My reply @Cpl. Jones

Cpl. Jones, thank you for your, brief ,but thought provoking comment.

To ignore Corbyn’s catastrophic stand on Brexit in all its wishy-washyness is the very crux of his defeat in the election. If Corbyn had only had the courage of his convictions, and been Pro-Brexit, instead of courting political respectability of another ‘referendum’, his campaign would have made sense, to those who voted for the Posh Boy dullard Boris.

Corbyn is and will remain a Left-Wing Social Democrat, in sum, fully a part of a long and valuable political tradition, except in the Age of Neo-Liberal Tony Blair, which, in sum, has evolved into the cherished notion of ‘Moderation’.  Blair’s actual mentor Mrs. Thatcher and her Hayekian political/social psychopathology, in a more carefully massaged and packaged version: see Edward L. Bernays ‘public relations’ bible    ‘Propaganda’.

Here is Samuel Brittan, in the pages of this newspaper, circa 2013, explicating Mrs. Thatcher’s inherent personal/political nihilism.

Headline:Thatcher was right – there is no ‘society’

Sub-headline: Aid for the poor, or distressed regions, must come from the citizens of the country concerned

https://www.ft.com/content/d1387b70-a5d5-11e2-9b77-00144feabdc0

Regards,

StephenKMackSD

https://www.ft.com/content/aa0677e0-48fe-11ea-aee2-9ddbdc86190d?commentID=16668c8a-f8bf-4581-8dc0-6a10ce9f9600

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

‘Unchained Donald Trump’ in the pages of The Financial Times! Old Socialist comments

With the collapse of the Clinton/Clapper/Brennan ‘Russian Interference’ in the 2016 Election, almost receding into the back ground? except for die-hard New Democrats and their Corporate Media allies. ‘CrowdStrike’ was the only organized investigative agency to examine the Clinton servers and e mails, the FBI deferred to its report: when has the FBI ever ceded its investigative prerogative?
The watershed of the Mueller Report,and its star witness, who seemed to be disconnected from the investigation he headed , in his appearance before the House, was utterly, even completely unimpressive. Both Mueller and Comey appeared as near comic figures, in this exercise in political theater: Schiff’s status as dramaturge/ringmaster was not yet in doubt or a state of collapse, the Impeachment in the Senate, would offer that opportunity.

But the undaunted New Democrats, under the leadership of the Pelosi/Schiff/Nadler troika, launched an Impeachment inquiry, with two weeks of ‘secret hearings’ which enabled Rep Schiff to cobble together his narrative of Trump’s political crimes, and its cast of characters : that passed in the New Democratically controlled House, that after Pelosi’s flat-footed machinations, was referred to the Republican controlled Senate.

The only Republican to vote to convict Trump was Sen Mitt Romney!

The above just the political background to this Financial Times editorial:

Headline: An unchained Donald Trump poses a threat to the US republic

Sub-headline: The Senate has given its judgment, now it is the turn of the American people

Roula Khalaf and the others editors at The Financial Times proclaim that Trump is not a political gentleman. But the political intent of these ‘Editors’ is presented here:

It is hard to overstate the danger a re-elected Mr Trump would pose to America’s system of checks and balances. Most pressing is what he could do in the eight months before the election to influence the outcome. This week showed there are no penalties for doing so. As a divided Democratic field heads to its first primary in New Hampshire, candidates should keep this top of mind.

Whatever their differences, which are in some respects deeply ideological, the priority should be to preserve the US constitutional order. They must nominate a strong and credible rival to Mr Trump. This week Mr Romney displayed principle and courage. History will celebrate those who follow his example.

The above might just be a not so covert restatement of Mr Caville’s recent polemic in these pages?

https://www.ft.com/content/aa0677e0-48fe-11ea-aee2-9ddbdc86190d

Carville is a New Democrat, and as such, presents Sanders as clear and present danger to ‘Centrist candidates’, who in his opinion are the only real chance of the New Democrats to wrest the Presidency from Trump. ‘Centrist candidates’ is the term of art for Neo-Liberal conformists, who tow the Party Line of the Clinton/Obama Coterie.

