The Paranoid Style in American Politics

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Vic
Oh boy, Cad is resorting to the usual ASSumption bit again... :roll:

Regardless of what I think about communism (which isn't good), it is simply a fact that communists had every reason to be paranoid during the '50s and 60s, a time when it was effectively illegal to be a communist in America. A policy which BTW was supposed to be to protect our freedoms. Hence, irony.

I was noting your assumptions - do you not realize what you posted was an asinine ASSumption? Probably not - you seem to be worked up today.

Yes, they had reason to be paranoid. I didn't say they didn't. If you actually read what I posted, it was in response to barry noting the irony. But project/assume more if you wish...

Where is the irony?

 

[Moonbeam]

I find it interesting that Hofstadter was almost able to see that the origin of this disease is self hate. The cataclysmic aspect of paranoia is the result of childhood psychic death, the fear that tomorrow will bring what already happened and can't be allowed into conscious memory. The lack of capacity to compromise and see everything as an ultimate battle is the result of the need of the paranoid to have a powerful ego, to manifest hubris and paternal authoritarianism. If the ego fails, memory will come rushing in. The fanatic is full of self flattery and bravado, talk of masculine strength over feminine weakness. It leads right into sadism, the need to make others suffer because one can't feel anything and is dead inside.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.

Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.

Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

I don't know what communism is, I have never studied it. I know nothing about how dangerous it is. Anybody that does has been contaminated and can't be trusted as a real American and that's especially true of BarrySotero who has clearly been driven mad by it.

I figure he's looking to form a communist cell from the folk who support communism here against his protests. I think he's a communist and looking for others who think the same. I'm sure there are ulterior motives driving him because people can't naturally become quite that nuts. It has to be a pretense, eh?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.

Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

Ah, so that makes it better in your mind?...:roll: Discredit the article? Oh really? Why is having information about the author discrediting? Is it not important to know where the author is coming from when reading their opinions?

 

[CallMeJoe]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.
Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

Ah, so that makes it better in your mind?...:roll: Discredit the article? Oh really? Why is having information about the author discrediting? Is it not important to know where the author is coming from when reading their opinions?

I don't have a horse in this race, Cad. I saw our favorite simpleton Barry try to use an incomplete and misleading reference to the author's politics to discredit the article, and saw you echoing his post. I just pointed out the weakness in your mutual argument.
If you want to discuss the article on its merits, go right ahead. If you want to try to derail the discussion by screaming "Commie", you could leave the thread now to protect your precious body fluids from Leftist Contamination and leave the discussion to the more rational members.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: ebaycj

Originally posted by: BarrySotero
Perfect.

Hoffsteader was a Marxist and belonged to Communist Party

"Marxist stage:

As an undergraduate, Hofstadter became involved in left-wing politics, joining the Young Communist League and meeting a radical student named Felice Swados, whom he married in 1936; she died in 1945. After graduation in 1936, Hofstadter entered the PhD program in history at Columbia University in New York, where he was most influenced by Merle Curti, who synthesized intellectual, social and political history using published sources rather than archival research.[3] Hofstadter became more involved in Marxist circles, joining the Communist Party in 1938.."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hofstadter

Communists, Marxists, liberals are always accusing conservatives of being paranoid when defending communists, Marxists and liberals. Before election anyone who said Obama was a Marxist and or radical was defamed. Now look what's happened.

This post, by this person, this early on, in this thread, makes me LOL. :laugh:

Just like a firehose, one setting (always on), one direction (full force ahead). You can't even turn it off for a second, can you? That's sad.

That's what P&N has been reduced to since their hero fell out of power. A handful of neocon trolls get banned every couple of weeks only to return with new names. It's kind of fun to try and guess who is who when they return but at the same time, pathetic. They are the kid at school who eats lunch by themselves every day.

 

[BarrySotero]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.

Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

Even admitting a person is "perhaps" a disillusioned Marxist and communist does not make them a committed capitalist devoted to personal freedom. Indeed, many people today would not call themselves "Marxist" but they practically function as one having absorbed the ideology unaware of origins. It was Marxists who started schools teaching "everyone is special and equal". Not even the bible taught that (it was children of darkness vs children of light)

Commies still liked Hof's work over the years. He equated fear of communism with Salem witch trials which is ridiculous. There were no witches but there were communists actively spying and trying to subvert the nation - and schools, media, "mental health" professionals and entertainment were main targets. Where do you think all the crummy schools and anti-American media got started? McCarthy went after things the wrong way but the threat was real. Now we have Barry and the gang because of it.

