Revolutionary American democratic uniracialist ideology after 1776, establishes his position as an example of the Monsanto Fallacy, even as he denies it as anything special or new in human genetic history.
What is also age old, as proven by research of Reich and other prehistoric geneticists themselves, is very longterm widespread complex and thoroughgoing race and caste based endogamy, almost certainly fully as male dominated everywhere and by all races and cultures as the unequal admixtures he singles out for ctiticism under post 1776 ideology.
What is also age old, as proven by research of Reich and other prehistoric geneticists themselves, is very longterm widespread complex and thoroughgoing race and caste based endogamy, almost certainly fully as male dominated everywhere and by all races and cultures as the unequal admixtures he singles out for ctiticism under post 1776 ideology.
DAVID REICH NEXT QUESTION
Why are we not living in particularly special global homogenizing times? p 231
To point out frequency of admixture throughout the past begs the question.
See my prior DR question, regarding biological problems inherent in thoroughgoing homogenization re Race Against Time.
Reich's global homogenization position promotes what I would call
The Monsanto Fallacy
Wednesday, November 6, 2019
Sunday, February 24, 2019
ENTER PREENERS OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL ROLE
US President Barack Obama has met Silicon Valley bosses, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.
Apple's Steve Jobs and Google chief executive Eric Schmidt were also present at the private get-together in California.
The president had been seeking the views of technology leaders as he works to turn around his country's ailing economy.
Mr Obama has said he wants to encourage American businesses to invest more money in innovation.
Among those meeting the president were the bosses of Twitter, Yahoo and Oracle.
Apple's chief executive Steve Jobs was in attendance, despite media reports that his health had taken a turn for the worse.
US newspaper the National Enquirer published pictures, said to be of Mr Jobs, looking emaciated.
He is currently on his third medical leave of absence from Apple since being diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in 2004.
Thursday's meeting with the president was a private event, hosted by venture capitalist John Doerr.
DAVID REICH WHIG GENOMICS OF INEQUALITY
Ch 10, first 2 pages, good summary. Even his statistics are good: only 10% of all slaves were brought here. The rest went South of here.
Most white American liberal stooges have been taught that only Southerners' white ancestors went to Africa and captured free negroes and enslaved them, and that almost all of those enslaved negroes were brought here!
The reality is a little different. The ships and money used for all this came from the New England colonies and from Britain, not from the South.
Southerners usually bought slaves, brought in by Northern interests, based almost entirely on loans from Northern bankers. Long story, but they ended up in hock to the North both because of lifestyle and because cotton land became exhausted. Northern banking interests took southern plantations after the Civil War. They were entitled to it!
I would just note that Africans were sold as slaves to Europeans by other Africans in Africa. They were not enslaved, in the first instance, by white Europeans. They were bought by them there and then resold here and elsewhere.
THEY LOVE THIS TODAY
Thursday, February 7, 2019
BEZOS ACCUSES PECKER HEAD OF BLACKMAIL EXTORTION LOVE THAT SHIT
Bezos is probably right.
However, his wife and his girlfriend look too much alike.
This shows a lack of imagination.....
At least his is a philandering heterosexual, consensual affair.
Some Virginia politicians are just plain predator pervs!
Or blackfacers! Terrible, blackface! Call in Leonhardt to call these things on the NYT Black white racism carpet!
They haven't thought of Yellowface, yet!
It's an epidemic! An avalanche!
However, his wife and his girlfriend look too much alike.
This shows a lack of imagination.....
At least his is a philandering heterosexual, consensual affair.
Some Virginia politicians are just plain predator pervs!
Or blackfacers! Terrible, blackface! Call in Leonhardt to call these things on the NYT Black white racism carpet!
They haven't thought of Yellowface, yet!
It's an epidemic! An avalanche!
THE WHIG AUDIENCE AND ITS DISCONTENTS
"...whether the citizens of the United States now have enough understanding of, or belief in, our government, to make it work effectively...Today, only lawyers--not students of history--know anything about British legal and constitutional precedents, and almost no one knows anything about the political history of ancient Greece and Rome. Our fellow countrymen, I would suggest, do not know about this history of legislative inquiry as a check on executive power....Sanders,...Warren, still believe in this model of government, but how many voters do?...How many of them care that the Trump Administration is ignoring much of the bureaucracy....how many...have a real commitment to public education...And how many believe in interventionist foreign policy? Without the right training, few Americans can make sense of our complex government and our complex world. " DK
I agree with this. It really spells the end of the liberal democratic project since 1776, and of the Enlightenment before. It is really an indictment of the West.
But it can sound a little bit like Soviet propaganda, can't it.
I agree with this. It really spells the end of the liberal democratic project since 1776, and of the Enlightenment before. It is really an indictment of the West.
But it can sound a little bit like Soviet propaganda, can't it.
Further, telling readers we triumphed over all our crises, (especially the Soviet debacle of WWII, which we lost to them in spades), and the Enlightened rational bourgeois merchant (Left) North beat the passionate emotional aristocratic (Imperialist Ancien Regime Right) South, is not fulfilling for the author, really, even if the audience for which it is written always buys it, and even if one believes it oneself.
But doesn't it, too, smack a little much of Soviet propaganda, (taking advantage, once again, as they did since the 30s, of America's racial divisions for tactical reasons,) pitting good North against bad South forever?