The very notion that Vulture Capitalist and political opportunist Mitt Romney represents ‘principle and courage’,  instead of unslakable presidential ambition, clearly demonstrates that both the Financial Times editorial board, the Republicans and New Democrats are representative of the bankruptcy of the whole of the American singularity of the Property Party, and its two wings.

Old Socialist

https://www.ft.com/content/6eaef4bc-4901-11ea-aee2-9ddbdc86190d

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

New Democrat James Carville on the mortal danger of Bernie Sanders. Political Observer comments

It’s not just New Democrat James Carville, political expert and fixer who helped Bill Clinton to win in 1992: forget Bush looking at his watch, during the debates, and the prescient Ross Perot’s interjection into the campaign, that fated Clinton’s victory?  Now Carville is having a hissy- fit about Bernie Sanders. Hillary Clinton’s been at its for years, and its has just intensified as he moves closer power. The Squad and Tulsi Gabbard are just his natural allies. Note that the New Democrats have political friends in the Neo-Cons, Bret Stephens and on the Right, Rich Lowry :

Headline: Bernie’s Angry Bros

Sub-headline: The Sanders online army resembles President Trump’s most ardent supporters in more ways than either side might care to admit.

Barbara Boxer minces no words when it comes to describing the people usually known as the Bernie Bros — a subset of Bernie Sanders supporters who hope to take over the Democratic Party and remake it in their image.

“There is so much negative energy; it’s so angry,” says the former four-term Democratic senator from California. “You can be angry about the unfairness in the world. But this becomes a personal, deep-seated anger at anyone who doesn’t say exactly what you want to hear.”

I ran into Boxer earlier this week and got to talking about a superb report in The Times by my colleagues Matt Flegenheimer, Rebecca R. Ruiz and Nellie Bowles: “Bernie Sanders and His Internet Army.” The piece briefly mentions a 2016 incident in which Boxer went to Nevada to try to unify the party after Hillary Clinton defeated Bernie Sanders in the state’s caucus.

 

Rich Lowry his column of January 19, 2020, the last two paragraphs are instructive

Headline: Rich Lowry: Bernie a clear danger to the public welfare

His foreign policy bears the stamp of soft spots for the communist regimes in Nicaragua and the Soviet Union. He called the killing of Gen. Qassem Soleimani an assassination. He condemned the ouster of Bolivia’s leftist autocrat Evo Morales, who has called Sanders “brother.” He won’t call Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro a dictator, but slams Benjamin Netanyahu as a “racist.” He has said his vote to authorize the war in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks was a mistake.

Sanders does indeed have his charms. He is sincere, consistent and inarguably himself. He now has a step on frenemy Elizabeth Warren in the leftist lane in the primaries because he is not as painfully calculating as she is. But make no mistake: Sanders is a socialist continuing his takeover attempt of the Democratic Party to forge what he aptly calls a political revolution. He may be more polite than Trump, but he is wildly outside the mainstream and a clear and present danger to the public welfare.

https://www.sunjournal.com/2020/01/18/rich-lowry-bernie-a-clear-danger-to-the-public-welfare/

The notion of ‘the public welfare’ in the rhetoric of Lowry is heretical.

A report on John Kerry’s Anti-Bernie remarks, reported on February 02, 2020:

Headline:’Sanders taking down the Democratic Party’: John Kerry overheard talking about potential 2020 bid

Former Secretary of State John Kerry was overheard talking about the potential steps he would have to take to enter the 2020 presidential race.

Kerry, who has been campaigning for former Vice President Joe Biden, cited “the possibility of Bernie Sanders taking down the Democratic Party — down whole” as the reason for potentially entering the race. An NBC News analyst overheard part of the conversation while Kerry, 76, was talking on the phone in the lobby restaurant of the Renaissance Savery hotel in Des Moines, Iowa, on Sunday.

“Maybe I’m f—ing deluding myself here,” Kerry said, explaining that he would have to step down from the board of Bank of America and stop making paid speeches.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/sanders-taking-down-the-democratic-party-john-kerry-overheard-talking-about-potential-2020-bid

The Left is the favored target of both the Neo-Liberals, Carville, The Clinton’s, John Kerry and a host of fellow-travelers, the Conservatives like Rich Lowry and the Neo-Cons like Bret Stephens.

