I'm still not posting much these days. Not that anything is wrong, but recently I've found myself too angry at U.S. policy in the Middle East for it to be healthy for me to concentrate on it.
In the meantime, I've been leaving minor comments on other blogs, and I'm still putting here comments that blog owners decide they don't want their readers to see.
Here's one from Brad DeLong's blog. DeLong republished a book review from years ago where he criticizes Eric Hobsbawm for not sharing his hatred of communism and writing a book that reflects Hobsbawm's admiration of communism's ideals rather than DeLong's animus.
I admit I don't have a good understanding of Brad DeLong's animosity against communism.
I'd define communism, or the common thread of DeLong's examples of communism, as redistributionist non-democracy.
DeLong makes the empirical observation that redistributionist non-democracies have led to bad outcomes.
The question still remains, what part of the bad outcomes results from flaws of redistributionism, what part results from non-democracy and what part results from the capitalist world's executing a conflict with them?
DeLong seems, but not explicitly, to assign all of the blame for the bad outcomes on redistributionism.
He doesn't assign the all of the blame explicitly because it would be silly to claim that none, none of the problems in Cuba or even North Korea are caused by the US' and its allies' efforts against those countries.
Also the US has paid to overthrow democracies, and has plenty of money to continue to do so. DeLong seems to leave out of his story that at least part of the non-democratic tendencies of redistributionist governments has been a defensive reaction to the US and the capitalist world's tactic of funding and elevating opposition forces to destabilize their countries.
DeLong clearly thinks "communism" is evil. But he isn't clear what part of it. From DeLong we see that communist governments just so happen to have led to bad outcomes, but DeLong does not show that these bad outcomes are ultimately caused by a philosophical defect rather than circumstance.
In fact, what exactly is the philosophical defect, if there is one?
Beyond that, as an American, DeLong greatly benefits from the place the United States has in the hierarchy of nations. There is something self-interested, and maybe sinister, about his claim that countries that challenge the hierarchy of nations he benefits from are engaging in unmitigated evil.
35 comments:
Really, it is not about "non-democracy". Aliende (or Chavez) was (and is) democratic. Still, USA media and politicians routinely call Chavez dictator and compare him to Hitler and what not.
Anti-communists just do not want what they see as their fair part -i.e. wealth of other peoples - to be "wasted" on social spendings instead of being siphoned into TNC coffers from where anti-communists get paid - directly or not.
Before anything else, I would like to say how happy I am to see Arnold back. Next I want to ask Arnold something: Why don't you contribute every now and then to Moon of Alabama?
And finally regarding the topic at hand:
Quite contrary to "production to address the social needs" being undemocratic, it is the capitalism that is inherently undemocratic. I said previously (using some of Arnold's words) that there is no benevolent way of getting a large sum of people to work part of the day for themselves and part of the day for a 'boss'.
Well now I will slightly change the wording:
There is no democratic way of getting a large sum of people to work part of the day for themselves and part of the day for a 'boss'.
You are right. No wonder that Marx shows how the British capitalism was born with such midwife as laws against "vagabonds" - i.e. people robbed of their means for independent (not waged slavery) bread winning.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch28.htm
" but recently I've found myself too angry at U.S. policy in the Middle East for it to be healthy for me to concentrate on it."
Its a shame that this is stopping you from providing your cutting edge analysis, the type of analysis in which you state that you believe that the syrian government is dealing with protests against it mostly reasonably.
"I haven't seen any verified fact that is inconsistent with Syria dealing with peaceful protests mostly reasonably."
(rolls eyes)
I'm still putting here comments that blog owners decide they don't want their readers to see
How awful.
Given all the lies we were told about Libya and "massacre" that was inevitable without NATO bombs, I suggest that mocking of Arnold be postponed till at least looking into what is going on in Libya NOW (a tip - real massacres and destructions of the whole cities by NATO rebels)
Also, it could help if one read what Arnold writes. I.e. " peaceful protests" are not the same as "protests", which could be just terrorist acts backed by such champion of peaceful protests rights as USA, see "Occupy" protests being deal with:
"The New York Police Department (NYPD) arrested nearly 200 protesters on Monday as they attempted to surround the New York Stock Exchange and block traffic in the city’s financial district.
The police handcuffed and removed at least four people who had joined the protests in wheelchairs.
