Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Liberal Academic determinism?

David Thompson politely examines philosophy professor Jere Surber’s “argument” that academics in the Humanities naturally trend “liberal” because their nuanced understanding of the “complexities of history” — to which they lay claim as a function of having made it all the way through Georg Lukács’ History and Class Consciousness without once stopping to purchase a Diet Coke, presumably — leads them to an obvious intellectual endpoint: progressivism.

That progressivism — and the socialism and soft fascism required for its intellectual undergirding — keeps failing as it runs into the realities of the market (and the unintended consequences that result from attempting to subvert individualism in favor of a kind of state-monitored tribalism by way of increasingly intrusive legislation) seems never to trouble those like Surber; in fact, their idea of intellectualism, inasmuch as it brackets actual data in favor of privileging political and social desire, is not really intellectualism at all. Instead, it’s a rather wordy masturbation fantasy.

Which is why the proper response to Dr Surber would be to approach him outside the faculty lounge and say something like, “Tell me, philosophy boy… what is the sound of one hand clapping?”

— Then, when he hesitates, slap him across his face.

From there I recommend you go get yourself a pack of Hostess Snowballs and enjoy the delicious combination of sugar-coated coconut sliver, marshmallow, and soft cookie platform. Trust me: you’ll get more out of it than you would trying to argue the smug off a philosophy teacher’s face.

****
See also, Jonah Goldberg, here and here.

282 Replies to “Liberal Academic determinism?”

  1. bh says:

    Well, I just figured Jere Surber couldn’t pass calculus.

  2. bh says:

    What’s the area under the curve, Jere? C’mon, smart guy.

  3. Blake says:

    Progressives lawmaking: Whack-a-mole played on a national stage.

  4. Blake says:

    Hmm, extra “s” at the end of “progressive.”

  5. Alec Leamas says:

    rather wordy masturbation fantasy

    I propose we start a band and call it this.

  6. R. Sherman says:

    Frankly, for the reasons you cite, I’ve become a disciple of Jean-Baptiste Botul. If Lévy can do it, so can I.

    Regards.

  7. B Moe says:

    Is it possible to be both redundant and an oxymoron? I kind of feel that way about “fake philosopher”.

  8. dicentra says:

    Just wondering about the denizens of this blog: How did any of you manage to major in the Humanities (or similar soft subject) and yet not come to the right conclusions about how the world works?

    Besides a mortal dread of the demonsheep, I mean.

  9. baxtrice says:

    Oh Jeff to have you as a college professor.. the fun I could have while learning instead of being indoctrinated.

  10. sdferr says:

    From R. Sherman’s link (for which, thanks Mr. Sherman), the last line:

    Mr Pagès kept up the joke last night, saying: “It has never been firmly established that Botul didn’t exist and it cannot thus be ruled out that one day history will prove Bernard-Henri Lévy right.”

    Ah history, our savior and hero.

    In the meantime, Mr Pagès will keep his own knowings (clappings?) to himself.

  11. B Moe says:

    Just wondering about the denizens of this blog: How did any of you manage to major in the Humanities (or similar soft subject) and yet not come to the right conclusions about how the world works?

    I dropped out before it had time to take.

  12. bh says:

    Besides my essentially ad hom snark, there is another way to think about this. Would it be harder to get a good grade in Jeff’s class or in a bizarro world liberal Jeff’s class?

    In one, you couldn’t bullshit. Personally, I always found bullshit was even easier than slightly expanding the page margins.

  13. alppuccino says:

    The Hostess Snowball is best enjoyed in one bite. Both at once not recommended for the novice.

  14. alppuccino says:

    …and that, as you know, is as intellectual as I get.

  15. bh says:

    I can’t even express how immensely hilarious I find Sherman’s link.

  16. bh says:

    Perhaps this is on topic, who knows? One thing I’ve always loved about those with musical ability is the way they have this fantastic brain function that’s fairly rare and they never seem to rub your nose in it.

  17. geoffb says:

    From the second Jonah Goldberg link.

    Or, I can sum up my view of why the humanities are less rigorous with even more pith: There’s no math.

  18. TexasDoc says:

    Why don’t you see more liberals in health care, natural sciences or law enforcement? Easy answer – those are all areas which require direct accountability and responsibility for results. Last time I looked, no one is ever held responsible for a garish painting or a poorly written novel.

  19. TmjUtah says:

    I had history figured out by the time I was about twelve:

    The side with the most artillery wins.

    Right up until 1945, great powers fought wars of decision. Winners, and losers. The basic humanity inherent in our Republic – and the physical and moral weariness resulting from fighting two world wars – brought on a period of joust and posture that has lasted to this day. The Bear died of economic contradiction concomitant with totalitarianism… but we’ve since pretty well ceded the “good guy” hat as public policy.

    We’ve elected a government (all of it) evenly split between self-loathing free men and baby sitters.

    Hope I don’t live to see the return of winner take all. Because with the current cast of characters, we’d lose.

  20. newrouter says:

    “I don’t live to see the return of winner take all.”

    where’s the nuance in that?

  21. psycho... says:

    Just wondering […]

    I, like, for-real hated The Man and shit, in an already almost fully complexified way, so seeing his mind at work behind all right conclusions, and his (very) face on the signers-on to those conclusions, I was all “Nuh-uh.”

    It was like disillusionment, but much faster.

  22. bh says:

    I feel kinda knee-jerky. Guys like Umberto Eco kick all kinds of ass. And, of course, probably a dozen others I’m simply ignorant of.

    There’s just so much bathwater and so little baby though. It’s hard to resist the temptation.

  23. sdferr says:

    Two Dogmas of Empiricism, might make a nice pairing with the Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, if we can find it.

  24. LTC John says:

    Sorry bh, Umberto must be beaten soundly in payment for the ending of “the Mysterious Flame of Queen Laona”. Then he can go back about his business.

  25. geoffb says:

    Good original writing is hard as good original science is also. However, to echo, perhaps, bh a bit.

    If the hard sciences at the college level were to follow the model of the Humanities then there would exist honored Departments, complete with Chair-persons, faculty, advanced degrees, in Alchemy and Astrology standing right along side the Chemistry and Astronomy Departments.

    This is not inherent in the Humanities but is a consequence of Leftist politics which has brought this marker to the areas of study it most thoroughly infests. The CRU scandal is/was one attempt at bringing the same political influenced education to infest the sciences.

  26. Benedick says:

    I did poli sci at Emory. Poli Sci is a field of varying levels of scientific rigor, depending on your concentration. A lot of it is pure humanities (narrative, case-study, etc.), but a good bit of it has become empirical. I had a thesis advisor who persuaded me to do a statistical (regression analysis) project about Supreme Court decision-making. Which made it quite a bit more scientific than some of the papers being cobbled together by my peers. Said advisor, by the way, is an unabashed liberal — but not the sort to preach it or hold against you your contrarian ideas. Still keep in touch with him. Solid dude.

  27. bh says:

    Heh, LTC John, perhaps so.

    You guys ever hear about the baseball player Rube Waddell? Apparently he was a bit soft in the head (allegedly) and opposing fans could distract him by holding up puppies. I feel like that sometimes with sdferr’s philosophy links. I start reading them, then I feel like I have to diagram some of the ideas or come up with little formulas. Then, later, I think “Oh yeah, there’s a comment thread going on and Lost is about to be on TV.”

  28. bh says:

    But, for a better analogy, I’m like a Rube Waddell who gets distracted by a puppy held up by a teammate.

  29. Jim in KC says:

    Just wondering about the denizens of this blog: How did any of you manage to major in the Humanities (or similar soft subject) and yet not come to the right conclusions about how the world works?

    Well, I started out intending to go J-school, dropped out to join the Marine Corps, went back on a ROTC scholarship as an English major, then finished up my active duty tour instead of graduating. So naturally I work in IT now.

    Demonsheep, I have shotguns for…

  30. steph says:

    G R Elton was not a progressive. Yet, he was an historian. Just sayin

  31. Bob says:

    It’s really stunning to think so many right wingers have bought Jonah Goldberg’s brand of revisionist history and pseudo intellectualism. It is really pathetic, fixing the facts around a policy. Sound familiar? The thing is, his audience is so poorly educated, they actually buy the shit … hook, line and sinker. Goldberg has been thoroughly debunked. But, if you like a little wingnut masturbation, enjoy his BS.

  32. Alec Leamas says:

    But, if you like a little wingnut masturbation, enjoy his BS.

    Anyone else imagine Bobaloo was one of those “edgy” types on campus who carried around the little red book all serious like?

  33. steph says:

    “Just sayin” is shorthand for, “there’s a point to be made here. maybe about how the texts don’t fall in line with the agenda of the instucting prof using the the text”, but its global warmining again to the tune of another 20 inches or so and since I have no intention of risking life and limb to play fool for the “man” tomorrow, I’ve decided the best recourse is Beefeaters. Just sayin.

  34. bh says:

    Non sequitur much?

    It makes you look dumb, Bob. Keep fucking that chicken though.

  35. Benedick says:

    I think Bob nicely illustrated the points Jonah made today on NRO.

  36. steph says:

    Oh, yea, and Bob, if indeed that is your real name, since I’ve decided to blow off tomorrow, I’ve got a full night of wingnut masterbating ahead of me. “Oh Jonah .. oh god oh god oh god .. pseudo intellectualism .. ism .. ism.. “. Where’s the kleenix when you need it?

  37. slackjawedyokel says:

    I always thought that Georg Lukács should have quit after Return of the Jedi. The last three movies sucked.