 

[BarrySotero]

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.
Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

Ah, so that makes it better in your mind?...:roll: Discredit the article? Oh really? Why is having information about the author discrediting? Is it not important to know where the author is coming from when reading their opinions?

I don't have a horse in this race, Cad. I saw our favorite simpleton Barry try to use an incomplete and misleading reference to the author's politics to discredit the article, and saw you echoing his post. I just pointed out the weakness in your mutual argument.
If you want to discuss the article on its merits, go right ahead. If you want to try to derail the discussion by screaming "Commie", you could leave the thread now to protect your precious body fluids from Leftist Contamination and leave the discussion to the more rational members.

I am so far ahead I am behind - but still ahead of you. Fact number 1 is Hof was a Marxist and communist - and his little mediocre stab as scholarship still read like a Marxist even if Hef did say he was disillusioned by Stalin (and who wouldn't? Who would want to be associated with that? Dropping the label doesn't mean the mindset isn't there). Hof is mediocre at best. He's like the latest Spider Man movie people think is high art because it goes "bang" with nice sets.

 

[cwjerome]

I don't think the OP is particularly insightful and I don't think it's particularly American. But the psychology of politics is a fascinating subject and P&N is an interesting microcosm.

There is another style that's more subtle and maybe even more powerful... American Political Romanticism. The American character forged from our history still has a strong sense of idealism, greatness, and progress. Whereas politics can become a sterile, pragmatic, and bureaucratic affair, there is still a strong sense exceptionalism in the US. That's one reason why leaders like Reagan and 'campaign-Obama' become powerful... because they sell a sense of hope, growth, and opportunity. They promote a social self-esteem American deserves, and many people still gravitate toward such optimism.

The true power of America doesn't come from our economy or military, it comes from our fundamentally benevolent view of life and the deep rooted liberalism of our culture. Once those ideals disappear, America will wither, and the world will be the lesser for it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
...And I'm talking about the others who can't see the irony of using a commie's writing about paranoia in American politics. Is that lost on you too?
your question is stupid but I'll humor you. Yes, they can have their beliefs and I didn't "condemn" them - I was merely agreeing with the noted irony. So do you want to post any more of you asinine ASSumptions about the motives of my reply?

Had you bothered to read poor Barry's Wiki link about Richard Hofstadter, you would note that he conveniently omitted the rest of the paragraph on the Marxist Stage of his career:

By 1939, however, he had become disenchanted with the party and his participation began a steady decline; by the time of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in September, he was thoroughly and permanently disillusioned with the Communist Party, the Soviet Union, and Marxism itself.

Ergo the article cited was written by a disillusioned former Marxist.
Nice attempt at an ad hominem discredit of the article, though.

Ah, so that makes it better in your mind?...:roll: Discredit the article? Oh really? Why is having information about the author discrediting? Is it not important to know where the author is coming from when reading their opinions?

I don't have a horse in this race, Cad. I saw our favorite simpleton Barry try to use an incomplete and misleading reference to the author's politics to discredit the article, and saw you echoing his post. I just pointed out the weakness in your mutual argument.
If you want to discuss the article on its merits, go right ahead. If you want to try to derail the discussion by screaming "Commie", you could leave the thread now to protect your precious body fluids from Leftist Contamination and leave the discussion to the more rational members.

I am so far ahead I am behind - but still ahead of you. Fact number 1 is Hof was a Marxist and communist - and his little mediocre stab as scholarship still read like a Marxist even if Hef did say he was disillusioned by Stalin (and who wouldn't? Who would want to be associated with that? Dropping the label doesn't mean the mindset isn't there). Hof is mediocre at best. He's like the latest Spider Man movie people think is high art because it goes "bang" with nice sets.

All right, that's it. If you're going after Spider Man it's gloves off. My name is Inigo Moonbeam and you stabbed my idol, prepare to die.