The pressing question for 2020: will the New Democratic Party and its Clinton loyalists subvert the Reform Wing of the Party, Sanders, The Squad and Tulsi Gabbard? We already see the evidence of the Iowa Caucuses, as the demonstration of the inept and mendacious  Clinton apparatchiks.

StephenKMackSD

P. S. Tulsi Gabbard’s defamation lawsuit against Hillary Clinton might offer what?

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

janan.ganesh@ft.com on ‘Conspiracist fans of Mr Sanders’ and other pressing political questions. Political Observer comments

Mr. Ganesh gives the game away with his first sentence:

‘Excuse the postmodernism here but the Iowa caucuses did not happen.’

What Mr. Ganesh ‘knows’ about Post-Modernism is a matter of conjecture, but does provide an au courant opening for his political chatter. This ‘hipster’ loves to salt his essays with what reads like a knowledge that spans the breadth of the zeitgeist.

But not content to travel, merely on his immediate knowledge of that zeitgeist, he offers this :

Still, Iowa was useful insofar as it put one idea to rest. There is no conspiratorial elite of political centrists. Or at least not a competent one. If liberals really were the knaves of socialist and conservative demonology, they would not allow their vote to splinter so inefficiently among duplicate candidates.

Ganesh presents his myth of a conspiratorial elite of political centrists as indicative of what?  What in fact is a cadre of Neo-Liberals led by Clinton and her political minions: Buttigieg declared himself the ‘winner’ of Iowa with 62% of the ballots available for count, using the ‘Shadow’ app created by Clinton and Obama loyalists! A New York Times report of 02/05/20

Headline: Iowa Still Unresolved, 2020 Candidates Move On to New Hampshire: Live Updates

The Iowa Democratic Party released a new set of partial caucus results late Tuesday night, but it didn’t change much from the first wave of numbers it put out earlier in the day. With 71 percent of precincts in, Pete Buttigieg still held a narrow lead over Bernie Sanders. Elizabeth Warren was in third, and Joseph R. Biden Jr. was in a distant fourth.

This followed by some political embroidery that presents preliminary data as definitive of political viability of  that ‘centrism’. Not content with this he presents the case for the triumphalism of this centrism:

Because it was so imperious for so long, centrism did not have to define itself. It was whatever the government of the day was doing, whether led by Bill Clinton or Barack Obama in the US, Tony Blair or David Cameron in Britain, Romano Prodi or Matteo Renzi in Italy. Once it found itself in opposition, the centre had to set out what it believed from first principles. And there were no spoils of power with which to finesse any differences.

Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Tony Blair were and are Neo-liberals, the Italian context I’ll refrain from comment. Mr. Ganesh is the fellow traveler of the above leaders. So his ‘Centrists’ are in fact Neo-Liberals, the subject of historical/political re-write.

But Mr. Ganesh can’t resist this pronouncement:

Conspiracist fans of Mr Sanders read into Iowa’s delayed results obvious chicanery by the Democratic elite. Would that it were so feline. An establishment that cannot settle on a favoured candidate of its own, or even two, is unlikely to have the rest of the party on marionette strings. If its problem were just a lack of guile, it might be fixable. But beneath that is genuine confusion over the meaning of moderation today. Is it closer to liberalism or to social democracy?

‘Conspiracy Theorist’ was the weapon of choice used by the CIA, to attack the credibility of the critics of the Warren Report. Its was terrible day when the Church Committee found that there was more that one assassin in the Kennedy Murder. Mr. Ganesh is, of course, unaware of that, and many other inconvenient facts of American political history. Or that Clinton loyalist Debby Wassermann-Schultz is to lead the ‘investigation’ into the Iowa. The caucus was small enough to use a manual count of votes, why was ‘Shadow’ used instead?

Political Observer

https://www.ft.com/content/9fabe83c-47f7-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Argentine/IMF Economic Melodrama never ends in the pages of The Financial Times. Political Observer comments ?

Can there be any doubt that Macri’s ‘Neo-Liberalism Lite’ has been an utter failure! Was the peso in near free fall the first indicator, that de Kirchner would be returning to office, in her very adroit political trompe l’oeil as vice-president? The ‘judgement’ of the ‘technocrats’ at the IMF has proven to be in the category of the non-existent.
Or should the reader look to the firing of Alfonso Prat-Gay in 2016, as the signal, ignored by those very ‘technocrats’?