  38. Bob says:

    Goldberg … Thoroughly debunked

    One of the most persistent components of this is the right’s ardent embrace of the fraudulent thesis of Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism — to wit, that “properly understood, fascism is not a phenomenon of the right at all. Instead, it is, and always has been, a phenomenon of the left.” The embrace of this fraud as somehow truthful has produced those teabaggers’ signs bearing swastikas (suggesting that health-care reform is fascist) and signs showing Barack Obama as Hitler and, moreover, the claims that Obama is marching the nation down the road to fascism.

    These pseudo intellectual assertions by Goldberg are distilled down to the teabaggers by the likes of Glen Beck and his chalk board. You know the Tea Klux Klan that has contributed so much intelligent debate on today’s most important issues… like Obama the Nazi-fascist-socialist, Obama’s birth certificate, and Obama’s continuing efforts to kill your grandmother, etc…

    Real bright bulbs we have here.

  39. dicentra says:

    Bob:

    Dropping a big steaming pile of ad hominem in a comment section might constitute a fine argument over at crooks and liars, but over here, you gots to back it up with one of two things:

    • A sound argument
    • A bitchin’ submission hold

    You’re 0-2 so far. Wanna try again?

  40. Benedick says:

    I don’t think “debunked” means what Bob apparently thinks it means.

  41. bh says:

    Okay, which one of you is doing Bob? A bit of the top but a pretty good facsimile overall.

  42. Alec Leamas says:

    Someone was absent the day Sister taught debunking.

  43. Benedick says:

    I say “apparently” because I wouldn’t presume to claim a divination of his intent.

  44. steph says:

    Bob, did you know that “Bob” spelled backwords is Bob?

  45. Jeff G. says:

    Seems Jonah didn’t take that supposed debunking and just run away home, Bob.

    Oh, and just so you know? The punctuation marks used here are more intelligent than you are.

  46. Jeff G. says:

    I hope Bob doesn’t spend as much time fitting men’s testicles into his mouth as he does into his prose.

    Not that there’s anything with that, naturally — just that it would leave him so little time for all that learnin’ he’s been missing.

  47. steph says:

    (Meanwhile, back in Bobland, Bob feverishly googles “response to jonah debunk of criticism”. Ho hum.)Where is the damn vaseline?

  48. Alec Leamas says:

    Bob, did you know that “Bob” spelled backwords is Bob?

    IP address is from Twin Peaks, Washington . . .

  49. Alec Leamas says:

    You have got to know that when your big gun is that imbecile Neiwert, things aren’t going to go well for you.

  50. steph says:

    I’d sure like a cup of Joe about now.
    But what about Bob?

  51. Blake says:

    “I understood the infamous terror which this movement exerts, particularly on the bourgeoisie, which is neither morally nor mentally equal to such attacks; at a given sign it unleashes a veritable barrage of lies and slanders against whatever adversary seems most dangerous, until the nerve of the person breaks down…”

    Adolph Hitler as quoted by William Shirer in “The Rise and Fall of the third Reich”

    Neatly describes the tactics of the liberal left.

    Try again, Bob.

  52. bh says:

    Is there a German word for “I find empiricism hard to pin down but at least I’m not Bob”?

    Seems like there at least ought to be.

  53. geoffb says:

    My wife had a friend at college named “Bob“. Such a fine friend that he lives with us still. He makes more sense in the world than the “Bob” trolling through here, but then her “Bob” was given the last name of Marley so he has something to live up to.

  54. steph says:

    Bob?
    boB?
    (Bob – Did you see what I just did there?)
    Seriously, Bob, you’ve had like 25 minutes to cut and paste a response. And yet… nothing. Where is the love?

  55. Darleen says:

    those teabaggers’ signs bearing swastikas (suggesting that health-care reform is fascist) and signs showing Barack Obama as Hitler and, moreover, the claims that Obama is marching the nation down the road to fascism.

    Oh goody, yet another scrotum-dipping-obsessed Leftbot with a few index cards of spam points to randomly drop into comment sections.

    Bobby “claim” seems to be since Goldberg’s book as been THOROUGHLY DEBUNKED!!1!! nothing Goldberg says, now or ever can ever be right. Never. Always lies.

    boring, empty tactic.

  56. Jeff G. says:

    Also, I imagine regular readers of this site bought into the liberal fascism thesis long before Jonah’s book on the subject, if for no other reason than I’ve been making the same argument for years — albeit, I’ve used certain ideas about language held by the left intelligentsia (and the concession to such ideas on the right) as my jumping off point.

    You’re free to disagree, Bob — and counter the arguments — but to show up here and pretend that you’re dealing with a bunch of slack-jawed cousin fuckers is just going to end poorly for you.

  57. dicentra says:

    That’s a little better, Bob. At least you produced a thesis statement:

    “properly understood, fascism is not a phenomenon of the right at all. Instead, it is, and always has been, a phenomenon of the left.”

    Unfortunately, that’s Jonah Goldberg’s thesis statement. The rest of your comment consists of one logical fallacy after another, to wit:

    Argumentum ad verecundiam
    “Goldberg … Thoroughly debunked”

    The list you link to contains the protestations of actual progressives who are not about to admit that yeah, their ideological ancestry can trace back to fascism. Not in a million years.

    Arugmentum ad hominem
    “teabaggers”
    “pseudo intellectual assertions”
    “teabaggers”
    “the likes of Glen Beck and his chalk board”
    “Tea Klux Klan”

    Petitio Principii
    “embrace of this fraud as somehow truthful”
    “the right’s ardent embrace of the fraudulent thesis”

    Strawmen
    “signs bearing swastikas…and signs showing Barack Obama as Hitler”

    The Hitler and swastika signs were borne by Lyndon LaRouche supporters, who should never be confused with conservatives.

    “Obama the Nazi-fascist-socialist”
    “Obama’s birth certificate”
    “Obama’s continuing efforts to kill your grandmother”
    “Obama is marching the nation down the road to fascism”

    Furthermore, you get points take off for not addressing the thesis of this post, which is that intellectuals believe that the ONLY proper interpretation of history is the one they prefer, everyone else being a total moron.

    Liberal Fascism doesn’t even address that point.

    AND.

    The other side point is that the Humanities don’t provide rigorous fields of study, that they’re full of fluff and nonsense.

    See if you can see how I’ve deconstructed that thesis in this very comment.

  58. geoffb says:

    Twin Peaks, Washington . . .

    BOB!!!!

  59. dicentra says:

    Except that I didn’t.

    Because I didn’t learn a damn thing about logical fallacies in school. Not even at Cornell (where there is actual Parthenocissus tricuspidata on the walls. I saw it! And I even know that it’s not actually ivy!)

    I produced my comment by consulting this web site. Knocked it off in just a few minutes. Most of the commentariat here could do the same.

    Also, geoffb, my pony-tail palm is languishing in my east window, above the kitchen sink. But it sure hangs on, even after having the dirt kicked out of it several times.

  60. steph says:

    Dicentra – re #58 – I want to marry you. I have secret sql statements at my beck and whim, btw.

    Meanwhile…

    Bob?

    Bobby?

    You left some shit on the floor and you need to clean it up.

    ROBERT!

    Clean up in aisle “pseudo intellectual Jonah”.

    Ooops, I did it again.

  61. bh says:

    Petitio Principii = begging the question. (I can’t have been the only one to hit the ol’ Google for that.)

  62. Darleen says:

    dicentra

    Brava!

  63. dicentra says:

    Missing comment alert. WordPress ate it and ain’t giving it back.

    Bad blogging software. Bad!

  64. Darleen says:

    I can’t have been the only one to hit the ol’ Google for that

    nope. Sometimes I just sit back and marvel at di.

  65. dicentra says:

    Jeff, you got filters on your comment section? Cuz I said summat that WordPress just doesn’t like.

  66. Alec Leamas says:

    Just wondering about the denizens of this blog: How did any of you manage to major in the Humanities (or similar soft subject) and yet not come to the right conclusions about how the world works?

    My undergraduate degrees are in Classics and Philosophy. Classics is most definitely not soft; very few of my classes consisted of more than three students, and one was expected to have prepared the text for each class, which was very often a task which took upwards of four hours per class. If you have multiple Greek and Latin classes in a semester, you might not have much time left over for anything else. Most Classics professors were either Roman Catholic religious, vaguely liberal, or not very much in this world and therefore apolitical.

    Philosophy held its share of political proselytizers, but like so much in college you have to suck it up and mutter “jerkoff” under your breath when it makes you feel better. One asshole admitted to liking to give NROTC students in dress a hard time because he could. Would have liked to cockpunch him, as he deserved it.

  67. B Moe says:

    Anyone else imagine Bobaloo was one of those “edgy” types on campus who carried around the little red book all serious like?

    Was?

  68. dicentra says:

    Whoa! There it is. Number 66.

  69. bh says:

    Dicentra’s comment didn’t make it through the software because it was so chockful of curses and profanity.

    Well, it’s a funny idea anyways.

  70. bh says:

    66?

    Di = Alec?

  71. geoffb says:

    LaRoush signs. LaRoush resume.

    In 1980, 1984, 1988, and 1992, he sought the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination, and has also sought election to the U.S. Congress, as an independent Democrat, from Virginia’s 10th C.D.

  72. bh says:

    Logically can’t be #66. Di, you asked the question.

  73. TmjUtah says:

    High School grad.

    Went to surveying because somebody has to ensure the stuff all flows downhill.

    BTW, you know why George Washington and Abe Lincoln ran for president, right?

    At some point in their lives they found themselves knee deep in a snake and mosquito infested swamp, over budget and out of time, equipment, and help and swore that they’d have an inside job next season…

  74. steph says:

    BOB! Listen up.
    Seriously, I’ve got foie gras, mission figs, and pork bellies to deal with. Could you please fuckin cut and paste an “intellectual” response soon. Otherwise, you’re just so much bacon.
    Oooh.
    Bacon.