At least 25 people were arrested near Washington Square Park in lower Manhattan on Sunday. In some cases, police targeted protesters and bystanders indiscriminately, throwing them to the ground, handcuffing and arresting them".
Lidia, when it comes to libya you and your pal arnold got it wrong.
The evidence is quite clear, Gaddafi committed the majority of abuses and most libyans are happy now that he is gone.
The implication that real abuses are being committed now whereas before they were not is moronic.
" it could help if one read what Arnold writes."
Arnold wrote "I haven't seen any verified fact that is inconsistent with Syria dealing with peaceful protests mostly reasonably."
This for someone who claims to be interested in the affairs of the middle east is shockingly wrong. It truly shows that arnold is a bit detached from reality when it comes to the middle east.
Mere repeating of imperialist propaganda does not count as argument here. Of course, Meh has nothing to refute the facts.
But for the benefit of other readers I am linking to
http://gowans.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/slouching-towards-sirte-natos-war-on-libya-and-africa/
full of info about Libya before and after NATO bombings.
Not mentioning that even Cole stopped lately to show how great now everything in Libya is.
Merely asserting that a viewpoint is propaganda when it is not to your liking isnt a valid argument.
The facts are quite clear, Gaddafis forces did commit the majority of human rights abuses and the majority of libyans are happy now that he has been removed.
This was found by a number of groups such as Amnesty international and human rights watch.
However you and arnold decided to side against the welfare of the majority of the libyan people for ideological reasons.
Such reasons would be the reason why arnold wrote something as foolish as "I haven't seen any verified fact that is inconsistent with Syria dealing with peaceful protests mostly reasonably."
Merely repeating propaganda without facts is not an argument.
Meh decided to side with NATO - the great friend of non-whites - sure only because of of love for Libyans, who are much better off after NATO bombings and militias fighting on the streets of Tripoli, while CIA is the force on the ground without as much as "by your leave" to the "new Libyan government".
Such reasons made meh call Arnold names without paying any attention on Arnold and my arguments about " peaceful protests"
In short, as I have noted - Meh is repeating NATO/Zionist propaganda. Nothing new here, I am resting my case.
Again views not to your liking are not necessarily propaganda, the ones here certainly arent.
Anti-gaddafi forces did commit abuses however most abuses were committed by gaddafis forces. This was found by amnesty international.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14891913
"sure only because of of love for Libyans, who are much better off after NATO bombings and militias fighting on the streets of Tripoli"
According to the majority of libyans, they are. One has to remember that the alternative was Gaddafi with his shelling and indiscriminate attacks against civilians. Libyans saw this as being worse.
"Such reasons made meh call Arnold names without paying any attention on Arnold and my arguments about " peaceful protests""
I payed perfect attention to it, arnold wrote the foolish statement "I haven't seen any verified fact that is inconsistent with Syria dealing with peaceful protests mostly reasonably."
However peaceful protests were indeed dealt with violently, as amnesty international puts it "Forces loyal to Libyan leader Colonel Mu’ammar al-Gaddafi unlawfully killed and injured several thousand people, including peaceful protesters and bystanders,"
Arnold got it wrong big time.
"Nothing new here, I am resting my case."
You made an error with your views on libya, live and learn.
So, Meh finally tried to argue with some facts. Good, even though meh used articlle about Libya to refute Arnold on ...Syria. LOL
Anyway there is NO proof of Qaddafi airbombing rebel cities, even though Cole lied about it as if it was a fact. But NATO bombs were very real. AI was citing a year ago crimes of both Qaddafi and "rebels", but for Qaddafi AI demanded bombs, and against
"rebels" - nothing real. NOW, a year since "rebels" are still committing crimes, only now they are called "free Libya government", they ruined the whole city, but it is OK for Meh and AI is not calling for bombing new "government" - puppets of NATO, including CIA assets.
Now, after some of rebels killed some of their CIA masters in Libya, even some in USA government are wary of Libyan "success", but meh is still happy.
AI as a servant of imperialism
http://stopwar.org.uk/index.php/usa-war-on-terror/1821-how-amnesty-international-became-the-servant-of-us-warmongering-foreign-policy
(even though the author is too kind to AI - it always was a tool of imperialism, but it is another story)
" used articlle about Libya to refute Arnold on ...Syria. LOL"
I used a piece on sryia to show that arnolds knowledge on the matter is embarrassingly low.