Headline: Argentina finance minister axed on economic uncertainty

Sub-headline: President requests resignation of Prat-Gay due to ‘differences’ in department

https://www.ft.com/content/2d82da08-cb8c-11e6-864f-20dcb35cede2

The ‘experts’ that Mr. Mander presents are impressive, except that the current employers of his coterie might offer a clue as to the economic/political loyalties?

‘said Fernanda Vallejos, an economist and congresswoman for the province of Buenos Aires,’

‘said Martín Redrado, a former Argentine central bank governor.’

‘said one veteran observer.’

‘warned Daniel Marx, a former finance secretary’

https://www.ft.com/content/05bb622c-443f-11ea-a43a-c4b328d9061c

Political Observer

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Andy Divine prays for a Miracle. Political Observer comments

Headline:America Needs a Miracle

Andy Divine long ago lost the privilege of commenting on ‘race’ with his publication of this essay adapted from ‘The Bell Curve’ :

https://newrepublic.com/article/120887/race-genes-and-iq-new-republics-bell-curve-excerpt

Andy’s surmise is that his contemporary readers , in the provincial world of New York Magazine, haven’t read it, and are probably indifferent on the matter. This audience addicted to being seen at the latest restaurant, becoming ‘fans’ of the ‘hottest’ television programs, the latest gossip or photos from the utterly vacuous world of the Kardashian’s, and the Sex Diaries essays, that proves that we can all can aspire to be our own Candace Bushnells! At the time of my reading of Mr. Divine’s commentary had 50 comments, some of which were quite impressive but here is my favorites:

dptrue 5 HOURS AGO

@andrewsullivan. How did “the Civil Rights Act upend the Constitution”?

Andy has made many self- reinventions -from Thatcherite, to Neo-Conservatism, to Neo-Liberal. But its always the same arrogant pronouncements. This time he presents the  possibility of redemption:

Headline: America Needs a Miracle

Hope comes from two books: Ezra Klein’s ‘Why We’re Polarized’ and Christopher Caldwell’s ‘The Age of Entitlement’ . As a former reader of Mr. Caldwell at The Financial Times:

https://www.ft.com/stream/c27d57f9-4c55-3732-a557-612fd13d8ba0

I found his columns, if not just incomprehensible ramblings , a complete muddle of free floating chatter , in sum without argumentative anchor. But his book ‘Reflections on the Revolution In Europe: Immigration, Islam and The West  is reviewed at The New York Review of Books: The Big Muslim Problem! by Malise Ruthven (Pay Wall) is revelatory of Mr. Caldwell’s, what to call it?

The Big Muslim Problem!

Mr. Kline is not ‘Left’ but is a Liberal, in sum the kind of ‘guest’ always welcome on Corporate Media. And because of that, the perfect stand-in for the ‘Left’ in Andy’s World. While Andy has spent his time proselytizing  about these books, offering the mirage of redemption, he has missed the momentary ascendance of the Romney/Murkowski/Collins political alliance, that was about to render the solid Republican Majority in the Senate Impeachment Trial moot?

Political Observer

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/01/andrew-sullivan-america-needs-a-miracle.html#comments

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Edward Luce & Rana Foroohar in ‘The Swamp’. Political Observer comments

There is no more appropriate place for Edward Luce than ‘The Swamp’ ! He supplies the usual ‘horse race’ handicapping of the approaching Iowa Primary as if by wrote, its a well traveled rhetorical path for Corporate Media ‘reporters’ . He then, like the good teacher, has a list of recommendations to his readers. Not surprising they are his colleagues and fellow travelers, except for Anne Applebaum who is a Neo-Conservative  in Liberal Drag. This disguise is favorite of politicians/thinkers like Christina Freeland, Michael Ignatieff ,  Samantha Power and Timothy Snyder.

‘The Swamp’ a shared responsibility between Luce and Rana Foroohar. And perhaps because she is the least senior member of the Financial Times staff , she engages in, what is not surprising, the use of an anonymous inside source, whose information proves that Sanders is unfit for the Presidency:

I’ve heard from people very close to Sanders (including some who campaigned with him last time around) that he is totally authentic, and yet completely ill equipped to work with others. To quote one person from that former team, “he can’t really be in a room with more than three people at a time”. And that’s coming from someone who is deeply committed to Sanders policy prescriptions. Not good for a future president.