  75. dicentra says:

    My undergraduate degrees are in Classics and Philosophy

    Yeah. See, if you had to learn ancient Greek or Latin, that’s rigor. If you had to read all of the old philosophers and then expound on them intelligently, that’s rigor.

    Linguistics can also be a rigorous subject as long as you’re not stuck in Noam Chomsky land, because you have to deal with actual data and analysis.

    Furthermore, a true liberal education would tax the mind something awful. It would turn you into VDH or David Allen White or someone like my now-retired Spanish professor, Ciriaco Morón Arroyo (how cool a name is Ciriaco?), a devout Catholic who was Jesuit trained and who specialized in the history of ideas.

    I couldn’t get away with anything when I did my initial work for my thesis. He insisted on precision in terminology like I’d never seen before. He could tell you the ins and outs of Aquinas, Pseudo-Dionysius, Aristotle — anyone — break down the complex neo-Platonic philosophical systems, tell you about the word choices in don Quijote (that few if any modern professors could fathom) and how they informed Cervantes’ concept of the mind.

    One of my professors ran into him in Madrid, just by chance, and said he was there to research X. Ciriaco rattled of a series of book titles, chapters, authors, and even Dewey-decimal numbers of books that he’d need to consult. The man was a walking encyclopedia. A scholar’s scholar. Just amazing.

    Best of all, he didn’t possess the arrogance of his peers. He knew he was functionally an idiot-savant — extremely gifted in one area but helpless to mediocre in others — and consequently was Not A Leftist.

  76. sdferr says:

    Liberal Academic Determinism.

    They were the ones they’d been waiting for, as their prophecies had foretold. And told and told and told. Waiting, stalled in the lobby without a book. And not a Starbucks in sight. Damn those benches are hard.

  77. steph says:

    Bob talk’ed smack then
    Dis’a’pear’ed for ev’er
    What a fuck’ing dick.

  78. dicentra says:

    This is what I’m seeing in Firefox:

    64. Comment by dicentra on 2/9 @ 8:02 pm #

    Missing comment alert. WordPress ate it and ain’t giving it back.

    Bad blogging software. Bad!

    65. Comment by Darleen on 2/9 @ 8:02 pm #

    I can’t have been the only one to hit the ol’ Google for that

    nope. Sometimes I just sit back and marvel at di.

    66. Comment by dicentra on 2/9 @ 8:03 pm #

    Dammit! The secret to my success is in that missing comment! Lemme try again:

    Except that I didn’t.

    Because I didn’t learn a damn thing about logical fallacies in school. Not even at Cornell (where there is actual Parthenocissus tricuspidata on the walls. I saw it! And I even know that it’s not actually ivy!)

    I produced my comment by consulting this web site. Knocked it off in just a few minutes. Most of the commentariat here could do the same.

    Also, geoffb, my pony-tail palm is languishing in my east window, above the kitchen sink. But it sure hangs on, even after having the dirt kicked out of it several times.

    67. Comment by dicentra on 2/9 @ 8:04 pm #

    Jeff, you got filters on your comment section? Cuz I said summat that WordPress just doesn’t like.

    68. Comment by Alec Leamas on 2/9 @ 8:05 pm #

    Just wondering about the denizens of this blog: How did any of you manage to major in the Humanities (or similar soft subject) and yet not come to the right conclusions about how the world works?

    My undergraduate degrees are in Classics and Philosophy

    ***
    If you’re seeing something else, I don’t know what to say.

  79. bh says:

    Firefox here too. Your 66 has been eaten again I think, di.

  80. dicentra says:

    But! But! I can SEE it. Your last is #81, yeah?

  81. bh says:

    But, no matter, it’s copied now in 78, for me anyways.

  82. bh says:

    Timetravel much? Yes. 81. But, also I think you’re referring to my 79.

    You asked about my 81 before I typed it.

    Trippy!

  83. sdferr says:

    Does “eaten it” mean you hit “say it”, the page reloads and your comment just isn’t there? Or does it mean something else?

  84. dicentra says:

    I hit view source and see that my comment did post originally, as 858812, two posts after my logical fallacies one, as #66.

    And I got it again as 858818, which for me is #66.

    I didn’t see the original in #60 until I fed it into the URL: https://proteinwisdom.com/?p=16683#comment-858812

    Weird. Really weird.

  85. bh says:

    Dicentra doesn’t obey our silly spacetime rules.

    Greatest thread ever!

  86. dicentra says:

    But, also I think you’re referring to my 79.

    steph is at 79. You guys stop it.

    Does “eaten it” mean you hit “say it”, the page reloads and your comment just isn’t there?

    Yes. And then when I hit Say It! again, WordPress tells me I’ve already said it.

  87. sdferr says:

    Which, I’ve had that happen now and then, to which my response has reflexively become, hit the Back button on the Nav. bar, recover the comment, alter it slightly or grossly, depending, and post it again. Rinse and repeat as necessary until the proper effect is achieved.

  88. cynn says:

    Yes, we progs are left bereft. We are sitting in a clogged and offensive airport waiting room, where nothing ever takes off, and everyone’s on the phone.

  89. dicentra says:

    alter it slightly or grossly

    Hence my 66. Which didn’t show up either, until later.

    MOM!

  90. sdferr says:

    It’s a bitch determinism is, no getting around it.

  91. dicentra says:

    cynn: You’re thinking of No Exit. It’s been done.

    But nice image.

  92. geoffb says:

    #86-87

    Me also, same thing.

  93. bh says:

    Steph is at 77 for me. Someone else confirm. I’m not gaslighting you, di.

  94. bh says:

    Reference point comment.

    What comment number is this for everyone else?

  95. geoffb says:

    Reminded me of “Beetlejuice” but I’m prole through and through.

  96. geoffb says:

    #94

  97. B Moe says:

    Reference point comment.

    What comment number is this for everyone else?

    94. What do I win.

  98. bh says:

    #94 for me as well.

  99. LBascom says:

    dicentra…#75

    I know exactly what you mean. When I was in high school, I read a Louis L’Amour novel once.

    It had cowboys and shit.

  100. dicentra says:

    Ok, you guys.

    1. Right-click somewhere on the page and select View Page Source.
    2. Search for these two numbers: 858812 and 858818.
    3. Verify their existence as my posts, versions one and two.
    4. Return to this page and refresh.

    Yeah?

  101. sdferr says:

    Looking at view source, I find there is no 858812, just 858811 straight to 858813. dunno

  102. sdferr says:

    same thing with 858817 straight to 858819, no 858818 is there.

  103. dicentra says:

    HA!

    I’m seeing the right page view and you’re not. Neener neener.

  104. dicentra says:

    What’s the HTML code when you want the HTML reader to ignore the tags?

  105. bh says:

    I’m assuming it’s html related because otherwise we’re all traveling at extreme speeds relative to di.

  106. sdferr says:

    Sounds like it’s a local condition, kinda like you can have a swamp cooler thingy and I can’t.

  107. geoffb says:

    You do have powers far beyond those of other mortals. Your own private internet.

  108. sdferr says:

    So if there were no brownies and pie was naught but a distant memory, what would it be, that shining thing on the hill?

    Pudding? Is it pudding I see?

  109. ThomasD says:

    It is sad commentary on the state of academia that philosophy professor Surber is not only capable of producing such a blatantly self serving and decidedly uncritical assessment, but is also willing to put it out for public review. One would think such an act to be an academic suicide.

    The entire effort is weak. He does not even define his terms. You would think a man who calls himself a Doctor of Philosophy would recognize that the liberal in Liberal Arts might not carry remotely the same meaning as implied in it’s common American political connotations, and thus require some sort of clarification. No, he just skips right past that conundrum getting on to what he really wants to do – throw his great moral weight behind Obama and lash out at some current personalities. This is his notion of progress in the sweep of history?

    Sad.

  110. B Moe says:

    I am starting to wonder how many of my posts I can see and nobody else can.

    Why are you looking at me like that?

  111. dicentra says:

    I used to say that the proof of God’s existence is that no godless universe would contain chocolate pudding, but now there is Ace’s joke, and I really can’t bring myself to do it anymore.

  112. geoffb says:

    my pony-tail palm is languishing in my east window, above the kitchen sink.

    Unfortunately ours is over 7 ft. tall and is currently at the only unobstructed south window. I want to put him outside in the summer but fear he will grow more and won’t fit back inside.

  113. dicentra says:

    I just found the tag that makes the thing ignore HTML tags. It’s the pre tag, and WordPress doesn’t like it.

    Effing commie fascist machine.

  114. Jim in KC says:

    I’m with sdferr, those two are missing from the source as well as from the page. True for both Firefox and Safari on my Mac.

  115. dicentra says:

    One would think such an act to be an academic suicide.

    Are you kidding? He’ll be hoisted on the shoulders of his fellows and paraded around campus. He showed them.

    All that stuff you mentioned — defining his terms, producing actual arguments — has been deprecated on account of being constructs of the White Patriarchy that were designed to oppress Teh Other.

    I AM NOT KIDDING.

    That’s their argument. They don’t even WANT to be rigorous anymore, because that means throwing in with The Man.

  116. sdferr says:

    Finally, most liberal-arts professors come from a background of liberal education, which emphasizes the role that values play in human affairs. (I admit that “values” is sort of a tired, old-fashioned notion, but no other word covers the same territory.) More important, they’ve learned that values inevitably conflict, and they have developed the skills to interpret these clashes with nuance, envisioning various forms of resolution or mediation. In a certain sense, from Plato to Hegel to Derrida, philosophy—the paradigmatic liberal art—has been engaged with nothing but those questions.

    There you go Darleen. He’s your man.