In turn I used an article on libya to show that your views are wrong.
The fact that arnold wrote ""I haven't seen any verified fact that is inconsistent with Syria dealing with peaceful protests mostly reasonably." shows that he is a very foolish individual when it comes to the middle east.
"Anyway there is NO proof of Qaddafi airbombing rebel cities"
Actually there is, reports from amnesty international and hrw found that gaddafi did commit such actions.
By claiming otherwise you are showing yourself to be detached from reality.
Do you ever get tired of being wrong lidia.
(rolls eyes)
Using AI the champion of USA crimes as "proof" Meh sure shows how apologists of USA imperialism hope that other people are gullible.
If the person who support one side in a fistfight "reports" that other side is guilty, why would I believe such "report"?
AI or HRW (they are the same, I am not going to look further) also "reported" that several months of NATO bombings of Libya killed less than 100 civilians. Yeah, sure.
When shown that AI is a tool of USA propaganda, Meh has no answer. Sure, Meh believes in everything USA propaganda says. I bet Meh still looks for Saddam's WMD.
It hasnt been shown lidia, what a silly individual you are that you think so.
And "wmd", please try to come up with something more original and smarter.
"If the person who support one side in a fistfight "reports" that other side is guilty, why would I believe such "report"
AI by youre own admission reports abuses by both sides.
Another fail for lidia.
Again do you ever get tired of being wrong, i have no doubt that you are a lonely person that politics is the only thing to concern you, yet here you are even getting this wrong.
Lol, how pathetic. :)
Meh started to call me names - very clever of him, and the best argument possible :)
Anyway, I am not going to use such "arguments" even though it seems that Meh cannot get a very simple conceptions. For ex, that the person being on one side of the fistfight and wanting to be seen as "honest judge" could PRETEND to be even-handed. Of course, such sham usually is not to subtle and it is clear to any observer who is not willing to be duped.
AI and HRW usually add some little criticisms of some NATO/Zionist puppets and even politely ask NATO/Zionists to tell their puppets to behave. Of course, AI and HRW say very different things about official foes of NATO/Zionists.
Zionists with full USA support are mass-murdering children in Gaza. Have AI and HRW said a real word of condemnation for both of them?
More on AI dirty role in Libya during NATO "revolution" and then
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/11/21/libya-creative-destruction/
And, this is a key point to Forte’s narrative: that while human rights NGOs such as Amnesty International (AI) were quick to call for UN Security Council action to prevent a possible Libyan government slaughter in Benghazi, these same NGOs called for no such action when Sirte was being destroyed block-by-block with the help of the very NATO forces they helped unleash. Far from such calls for affirmative UN action, groups like AI were even muted in their verbal criticisms of this slaughter, downplaying
the numbers of the civilian victims in Sirte (and in Libya as a whole) and treating the accounts of human rights violations in Sirte with skepticism.
While AI ended up applauding NATO for allegedly making “significant efforts to minimize the risk of causing civilian casualties,” Forte demonstrates that NATO and its rebel allies targeted civilians and civilian infrastructure in Sirte, with the result being many more civilians killed than the mere “scores of [dead] Libyan civilians” which AI attributes to NATO over the course of the entire conflict. Indeed, there is good evidence that there were individual NATO bombing raids – raids entailing the typical U.S. policy of “double tapping” in which an area is bombed once and then again to kill the civilians who come to the scene to retrieve the injured and dead after the first bombing – which killed scores of civilians in Sirte and other locations in one fell swoop. But again, groups such as AI were unmoved.
"For ex, that the person being on one side of the fistfight and wanting to be seen as "honest judge" could PRETEND to be even-handed. Of course, such sham usually is not to subtle and it is clear to any observer who is not willing to be duped."
No lidia, you want to pretend that those which show facts not to your liking are biased, why, because they are presenting things not to your liking, simple.
"AI and HRW usually add some little criticisms of some NATO/Zionist puppets"
This is your view, the reality of the situation however is quite different, both groups offers large amounts of criticism towards nato allies and countries such as the us itself, amnesty have issued more critical press releases about the us than any other country.
Israel is also a frequent target.
"Of course, AI and HRW say very different things about official foes of NATO/Zionists."
Actually they say the same.
"Have AI and HRW said a real word of condemnation for both of them? "
Both groups have pointed out the abuses that have been committed and have shown the suffering of those under fire, just have they have pointed out the suffering which occurred in libya.