I write here for myself, for those who can follow it, and even, at times, for those who cannot. My stuff can sound a bit like Soviet propaganda. Putin says such things as Western liberalism has choked the West.
It is not just propaganda, as Thomas L Friedman has noted re Trump. Some things are true even if Putin says them, and even if they are Soviet propaganda. The most effective propaganda, after all, is propaganda containing some truth.
Sometimes the best propaganda, in a Whig world, is something completely true. It queers the Whig audience.
My view is that one is better off not writing whig interpretation propaganda because the audience cannot follow anything more complex, more accurate, more true, more messy, more ambiguous, more unprogressive, more repulsive, or more disappointing.
One is better off not writing left or right propaganda.
But doesn't it, too, smack a little much of Soviet propaganda, (taking advantage, once again, as they did since the 30s, of America's racial divisions for tactical reasons,) pitting good North against bad South forever?
I write here for myself, for those who can follow it, and even, at times, for those who cannot. My stuff can sound a bit like Soviet propaganda. Putin says such things as Western liberalism has choked the West.
It is not just propaganda, as Thomas L Friedman has noted re Trump. Some things are true even if Putin says them, and even if they are Soviet propaganda. The most effective propaganda, after all, is propaganda containing some truth.
Sometimes the best propaganda, in a Whig world, is something completely true. It queers the Whig audience.
My view is that one is better off not writing whig interpretation propaganda because the audience cannot follow anything more complex, more accurate, more true, more messy, more ambiguous, more unprogressive, more repulsive, or more disappointing.
One is better off not writing left or right propaganda.
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
Monday, July 4, 2016
ROBERT PALMER RE THE MOST LIGHTLY TAXED GROUP IN THE WORLD
"One suspects that 'no taxation without representation' meant no taxation with representation, either."
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
RE BOBBITT'S STATES OF TERROR VERSUS STATES OF CONSENT
"The mainspring of popular government in time of revolution is both virtue and terror... Terror is nothing but justice,... the principle of democracy, applied to the pressing needs of the country." Robespierre
See Palmer The Struggle, p 124, comparing the ideals of Adams and Robespierre.
Adams had had an idyllic situation, the Powers had been on his side, against England.
Robespierre did not, the Powers had united against revolutionary France.
So, why had the powers been for the revolutionary colonials, but against revolutionary France?
Good question.
Why was Thomas Paine put in Prison by Robespierre's government? Good question.
Thomas Paine: Samantha Power
See Palmer The Struggle, p 124, comparing the ideals of Adams and Robespierre.
Adams had had an idyllic situation, the Powers had been on his side, against England.
Robespierre did not, the Powers had united against revolutionary France.
So, why had the powers been for the revolutionary colonials, but against revolutionary France?
Good question.
Why was Thomas Paine put in Prison by Robespierre's government? Good question.
Thomas Paine: Samantha Power
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
WOOD THEY KNEW NOT WHAT THEY HAD WROUGHT
For me, at least, this excuse, for the founders' course of actions, doesn't wash.
One might as well exonerate the jacobins, Marat and Robespierre, on these grounds.
They knew what they had wrought, especially the early Republican, Jefferson.
AT LEAST ALAN TAYLOR MOSTLY TELLS THE TRUTH FOR A CHANGE ABOUT THE FOUNDING FATHERS :
"...One obvious error, actually in the larger scheme of things an enormous error given his topic, he today accuses Hamilton of having recklessly associated Jefferson with the bloody jacobins of the French Revolution.That is exactly what Jefferson was; Hamilton was hardly reckless, in fact the opposite, to have said so, and it is easy to show that it was quite, and obviously, true.
See Palmer, Struggle, p. 267, and references cited...."
Most Americans deride Jefferson's memory because he kept his slaves and had children with Hemings.
That is not my objection to Jefferson at all. In these things he was somewhat typical.
One might as well exonerate the jacobins, Marat and Robespierre, on these grounds.
They knew what they had wrought, especially the early Republican, Jefferson.
AT LEAST ALAN TAYLOR MOSTLY TELLS THE TRUTH FOR A CHANGE ABOUT THE FOUNDING FATHERS :
"...One obvious error, actually in the larger scheme of things an enormous error given his topic, he today accuses Hamilton of having recklessly associated Jefferson with the bloody jacobins of the French Revolution.That is exactly what Jefferson was; Hamilton was hardly reckless, in fact the opposite, to have said so, and it is easy to show that it was quite, and obviously, true.
See Palmer, Struggle, p. 267, and references cited...."
Most Americans deride Jefferson's memory because he kept his slaves and had children with Hemings.
That is not my objection to Jefferson at all. In these things he was somewhat typical.
Friday, December 2, 2016
TOCQUEVILLE FOIBLES I HAVE A DREAM
"all my hatred...is concentrated against those who, after a thousand years of equality, introduced slavery into the world again."
There has never been a single moment of world equality, or a moment without slavery.
Saying anyone in particular re introduced it is compounded sophism.
Identifying Christianity too closely with either liberty, equality, or fraternity: Paul's "in Christ is neither Jew nor Greek", proved to be disastrous. Palmer, Struggle, The Republics at Rome and Naples, 1799 or so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)