  117. dicentra says:

    I’m with sdferr, those two are missing from the source as well as from the page.

    I’d accuse Jeff of screwing with us, but I don’t thing he knows how to rig it so that nobody can see two of my comments but me. I don’t think anyone does.

  118. guinsPen says:

    If you had to read all of the old philosophers and then expound on them intelligently, that’s rigor.

    “And if the moon hit your eye like a big pizza pie, that’s amore.”

  119. Jeff G. says:

    The problem with the Humanities isn’t necessarily the study of any of its disciplines but rather how they are studied and taught — and how easy it has become, as both a student and a teacher, to bullshit your way through them simply by accepting and regurgitating the propaganda of those who have taken over the various departments (nearly all of which come from attached to at least some bit of the New Left).

  120. dicentra says:

    Clear back in ought-five I composed the following verses:

    In the sea you will spy,
    The green googly eye
    Of the moray…

    If it’s slim and it’s sleek
    And it nibbles your cheek,
    That’s a moray…

    When you’re out on the reef,
    Some fish gives you some grief.
    That’s a moray…

    On the ocean, you know,
    Something bites your elbow,
    That’s a moray…

    When you swim in the sea,
    Something takes out your knee,
    That’s a moray…

    It can rise to the bait
    And can evicerate
    What a moray!

    So I sent it to my brother (who had sung verse 5 to me originally) and he sends back:

    When a photo’s not clean,
    Check for out-of-whack screen,
    That’s … a moire!

  121. guinsPen says:

    You should’ve seen the art department when I said, “God bless Donald Rumsfeld.”

  122. ThomasD says:

    All that stuff you mentioned — defining his terms, producing actual arguments — has been deprecated on account of being constructs of the White Patriarchy that were designed to oppress Teh Other.

    Well, I’m something of an optimist. At one time phrenology was considered actual science, but in time it was discredited (even though some of the foundational principles were valid if not precisely accurate.) The true sweep of progress and knowledge has involved multiple mis-steps, misadventures, with all sorts of necessary back tracking and corrections.

    So long as we don’t find ourselves on a beach standing next to Charlton Heston and one half of Lady Liberty I have faith that today’s academic excesses will one day be held in severe disregard.

    That Dr. Surber finds himself reduced to writing 1500 word polemics in an online trade rag communicates more self-truths than he likely finds comfortable much less comforting.

  123. dicentra says:

    how they are studied and taught — and how easy it has become, as both a student and a teacher, to bullshit your way through them

    Bingo. I would be more impressed with my academic credentials if I had broken a sweat once or twice. As it was, I could just spend a few days researching a topic, blather away for 23 pages, and that was enough.

  124. sdferr says:

    Back in ’75 I beat morays to death with a baseball bat on the deck ’cause I hates the toothy bastards and they wount let go my hook.

  125. sdferr says:

    Copernicus preserved epicycles. He wasn’t joking.

  126. dicentra says:

    The true sweep of progress and knowledge has involved multiple mis-steps, misadventures, with all sorts of necessary back tracking and corrections.

    You’re assuming a desire to find, you know, the TRVTH at some level. The current crop of clowns are happy with what they’ve created and will alter their dogma only when it becomes fashionable to do so.

    So long as we don’t find ourselves on a beach standing next to Charlton Heston and one half of Lady Liberty

    In academe, we passed that point long ago. We’ll have to sweep away progressivism and its spawn completely and start over.

  127. John Bradley says:

    <pre> doesn’t make the browser ignore HTML tags. It says that text within the tag is preformatted – spaces and linebreaks are rendered as they appear in the source. (Normally, all whitespace is collapsed to a single space, and text word-wraps as it sees fit.)

    To ignore HTML tags, you’d wrap them in an HTML comment pair: <!– stuff –> Content within the comment pair is simply ignored, neither displayed or interpreted.

    (Sure wish there was a ‘preview’ button… crosses fingers)

  128. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    philosophy professor Jere Surber’s “argument” that academics in the Humanities naturally trend “liberal” because their nuanced understanding of the “complexities of history”

    Back when I majored in Philosophy, Surber’s analysis of the Humanities would be tantamount to calling the Humanities a Religion. Anything that fled from making sense by essentially claiming a niche beyond making understandable statements and allowing them to be publically and rationally analyzed, or by having some sort of sublime or ethereal way of knowing was in deep doo doo.

  129. gregorbo says:

    Anyone with a real liberal arts education cannot possibly end-up being a “liberal.”

  130. newrouter says:

    people who talk or write alot tend to be bullshitters

  131. Blake says:

    Dicentra, I bow to your demolition of Bob.

    ..way back, way back and gone!!! Touch ’em all, Dicentra!! You really crushed that Bob outa the park!!!(obligatory baseball metaphor..pitchers and catchers in 10 days..woot!!)

  132. dicentra says:

    John.

    Yeah, but then I wouldn’t be able to cut and paste the missing code/text in this comment section and show it to all and sundry.

    Maybe if I try replacing all the angle brackets with their HTML names:

    <li id=”comment-858812″>
    <p>Comment by <a href=’https://proteinwisdom.com/pub’ rel=’external nofollow’ class=’url’>dicentra</a> on 2/9 @ 7:59 pm <a href=”#comment-858812″ title=””>#</a> </p>
    <p>Except that I didn’t.</p>

    <p>Because I didn’t learn a damn thing about logical fallacies in school. Not even at Cornell (where there is actual <i>Parthenocissus tricuspidata</i> on the walls. I saw it! And I even know that it’s not actually ivy!)</p>
    <p>I produced my comment by consulting <a href=”http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html” rel=”nofollow”>this web site</a>. Knocked it off in just a few minutes. Most of the commentariat here could do the same.</p>
    <p>Also, geoffb, my pony-tail palm is languishing in my east window, above the kitchen sink. But it sure hangs on, even after having the dirt kicked out of it several times.</p>
    </li>

    <li id=”comment-858818″>
    <p>Comment by <a href=’https://proteinwisdom.com/pub’ rel=’external nofollow’ class=’url’>dicentra</a> on 2/9 @ 8:03 pm <a href=”#comment-858818″ title=””>#</a> </p>

    <p>Dammit! The secret to my success is in that missing comment! Lemme try again:</p>
    <p>Except that I didn’t.</p>
    <p>Because I didn’t learn a damn thing about logical fallacies in school. Not even at Cornell (where there is actual <i>Parthenocissus tricuspidata</i> on the walls. I saw it! And I even know that it’s not actually ivy!)</p>
    <p>I produced my comment by consulting <a href=”http://www.fallacyfiles.org/strawman.html” rel=”nofollow”>this web site</a>. Knocked it off in just a few minutes. Most of the commentariat here could do the same.</p>

    <p>Also, geoffb, my pony-tail palm is languishing in my east window, above the kitchen sink. But it sure hangs on, even after having the dirt kicked out of it several times.</p>
    </li>

    That should do it.

    Jeff says he had to rescue both versions of the comment from the spam filter (dunno why they were there), lest I be banned for being a habitual spammer. Maybe that’s why.

  133. dicentra says:

    people who talk or write alot tend to be bullshitters

    HEY!

    Well, actually… it IS how I got through school.

  134. Jeff G. says:

    I speak fluent bullshit.

  135. Jim in KC says:

    That sounds a lot like AGW, Peden.

    Shocking.

  136. geoffb: people who talk or write alot tend to be bullshitters

    It’s still small consolation for having Jeff post so seldom.

    But yes, a mind is terrible thing to waste. That’s why I use mine sparingly.

  137. sdferr says:

    geoffb newrouter: people who talk or write alot tend to be bullshitters

  138. […] laugh of the week, tacked onto Jeff G's usual adroit pinning of the subject moth to the board of […]

  139. dicentra says:

    OK. These people must be stopped. They’ve just corrupted Captain America!

    h/t Ace and Glenn Beck

  140. ThomasD says:

    You’re assuming a desire to find, you know, the TRVTH at some level.

    Sort of. No, not in the middling masses that pass for much of today’s academia. I agree that they are a lost cause, but would further argue that most (even this Surber character) are simply clock punchers, and the fewer still who are the committed ideologues are, at most, building a very weak and unstable edifice.

    What I’m assuming (counting on, actually) is the humanity that has, historically speaking, managed to cough up the valued few who are well and truly interested what is essential. A valued few who have, at various times, managed to stand in opposition to forces substantially greater, and more malign than today’s effete academics, and make their ideas not only known, but active upon the larger world.

    I mean, we don’t even burn the heretics anymore.

  141. bh says:

    I think I mentioned to Jeff one time that I used to make up fake Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett folk wisdom for papers as a signature move. Never got caught.

    Ephedrine. Good times.

  142. newrouter says:

    sorry all i was aiming at people who think that a crease of ones pants or tingle in a leg are important things.

  143. Blake says:

    A long time ago, I was given a handout by a teacher at a JC. I was supposed to go through it as a study guide, answer a few questions and be ready for the next day.

    I gave up on the course and the teacher after the first sentence on the handout. It was a compound sentence I tried to reduce so I could figure out what the instructor wanted. I was unable to reduce the sentence to the point of making it coherent.

  144. ThomasD says:

    interested in what is essential…

  145. Jeff G. says:

    I’m not offended at all, newrouter.

    Because I can speak it fluently I know it when I read it. And there are those who will always hate me for that.

  146. sdferr says:

    “I mean, we don’t even burn the heretics anymore.”

    Which is the thing that gives me pause about the fulminations of a Dennett, a Dawkins or Harris over God-i-ness. That is, who’s to say we (humans, obvs.) won’t start again one day?

  147. dicentra says:

    I wasn’t upset either, newsy. You’re absolutely right. People whose skill-set involves wordsmithing also have the capability for bullsplat, just as doctors can be quacks and scientists can work at CRU.