Groups like amnesty unlike lidia are being honest, they will point out the flaws on both sides, because of this they will be opposed by ideologues on both sides of the political spectrum, far right individuals will say it is too anti-western or too anti-israeli while people like lidia will claim the opposite.
The fact remains Gaddafi committed the majority of abuses, lidia seems to think differently has failed to counter or present evidence which shows otherwise.
"But again, groups such as AI were unmoved."
Another fail, amnesty's has indeed documented abuses in Sirte.
Forte is an individual who also got the libyan situation wrong and seems to be quite annoyed about it.
The fact remains that libyans themselves have shown that they are happier without gaddafi, the huffing and puffing of those who failed to properly analyse the situation fails to counter this.
I paid attention to your comment.
You and arnold seem to have foolishly believed that peaceful protests were not attacked.
The evidence however shows otherwise.
HRW whitewashes Zionist crimes
http://angryarab.blogspot.co.il/2012/11/human-rights-watch-has-finally-spoken.html
Arnold, I am sorry to use your place such, but I am fed up with "human rights" business of Zionist and NATO apologists.
Thanks for these Lidia.
Hardly, hrw reports if you bothered to read them are highly critical of israels actions.
Must try harder lidia.
Out he comes, arnold do you still think that peaceful protests in syria were dealt with mostly reasonably.
Meh "numbers" still repeats his "questions" based on imperialist propaganda. Now the voice of anti-Assad peaceful reformer
edward dark @edwardedarkthe FSA in Aleppo are banning the sale & consumption of alcohol in their "liberated" areas in Aleppo #Syria this is our new found "freedom"Expand24 NovFeraas Ayoub @BouyaMedia@edwardedark did u ever doubt this would happen from the start?Expand24 Novedward dark @edwardedark@BouyaMedia yes, we did. we never thought it would get this far. sectarian killings and Wahabism? we would never have started if we knew Hide conversation Reply Retweet Favorite
Lidia, you still have not properly answered my question, do you think russia should cease its aid to the non-elected government of syria. Please answer this.
I actually do have answers but arnold seems to be quite fond of the old censor-ship so my responses are taken away.
What can one expect of a man who has difficulty counting to three ;)
"Such reasons made meh call Arnold names without paying any attention on Arnold and my arguments about " peaceful protests""
Arnold and you it seems believed that peaceful protesters were dealt with mostly reasonably.
This isnt true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhNpw4ydBpY
meh(?) still repeats old propaganda about Syria being a story of Assad against all else, while
1) Even USA about 1,5 years after Syrian gov has said it first admitted that there IS Al Qaida in Syria. Of course, USA were busy sending AG to Syria, including from Libya.
2) USA and other Western govs deal with peaceful protesters by beating up, framing up or tazering and spraying up. Sometimes people got killed. Meh (?) could start to think why USA and other war criminals and torturers care SO much about Syria.
3) Just NOW
"The US Congress has dropped a potential amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2013 that would have provided nominal protections of US citizens and permanent residents from indefinite detention."
So, EVERY person in USA and beyond could be by LAW (USA one) kidnapped and jailed without trial.
Then Meh could go on writing how Arnold and me do not see what USA propaganda has told us
I am an Australian who lived in the US for about 6 years and while i was there i became so disgusted by the "land of the free" that all the brain washing i had suffered my whole life started to wear thin, i started to question everything i was ever told as being fact and as it turns out America IS the evil terrorist that they claim to be protecting us from.
All of us in the "west" have been lied to our whole lives, even me as an Australian is subject to American control as no government in the world has the courage to stand up and say no more, except the ones that are branded "rogue".
You can choose to accept it or not the choice is yours, America is the most powerful nation this planet has ever seen, this should not be a battle between east and west, christian or muslim, this should be a battle to retain our freedom from the Evil, Corrupt and greedy United States of America who has strayed so far from the ideals that made them the envy of the world that it disgusts me and it should disgust Americans, but they are so blinded by all the trivial things such as TV, Video games, hollywood and yes, the fear of terrorism that they themselves created, that they have allowed Their own government (Obama) to have absolute control over the worlds newest police state.
It seems like this blog collapsed under its own stupidity.
Arnold probably got depressed that he had the likes of lidia as his biggest fan.
Post a Comment