  148. Blake says:

    sdferr,

    I dunno about the God people burning heretics.

    I’m not so sure about Progressive Liberals, though. Some of the stuff I see those people spew make me think they aren’t that far from learning how to build a large pyre upon which to burn anti-progs.

  149. dicentra says:

    sdferr: The proggs are eugenicists at heart, after all. George Bernard Shaw quite gleefully endorsed the use of a “humane gas” to get rid of the undesirables, but then Hitler went and spoiled it all.

    Abortion, birth control, and the “death panels” will do the same job, just more slowly.

  150. sdferr says:

    There’s just such a long long tradition of squishing the unGodly, were I in these guys shoes (and I’m not) I be a little more circumspect about paying out any more rope. Maybe a samizdat program would go over better, maybe a esoteric teaching, whatever/whichever.

  151. ThomasD says:

    Well, if we’re gonna have faith in a humanity that might produce a modern day Aristotle, then we’d also better be vigilant for an occasional Torquemada.

  152. Blake says:

    sferr,

    It depends on who is defining “unGodly.”

  153. newrouter says:

    oh watching beck today i find the tweed coat and pipe smoking crowd silly.(update to pc campus circa 2000)

  154. dicentra says:

    squishing the unGodly unfit

    FTFY.

    It was always the same urge — society won’t be right until we get rid of the undesirables, be they heretics or the feeble-minded. The criteria may changes but the urge to purge never goes completely away.

  155. sdferr says:

    Man that was a typo-grammatically fucked up little paragraph I did right there. So, I’d be, and maybe an

  156. sdferr says:

    I don’t like that sort of treatment, I must confess. I’m not really into having stuff fixed “for me”. I mean, if it’s bad or wrong, say so. But belittlement is fucked up.

  157. dicentra says:

    I didn’t mean that, sorry. I should have included “unfit” alongside “unGodly.”

  158. dicentra says:

    They being conceptually equivalent in that context.

  159. sdferr says:

    Socrates was unGodly in his fellow Athenian’s eyes. He was extinguished. Likewise, the Christ was seen a heretical sort. Annihilated. Who does these things?

  160. ThomasD says:

    We do.

  161. Bob says:

    Abortion, birth control, and the “death panels” will do the same job, just more slowly.

    Funny how in the echo chamber, the delusional are fully revealed.

  162. bh says:

    Apostate hunters.

  163. sdferr says:

    Print ayup, since a simple ayup wouldn’t take, WordPress being a mite fussy tonight.

  164. Jeff G. says:

    Funny how in the echo chamber, the delusional are fully revealed.

    Funny how you don’t see how funny it is you say this.

  165. dicentra says:

    Who does these things?

    People who don’t like to be challenged.

    I don’t believe that the people who did the extinguishing were merely misguided or blinded by their religious or philosophical prejudices.

    Isabella brought the Inquisition to Spain right after she and her husband, “the Christian kings,” successfully expelled the Moors from Granada in 1492. Because religious and political identity were practically identical in those days, Isabella wanted the inquisitors to root out her political enemies, who were easily identified as Muslims, Jews, and heretics.

    The label “heretic” was not applied in a fit of hysteria, either. Any Spaniard that Isabella saw as a threat got called a heretic — the idea that the person’s “impiety” was a threat to the soul of the nation was a mere pretext to carry out her vendettas.

    Likewise, Jesus called out the hypocrisy and moral vacuity of the Jewish leaders of the time. He was Causing Trouble. They couldn’t have that, so they use the Romans to carry out their dirty work (by law, only Romans could carry out capital punishment).

    There may be times when people genuinely are blinded by their religio/philosophical biases and rid themselves of someone they truly believe to be a threat, but most of the time it’s cynical destruction of one’s political enemies.

  166. ThomasD says:

    Yeah, I meant to mention the only reason I’m posting tonight is that I’m on the road. Posts from home seem to be getting eaten lately. I wasn’t sure if it as WP or Firefox.

  167. Jeff G. says:

    Okay, I’m off to watch Paranormal State and Paranormal Cops.

    Then I might summon the Beast and trade him my soul if he agrees to pack me a bowl and make me a really big turkey sandwich.

  168. dicentra says:

    Bob! You’re back!

    the delusional are fully revealed.

    Dude, again with the ad hominem. Can’t you, you know, craft an argument? Seriously, how do you justify your snobbery if you can’t even do THAT?

  169. geoffb says:

    sdferr,

    Thank you for #137.

    Spent the past hour warming and scraping the car then driving home. We are not up to Wash DC standards but 9 to 12 inches with blowing and drifting. My Sebring threw up a wake of white in the driveway and knocked it’s trail down to undercarriage height. Lots of shovel work on the morrow.

  170. Bob says:

    Read how Jonah Goldberg responds to his critics.

    As if the Tea Klux Klan isn’t proof enough….

  171. Pablo says:

    Then I might summon the Beast and trade him my soul if he agrees to pack me a bowl and make me a really big turkey sandwich.

    Shit, dude, if that’s all you’re asking for it, we should talk.

  172. sdferr says:

    Bobby Byrd? Is that you Bob?

  173. bh says:

    Well guys, Bob has me convinced. To hell with you all, I’m outta here!

  174. Darleen says:

    There you go Darleen. He’s your man.

    sdferr

    In case you didn’t notice, I haven’t referred to “values” in sometime. I use “principle”.

    YOUR influence, sir.

  175. ThomasD says:

    Better specify what the bowl gets packed with. It’d be a real bummer to find that the date he acquires your immortal soul gets bumped up by a heavy dose of paraquat.

  176. dicentra says:

    Here, let me help you. This is how you refute my argument:

    ***

    Abortion, birth control, and the “death panels” will do the same job, just more slowly.

    First, the term “death panels” is a loaded term that Sarah Palin coined to exaggerate the results of having the government offer a public option. No one is going to drag sick people in front of a panel that give the thumbs up or down on someone’s life, nor is there an effort afoot to give better treatment to the “fit” while letting the “unfit” die.

    Second, equating eugenics (which is a despicable idea) with abortion and birth control is likewise an exaggeration. Eugenics is the effort to improve the genetic pool by selectively breeding the best specimens and/or preventing the “unfit” from reproducing. Family planning is a method for a woman to take control of her own reproductive system. The concept that some people “ought” to reproduce while others “ought not” is absent from today’s approach to family planning.

    ***

    See? Was that so hard?

  177. Darleen says:

    As if the Tea Klux Klan isn’t proof enough

    Bob, the KKK was a Democrat organization and even Kleagle Robert Bird is still a Congresscritter.

    But hey, don’t let facts stand in the way of showing your ignorance.

    Goldamn, why do leftcult trolls have to have the IQ of an afterdinner drink?

  178. Jeff G. says:

    Why would I have Neiwert tell me how Goldberg responded when I can read the response itself?

    Tell me, Bob: do you find yourself tripping into furniture if Neiwert isn’t around to tie your shoes for you?

    Let me make this as clear as I possibly can: I’ve dealt with Neiwert before. He’s the intellectual equivalent of a puff pastry: looks plump at first blush, but once you pressure it at all, you’re left with something deflated, flakey, and vaguely French-inspired.

  179. cranky-d says:

    Anyone who read here more than 10 minutes would see that this is not an echo chamber. Then we have Bob, who is, apparently, an idiot. Hi Bob!

  180. Slartibartfast says:

    Debunked by Neiwert defused by Kascynski

  181. bh says:

    But, guys… Tea Klux Klan!

    It’s like I’m being wordsmithed… in my ear!

  182. Slartibartfast says:

    I mean, what’s the diff?

    Neiwert is more apt to accidentally bunk something than deliberately debunk.

  183. Darleen says:

    another reason I’m annoyed with Bob

    my late uncle was Bob. Bobby to my grandparents. An all around good guy and straight talker.

    I think hate-filled idiots like the troll “Bob” above should be stripped of that good American name.

  184. I think I’ve been insulted.

  185. dicentra says:

    Bob. I just looked at what you linked. Here’s some of it:

    So let’s go back to my challenge to Goldberg. At my Firedoglake post on this (a link to which, I note, Goldberg has declined to provide his readers), I posed three questions for Goldberg to answer:

    — How does he account for the continuing presence — from the 1920s up through the present — of definably fascist groups, not just American entities like the Ku Klux Klan, the Christian Identity movement, the Posse Comitatus, the Aryan Nations, the National Alliance, Hammerskin Nation, and White Aryan Resistance (to name just a few), but also European groups like Vlaams Belang and Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front, all of whom are clearly right-wing political entities? Doesn’t this lay waste to his claim that fascism is “a phenomenon of the left”?

    — How does he defend his whitewashing of the Ku Klux Klan? Is he seriously trying to argue that the Klan is a “phenomenon of the left”?

    — How does he explain the self-evident inadequacy of his definition of fascism? (Goldberg’s definition, as we’ve explained, describes not fascism — particularly not any of the traits that make it distinct — but rather totalitarianism (or authoritarianism, if you will) generally, of which fascism is but a particular species, and a definitively right-wing one at that).

    Unsurprisingly, Goldberg refuses to recognize the challenge, but he does try to tackle at least one of the questions — the second, regarding his whitewashing of the Ku Klux Klan.

    Here’s Jonah’s stab at it:

    As for the Klan, I discuss it quite a bit. He simply shrugs off that discussion so he can get back to his own little dog and pony show. I don’t dispute that the Klan is bad, that it had ties to the Nazis in the 1930s, or any of that. It’s just not an important part of the story I have to tell.

    Excuse the interruption, but: Why the hell not? You’ve written a book about the fascist lineage in America — why not include an honest assessment of identifiably fascist American movements?

    For one thing, Jonah rejects (and uses evidence to refute) the idea that the KKK is just a bunch of racist rednecks who currently populate the conservative movement, as conventional wisdom on the left insists. Neiwert’s insistence that Jonah “honestly” assess the KKK is really a call for Jonah to wear a hair shirt and flagellate: “Yes! Yes! I admit it! All of us on the right are racists because the KKK is exactly who you think it is! Which also negates the entire thesis of my book!”

    But notice what Neiwert does here: “Goldberg’s definition [of fascism], as we’ve explained, describes not fascism — particularly not any of the traits that make it distinct — but rather totalitarianism (or authoritarianism, if you will) generally, of which fascism is but a particular species, and a definitively right-wing one at that).”

    Maybe you’ll have to find it for me, Bob (let that be your one contribution to an intellectual discussion), but how does Neiwart define “right wing”? Because right now he’s just objecting to the fact that Jonah is connecting dots that Neiwart does’t think should be connected. Why? Because they shouldn’t.

    Ok, your turn.

  186. cranky-d says:

    My real name is David and there have been so many idiot trolls using that name that I wouldn’t want to use it if I did want to use it.

  187. dicentra says:

    Bob, you ruined my mac and cheese.

    Here I was clacking away at the keyboard to pound some sense into your head while my macaroni soaked in the hot water. Now it’s a mushy mess.

    I won’t forget it, Bob. That’s just not done.

  188. Lazarus Long says:

    “As if the Tea Klux Klan isn’t proof enough…”

    You do know. do you not, the the KKK was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party?

    No,no you don’t.

  189. cranky-d says:

    Bob is like that, dicentra. He’s a hater of all things simple and fulfilling, like mac and cheese.

  190. dicentra says:

    Also, Bob.

    Have you actually read Liberal Fascism? I have. Jeff has. Others here have. However, if you have not, there’s no earthly reason for you to defer to anyone on the planet — including me — when it comes to pronouncing on LF’s “falsehood.”

    Seriously. What kind of person declares a book to be false and invalid without having read it and only relies on the opinion of those whom the book is calling out? Would you rely on me to evaluate something that attacked conservatives? Really?

  191. bh says:

    Mac Klux Klan!

  192. Lazarus Long says:

    Apparently Neiwart doesn’t, either.

  193. Lazarus Long says:

    “Everything in the state, nothing outside the state.”

    -Benito Mussolini

  194. Pam says:

    As Jonah Goldberg put it in his white-washing of the KKK, “if the Klan was less racist than we’ve been led to believe, academia was staggeringly more so.”

    How does Goldberg account for the continuing presence — from the 1920s up through the present — of definably fascist groups, not just American entities like the Ku Klux Klan, the Christian Identity movement, the Posse Comitatus, the Aryan Nations, the National Alliance, Hammerskin Nation, and White Aryan Resistance (to name just a few), but also European groups like Vlaams Belang and Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front, all of whom are clearly right-wing political entities?

  195. Robert Byrd says:

    You do know. do you not, the the KKK was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party?

    Whatchoo talking ’bout, Willis?

  196. dicentra says:

    No really, this is what passes for logic with Neiwart:

    Yet, in this latest response, Goldberg continues to keep slapping on the ol’ whitewash:

    However, two points are worth making about the Klan. The first is, they’re a joke. An evil joke to be sure, and they should be prosecuted for their crimes as aggressively as possible when the evidence warrants it. But they’re essentially a nostalgic cargo cult. If you want to call them fascist, at the end of the day that’s fine with me, particularly if you define fascism the way Neiwert does. Like neo-Nazi skinheads, the Klan play a game of make-believe. Indeed, as I note, the Second Klan has its start as a basically a fanboy craze for Birth of A Nation – a film admired and promoted by none other than Woodrow Wilson (he actually screened it for congressmen and Supreme Court justices in the White House). To say that today’s Klan is even close to as serious as the Klan of the 1920s and 1930s, strains credulity.

    That was whitewash? By whose definition? Whitewash means trying to make out that “they’re not that bad.” What part of “evil joke” constitutes whitewash?

    Oh yeah, the “joke” part. The part where he accuses the KKK of engaging in make-believe and being a nostalgic cargo cult.

    In other words, Jonah says the current KKK is a farce, not worthy of consideration, whereas Neiwart, true to his leftist credentials, must inflate the KKK’s importance to encompass the soul of conservatism, because he and his peers say so.

    It doesn’t matter that 99.999% of today’s conservatives think they’re pathetic losers. It doesn’t matter that any member of the KKK or Aryan Nations who tried to infiltrate a Tea Party would be tossed out on his ear.

    CONSERVATIVES ARE RACIST. Q.E.D. With the demonstrandum part coming from its sheer repetition in faculty lounges and coffee shops. Where it matters.

  197. dicentra says:

    “Pam”

    You’re quoting Neiwart verbatum. Use your brain.

  198. Darleen says:

    Personally, I always found the usual political scale “leftwing” communism at one end and “rightwing” fascism at the other a fool’s game. Both “ends” are authoritarian/totalitarian collectives – where individual rights are ephemeral and exist only at the whim of the collective.

  199. dicentra says:

    Darleen. You don’t need to qualify that with “personally,” because you’re absolutely right.

    Pam, Bob: If we posit a continuum with Anarchy on the far right and Totalitarianism on the far left, how does racism move something farther right?

  200. Pam says:

    Goldberg doesn’t even know the meaning of the word. How does he explain the self-evident inadequacy of his definition of fascism? Goldberg’s definition describes not fascism — particularly not any of the traits that make it distinct — but rather totalitarianism (or authoritarianism) generally, of which fascism is but a particular species, and a definitively right-wing one at that.

  201. Darleen says:

    “Pam” (did you have a quicky sex-change, “Bob”?)

    Step away from your plagarism and state, in your own words, why any of those racial-supremacists organizations – collectivists who believe skin color conveys moral worth or talen rather than an individual’s own actions – are different from Leftist racialist organizations? Black Panthers, Mecha, Democrat Party, et al.

  202. Darleen says:

    Comment by Pam on 2/9 @ 10:42 pm

    you’re still plagarizing.

  203. dicentra says:

    Pam, I’m asking you to either make your own damn arguments or take the sock off your hand and identify yourself as Neiwart.

    Goldberg doesn’t even know the meaning of the word.

    Goldberg spent one chapter examining Mussolini and his definition of fascism, then spent the next chapter examining Hitler’s take on it, then further chapters examining what the rest of the West thought, including the American Progressives.

    When you write a political treatise, you get to define your own terms, especially one as flexible and as loaded as “fascism,” which for many people just means “stuff I hate.”

  204. bh says:

    It’s not supposed to be but this is funny as hell.

  205. dicentra says:

    Geez, can’t a girl eat her mushy mac and cheese in peace?

  206. dicentra says:

    bh

    Of course it’s funny: both funny ha-ha and funny “I’m laughing so I don’t cry.”

  207. Pam says:

    Aryan Nations who tried to infiltrate a Tea Party would be tossed out on his ear.

    Go to the Aryan Nations website… you’ll see videos from Fox News, lots of hateful talk about ACORN (sound familiar?), Tea Parties, etc… yea, sounds real left-wing. lol

  208. Spiny Norman says:

    Darleen,

    The Left-Right scale is a 18th-19th Century European concept, one that has little real bearing on modern political ideology and practice.

    The Political Compass is a step in the right corrective direction.

    For what it’s worth:

    In terms even Bob can understand:

    Communism = Collectivism
    Fascism = Collectivism
    Socialism = Collectivism

    Collectivism is entirely a product of the modern “Left” (which bears almost no resemblance to its French Revolutionary origin), no matter how much the apologists try to spin it.

  209. dicentra says:

    Pam, seriously. You’re being tiresome.

    I can go to jihadi sites and see anti-Bush rhetoric and promotion of AGW.

    NEENER NEENER! LANDED THAT ONE SQUARELY.

    I’m outta here. I have job that requires actual mental acuity.

  210. Darleen says:

    di

    If we posit a continuum with Anarchy on the far right and Totalitarianism on the far left

    That’s how I’ve always viewed things. But hey, I’ve been told more than once by Leftists I debate with that I’m an ignorant [slut, bitch, teabagger] who obviously didn’t take poli-sci.

    and, heh, sometimes I have to quality “anarchy” NOT to mean so-called libertarian-anarchism (Chomsky’s self-identification) aka Anarcho-syndicalism, which is just another anti-individual scheme.

  211. bh says:

    I’m leaning much more funny ha-ha with Pob/Bam.

  212. Spiny Norman says:

    dicentra,

    Pam, I’m asking you to either make your own damn arguments or take the sock off your hand and identify yourself as Neiwart.

    What the hell do they think this is, Fark?

  213. Lazarus Long says:

    “Go to the Aryan Nations website… you’ll see videos from Fox News, lots of hateful talk about ACORN (sound familiar?), Tea Parties, etc… yea, sounds real left-wing. lol”

    That proves…..what?

    And it proves it…..how?

    White supremicists are collectivists.

  214. Darleen says:

    Go to the Aryan Nations website… you’ll see videos from Fox News, lots of hateful talk about ACORN (sound familiar?), Tea Parties, etc… yea, sounds real left-wing. lol

    jaysus effin keerist, “Pam”, are you like, 12? I’m sure a copy of the Bible was found in Ted Bundy’s house, does that Judeo-Christianity supports sex-serial murders?

    “Pam” scroll down a couple of posts and read about the Green Police. I’m sure you’ll love ’em.

  215. Pam says:

    Race is the subtext of now-potent populist appeals to whites, who feel battered from a tsunami of economic and cultural change. The Tea Party counterculture is waging a proxy war over race during America’s rapidly shifting economy and demographic makeup.

    We’ve all heard the bar-stool version of the Tea Party canard that goes like this: Why should we, self-sufficient small-town whites, pay taxes to support all those welfare queens, food stamp cheats and Medicaid layabouts in the big cities and coastal states? The media’s version, parroted by Palin and other Fox talking heads, commiserates with Americans in the heartland, christened “the average taxpayer,” for unjustly having to subsidize ethnic enclaves that mooch off the national treasury.

    FYI – A disproportionately high share of our federal government’s tax income comes from racially diverse, immigrant-rich, urbanized states, including California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts; not from extremely homogeneous, conservative, anti-tax strongholds like Idaho, Montana, Utah, the Dakotas, Wyoming. Many southern states, the bastion of the conservative Tea Klux Klan, get more from the Fed than they give in taxes.

    All of this is not to say that any given rank-and-file member of the movement personally despises racial minorities. Rather, the Tea Party ethos is a direct descendant of the anti-tax segregationist politics that swept the South in the 1950s and ’60s.

  216. Spiny Norman says:

    More copypasta.

    Are you plagiarizing Neiwart again, Pam, or someone else?

  217. Robert Byrd says:

    I just dropped by the Aryan Nation website. I did see a Fox Business News clip with Gerald Celente predicting revolution. Whatevs. I don’t see how that plays into racism. What struck me more was the “National Socialism – The Aryan Way of Life” banner.

    Must be a right-wing socialism.

  218. Pablo says:

    Out, out, damned sock!

  219. B Moe says:

    WTF is up with TeaKluxKlan? It that supposed to be clever, or something?

  220. Darleen says:

    Pam

    do you do anything in your own words? Not plargarize? Or is “theft” not a moral problem for a collectivist like you? Your first line from here accompanied by sneering

    To pernicious effect, white tea partiers cloak themselves in the anachronistic rights-based […]

    Tea partiers contrive the right to live, make money, own property, zone neighborhoods, or protest taxes at will, without regard to the common good, a troublesome offshoot of rights-based agitprop.

    The rest of your plagarism is here.

    The fear of Americans actually acquainted with the Constitution scares the fuck out of you. And you can’t explain it even to yourself.

    Fuck off, thief.

  221. Darleen says:

    Spiny

    “Pam” is anti-American. It doesn’t believe in individuals having inherent rights.

  222. Darleen says:

    Hey Pam?

    Unlike the current President of the United States, I am the descendent of slaves.

    Go stick that square peg in that round hole between your eyes.

  223. happyfeet says:

    oh god with your slaveyness

  224. Darleen says:

    make your case, hypocritefeet, or fuck off.

  225. happyfeet says:

    oh she’s on a tear

  226. Darleen says:

    maybe you’ll want to share some butter tarts with Pam

  227. Pam says:

    Yes, thanx for supplying the link. Excellent commentary on the Tea Klux Klan

  228. B Moe says:

    He is just sore you’re not black, Darleen, so he could call you skeezy ghetto trash.

  229. Darleen says:

    Comment by Pam on 2/9 @ 11:18 pm

    Excellent example of your thievery.

    The article itself? Pure projection.

  230. Darleen says:

    B Moe

    He knew at one time I put that out there just to trip Leftcultists up with a little cognitive dissonance.

    But hey, he can’t make his case, so what else has he?

  231. Pam says:

    They hate America… what party do the secessionists belong to? Rick Perry?

  232. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    Unlike dem. homebobs, I done roomed with a [real] African American. Didn’t notice it at the time, but…

  233. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    I repeat my standing offer, homebobs: I’ll trade 1000
    of you for 100,000 of “the brown people” any time. Even though I’m not sure the particular ones y’all keep talking about even exist outside of y’all’s Fantasyword.

  234. geoffb says:

    “of definably fascist groups”… “all of whom are clearly right-wing political entities”

    This is all the arguments of the Left condensed into a handy package. They get to define who or what is “bad”. It is always a political adversary. Then those “bad” are placed as “clearly” on “the Right”. Circular.

    This political definitional form of argument for deciding who was on the “right” originated by Stalin. Through it he defined the Left/Right axis of socialism of the time. USSR dominated “international socialism” was the Left. All other socialist systems that did not concede to the complete authority of the Communist Party of USSR were, by definition, his definition, the right wing.

    Every system that was not socialist was not even on the scale. The answer to where American conservatives fit on that scale is MU.

  235. Darleen says:

    They hate America

    That’s the Left, Pam dear. As your plagarized quote proves. Constitution rights of individuals – to property, to assembly to petition redress, — those are despised as anachronistic.

    Own it, Pam. You are the anti-American.

  236. Spiny Norman says:

    The Constitution “reflected fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day”* It’s “tainted”, Darleen, don’t you see?

  237. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    Hey, homebobs, why is that only White [Faux] Liberals simply can’t forget black people are black? But since y’all appaarently know “Black” Culture so well, you’ve heard of Stokley Charmichael, H.Rap Brown, Angela Davis, and Dick Gregory, right? Well, without looking, tell me who Mckinley Morganfield is. Or Chester Burnett? They were giants.

  238. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    I seem to recall a Michelle Obama that hates America, and a Jeremiah Wright?

  239. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    Why is it that the “Progressives” always want to freeze themselves back in a time they never existed in, then also claim that certain Arab-like people are “not ready” for freedom? Seems a bit Regressive and self-contradictory, no?

  240. Spiny Norman says:

    I hate to admit it, having feed it, but the Bob/Pam troll accomplished at least part of his/her objective: derailing the thread.

  241. Spiny Norman says:

    It would be a cop-out to blame the Maker’s, wouldn’t it?

  242. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    Liberally “self” contradictory, that is, or is it Progressively affirming?

  243. This is How We Treat Our Friends…

    Green Room Arianna Obliteration: “This crisis is the result of a giant social engineering experiment and vote-buying scheme gone tragically wrong; The free market did not pass laws that forced banks to lend to those who do not qualify for a loan, the …

  244. B Moe says:

    Well, without looking, tell me who Mckinley Morganfield is. Or Chester Burnett? They were giants.

    Muddy Waters and Howling Wolf.

  245. […] Off-Beat Observations Of Jeff G.Posted on | February 9, 2010 | 1 Commentby SmittyThe Onanny State:That progressivism…keeps failing as it runs into the realities of the market…seems never to trouble those […]

  246. serr8d says:

    Let’s see Liberal Arts academicians do a thing to, say, improve any human’s lifespan or get us closer to Mars. Best they can do is slow us down, as Obama’s done by slashing NASA, with demands for socialistic equivalences.

  247. Rusty says:

    #194
    You forgot the Democrat Party.

  248. sdferr says:

    It’s a mistake to conflate the Liberal Arts with poor professors of the Liberal Arts, should anyone be tempted to do so.

    For that matter, it’s a mistake to suppose the Liberal Arts are confined to the scope of whatever is meant by the Humanities, loosely taken as language arts and pulverized philosophical pursuits, to the exclusion of scientific practices.

    Say rather that we begin to define the Liberal Arts classically with the Trivium — nominally Grammar, Rhetoric and Logic — and the Quadrivium — nominally Arithmetic, Geometry, Music and Astronomy. We’d then be in good company with Messrs. Locke, Hume, Smith, Madison, Newton, and Spinoza who would all instantly recognize what our teaching is about. We can then fill in the interstices between these points of outline with more modern subject matters as need and interest demand. But what is key in this description and division of the Liberal Arts is that it doesn’t leave aside our need for mathematical skills, nor does it ignore the heavens and under them, the earth in its orbit.

  249. Lazarus Long says:

    “FYI – A disproportionately high share of our federal government’s tax income comes from racially diverse, immigrant-rich, urbanized states, including California, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts; not from extremely homogeneous, conservative, anti-tax strongholds like Idaho, Montana, Utah, the Dakotas, Wyoming.”

    Hey, moron, which states have the larger population density, you fucking moron?

    “Comment by Pam on 2/9 @ 11:25 pm #

    They hate America… what party do the secessionists belong to?”

    The Democrats, in cse you missed that whole Civil War thing.

    You helmet wearing, short bus window licking moron.

  250. Darleen says:

    Laz

    and IIRC there’s a Vermont secession movement.

  251. Silver Whistle says:

    sdferr, are you suggesting that if university education was a closer approximation to the “?????????????” of old, liberal arts majors would be forced to study those subject areas that at present give them headaches, thereby swelling their brains sufficiently to not believe progressive nonsense?

  252. Lazarus Long says:

    “Comment by Darleen on 2/10 @ 7:21 am #

    Laz

    and IIRC there’s a Vermont secession movement.”

    Let me know when there’s 600,000 dead from fighting them.

  253. sdferr says:

    Something rather like to that SW; also that I happen to love those Liberal Arts and the learning attendant to them and can’t bear to see them derided unjustly.

    The politics of the thing as politics (as opposed to the obvious conservative nature of the proposal), meh [*shrugging*], was not so much a consideration since I just don’t know how that would go but am willing to leave it to such results as may come.

  254. Silver Whistle says:

    Yes, sdferr, I believe we have lost much through increasingly narrow and specialised education; I’m glad I took various humanities electives when I was a science undergrad, and I’m sure a broader based syllabus would help towards the “universal” in “university”.

  255. Slartibartfast says:

    what party do the secessionists belong to? Rick Perry?

    Secessionists belonged to the Democratic Party, when there were secessionists in numbers worthy of regard.

    Rick Perry’s party is a matter of public record.

    Robert Byrd was elected to office as a Democrat. David Duke ran initially as a Democrat, although it appears that Democrats and Republicans didn’t care for him:

    In December 1988, Duke changed his political affiliation from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party.[22]

    In 1988, Republican State Representative Charles Cusimano of Metairie resigned his District 89 seat to become a 24th Judicial District Court judge, and a special election was called early in 1989 to select a successor. Duke entered the race to succeed Cusimano and faced several opponents, including fellow Republicans, John Spier Treen, a brother of former Governor David C. Treen, and Roger F. Villere, Jr., who operates Villere’s Florist in Metairie. Duke finished first in the primary with 3,995 votes (33.1 percent).[23] As no one received a majority of the vote in the first round, a runoff election was required between Duke and Treen, who polled 2,277 votes (18.9 percent) in the first round of balloting. John Treen’s candidacy was endorsed by U.S. President George H. W. Bush, former President Ronald W. Reagan, and other notable Republicans,[24] as well as the Democrat Victor Bussie (president of the Louisiana AFL-CIO) and Edward J. Steimel (president of the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry and former director of the “good government” think tank, the Public Affairs Research Council).

    Dennis Kucinich, one of the craziest people in Congress, is a Democrat.

    There are crazies all around. Rick Perry isn’t even in the top ten percentile of crazy. I’m talking about in Congress, even.

  256. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    Muddy Waters and Howling Wolf.

    No help from the Peanut Gallery, not that the Progg empaths know anything more about “the brown people” from such anyway.

  257. Mikee says:

    “I am sure I could be a competent scientist if I worked at it, but I don’t want to.”
    A professor of Chemistry once explained to me that while he could listen to music or read a novel and enjoy it quite thoroughly, and could even try his hand at playing a piano and writing stories, very few musicians or writers could enjoy or perform a synthetic reaction.

    In other words, liberal arts classes are where the hard science majors go to meet easy girls and get laid.

  258. BuddyPC says:

    8. Comment by dicentra on 2/9 @ 5:07 pm #
    Just wondering about the denizens of this blog: How did any of you manage to major in the Humanities (or similar soft subject) and yet not come to the right conclusions about how the world works?
    Besides a mortal dread of the demonsheep, I mean.

    First-and-a-half gen Immigrant/refugee stock, only one generation removed from the farm. Which means life’s been a constant sink-or-get-your-arms-flailing lesson in cause and effect. Speaking for myself. Which, looking inward/backward, enabled more success in the art studios, ever to the soreness of the greater enlightened.

    Slartibartfast at 256: Wanna drive an OfA foot soldier apeshit? Remind them of coalition affiliate Fred Phelps, registered D-9th Circle.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps

  259. J."Trashman" Peden says:

    Hey, moron, which states have the larger population density, you fucking moron?

    Who the hell really thinks Patriotism, moral behavior and worth, survival…aw, screw it, Living itself, is comprised of or by paying taxes? Fucking Morons do, that’s who. Oh, you could call them Parasites, or you could call them Progressives, or you could call them Zombies, or….And they done managed to ruin Liberal Arts, to boot.

  260. Squid says:

    In other words, liberal arts classes are where the hard science majors go to meet easy girls and get laid.

    Dude, everybody knows that’s where you go. Empirical evidence supports the hypothesis that this is the most target-rich environment. Even the jock/poet “scientists” in Physics 001 (they rounded off gravity to 10) could figure that out!

    As an example of how screwed up my priorities were in college: upon hearing that there was a big protest against Gillette’s animal testing policies, I went to Old Main to check out the scene. Plenty of crunchy granola types and weepy sorority chicks filled with guilt about their beauty products being sprayed into little bunny rabbits’ eyes.

    Did I pick up some easy tail? Of course not. I headed to the Gillette products they were piling up book-burning style and helped myself to a variety of shaving and hair care products. Sure, the hippies got mad, but what were they gonna do about it?

    OUTLAW!

  261. sdferr says:

    We used to follow the Middies as they dropped off their dates Squid, pick ’em up and spend the night on the town. Girls just wanna have fun-un.

  262. LBascom says:

    Middies?

  263. sdferr says:

    Anna-no-place, LBascom, poor son’s a guns had a curfew.

  264. LBascom says:

    Ah, I thought that was a squid term.

  265. SDN says:

    strictly OT:

    My dog Fuzzy died this morning.

    She collapsed when I took her out for a walk this morning. I took her to
    the emergency vet, and they found that she had fluid in her abdomen and
    chest, her heart was enlarged, and her liver and kidneys were failing.
    They weren’t able to do anything for her, and I had to have her put to
    sleep.

    I have no idea what happened. Her last full physical (complete blood
    work, X-ray, etc.) was in December and showed nothing wrong. Yesterday
    morning, she was her usual self. I’m not sure if she got bitten by
    something, or ate something, or what.

    She didn’t seem to be in pain, just really lethargic and wobbly after
    the collapse.

    She was a good dog.

    Dinah in Heaven

    Rudyard Kiplng
    /”The Woman in His Life”
    >From “Limits and Renewals” (1932)/

    She did not know that she was dead,
    But, when the pang was o’er,
    Sat down to wait her Master’s tread
    Upon the Golden Floor,

    With ears full-cock and anxious eye
    Impatiently resigned;
    But ignorant that Paradise
    Did not admit her kind.

    Persons with Haloes, Harps, and Wings
    Assembled and reproved;
    Or talked to her of Heavenly things,
    But Dinah never moved.

    There was one step along the Stair
    That led to Heaven’s Gate;
    And, till she heard it, her affair
    Was–she explained–to wait.

    And she explained with flattened ear,
    Bared lip and milky tooth–
    Storming against Ithuriel’s Spear
    That only proved her truth!

    Sudden–far down the Bridge of Ghosts
    That anxious spirits clomb–
    She caught that step in all the hosts,
    And knew that he had come.

    She left them wondering what to do,
    But not a doubt had she.
    Swifter than her own squeal she flew
    Across the Glassy Sea;

    Flushing the Cherubs every where,
    And skidding as she ran,
    She refuged under Peter’s Chair
    And waited for her man.

    .. . . . . . .

    There spoke a Spirit out of the press,
    ‘Said:–“Have you any here
    That saved a fool from drunkenness,
    And a coward from his fear?

    “That turned a soul from dark to day
    When other help was vain;
    That snatched it from Wanhope and made
    A cur a man again?”

    “Enter and look,” said Peter then,
    And set The Gate ajar.
    “If I know aught of women and men
    I trow she is not far.”

    “Neither by virtue, speech nor art
    Nor hope of grace to win;
    But godless innocence of heart
    That never heard of sin:

    “Neither by beauty nor belief
    Nor white example shown.
    Something a wanton–more a thief–
    But–most of all–mine own.”

    “Enter and look,” said Peter then,
    “And send you well to speed;
    But, for all that I know of women and men
    Your riddle is hard to read.”

    Then flew Dinah from under the Chair,
    Into his arms she flew–
    And licked his face from chin to hair
    And Peter passed them through!

  266. LBascom says:

    That sucks SDN.

    The Kipling was cool…Thanks.

  267. Squid says:

    My sympathies, SDN. Whether sudden or drawn-out, we’re never really ready.

  268. bh says:

    Sorry to hear that, SDN.

  269. dicentra says:

    Poor puppy! Poor owner!

  270. Lamontyoubigdummy says:

    Sorry, SDN.

    The Kipling shows you remember a great friend, and not just this sad day. She happily carried a part of you, and you will always carry a part of her.

    Happily.

  271. SDN says:

    Thanks, guys. She had a full life, she was about 15 years old. I had her for 12.

    Kipling wrote several dog poems. Everyone remembers the one about “giving your heart to a dog to tear”, but I always liked this one better.

  272. SBP says:

    Let’s see Liberal Arts academicians do a thing to, say, improve any human’s lifespan

    Adam Smith, Professor of Moral Philosophy.

    On the other side of the coin, there were plenty of Nazis who were verrrrrrrry scientific.

  273. SBP says:

    Very sorry to hear about your dog, SDN.

  274. urthshu says:

    The eternal Lib refrain. “Of course I’m correct, if you disagree you’re a dummy”

    Its like how the Devil just does variations on “ye shall not surely die, ye shall be as gods”

  275. Bob says:

    SLAM DUNK. Why DC is broken:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eyWg_fJPeM

    Extremely well documented and researched.

  276. geoffb says:

    Bob continues in his tradition of #32, #39, and #170, of linking to things that are not as described.

    Comment feedback shows a lifetime rating of -173 with seller standing accused of over promising his merchandise while delivering the shoddy on a scale rarely seen in these parts since the unlamented William. -F.

  277. oh, I’m sorry SDN.

  278. Danger says:

    I know how you feel SDN, My dog drowned back in November :-(

    It’s certainly not comparable to Kipling but I offered this tribute at the time:

    Goodbye Scrappy

    You brought so much joy to me whenever I walked through the door.
    and I’m trying not to cry right now cause I owe you so much more.
    I remember you as a puppy, full of life and eager to please.
    You certainly loved your cookies and did all your tricks with ease

    Thank you for kisses and bringing me such joy
    and I know I was so lucky to have you bring your toys
    I wasn’t always kind to you and that I do regret.
    But you never held it against me, you just seemed to forgive and forget

    I know you are happy now and Lady is with you too
    Tell her that I miss her and to take care of my Scrappy doo
    So since you are in heaven please tell the Lord for me
    That I am greatful for the time I had – The time as your Daddy

  279. serr8d says:

    Sorry about your pet’s death, SDN. I’ve got a mini-pet cemetery going in my backyard; those are always the hardest holes to dig.

    Oh, on the relative benefits of engineering science, a nice development from the University of Florida. Better’n a box full of Derrida(s).

Comments are closed.