According to the Corporatist Mythology Sanders isn’t ‘a multi-tasker‘! The most necessary talent for any employee in American business. Should the reader recall Reagan’s penchant for snoozing? or Nixon’s law breaking, or his drinking problem?

The above was just the windup for Foroohar, who then attacks Millennials as natural Socialists:

That said, these aren’t ordinary times. Millennials want wealth redistribution. Sanders is promising it. He may be the one to bring them out — and bring out the existential fight within the party that the Republicans have already gone through. As for Des Moines, I’m giving it a miss . . .

Political Observer

https://www.ft.com/content/778ab682-43ae-11ea-a43a-c4b328d9061c

_____________________________________________________________

In reply to Paul A. Myers

Isn’t Gavin Newsome the perfect Democratic candidate that the Party is looking for? The Democrats haven’t had a near ‘charismatic’ candidate since John Tunney.  The two ‘stars’ of that Party Feinstein in her last term, a Clinton stalwart, and Boxer attacking Sanders from the periphery of retirement?

This from Neo-Con Bret Stephens:

‘Barbara Boxer minces no words when it comes to describing the people usually known as the Bernie Bros — a subset of Bernie Sanders supporters who hope to take over the Democratic Party and remake it in their image.
“There is so much negative energy; it’s so angry,” says the former four-term Democratic senator from California. “You can be angry about the unfairness in the world. But this becomes a personal, deep-seated anger at anyone who doesn’t say exactly what you want to hear.”
I ran into Boxer earlier this week and got to talking about a superb report in The Times by my colleagues Matt Flegenheimer, Rebecca R. Ruiz and Nellie Bowles: “Bernie Sanders and His Internet Army.” The piece briefly mentions a 2016 incident in which Boxer went to Nevada to try to unify the party after Hillary Clinton defeated Bernie Sanders in the state’s caucus.’

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/31/opinion/sanders-bernie-bros.html

Stephens gives reactionary Republicanism a bad name, but he can’t resist defaming Sanders. ‘Socialism’ is the dirty word in American Politics, while we exist in the ‘Gig Economy’ that followed the Depression bought on by the collapse of the Neo-Liberal Swindle of 2008.

Newsome performing those  ‘Gay Marriages’ as Mayor of San Francisco had my ‘fellow’ ‘Gays’ in a state of rapture, a bit hyperbolic, but not by much. Its too bad he is Old Money, although he almost meets the lowest possible standard for ‘dashing’ in Hollywood terms.
Always enjoy reading your comments!
Regards,
StephenKMackSD

https://www.ft.com/content/778ab682-43ae-11ea-a43a-c4b328d9061c?commentID=06bf60b6-bf13-4720-8115-7be2a1541c08

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Janan Ganesh on Christian Bale, Dick Cheney, Small Government Republicans, the Unitary Executive, the Trump Impeachment and other pressing questions of the dismal political present. American Writer can’t get past paragraphs one and three!

As as an accomplished, indeed a querulous practitioner of the feuilleton, for the uninitiated a definition : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feuilleton.

Mr Ganesh’s penchant for Pop Culture references is matter of his immersion in the vicissitudes of that cultural/political product: Christian Bale’s performance as the redoubtable Dick Cheney in ‘Vice’ acts as his framing device for his meditation on ‘Small Government Republicans’ – just a slight but necessary digression – Neo-Liberalism demands a ‘strong state’ as the sine qua non of its success, this the most elementary building block of this political/ethical regime.

Should the ‘Unitary Presidency’ be credited to John Yoo ?  Or at least its ‘codification’ with the help of his brother Christopher S. Yoo?

This book is the first to undertake a detailed historical and legal examination of presidential power and the theory of the unitary executive. This theory—that the Constitution gives the president the power to remove and control all policy-making subordinates in the executive branch—has been the subject of heated debate since the Reagan years.

To determine whether the Constitution creates a strongly unitary executive, Steven G. Calabresi and Christopher S. Yoo look at the actual practice of all forty-three presidential administrations, from George Washington to George W. Bush. They argue that all presidents have been committed proponents of the theory of the unitary executive, and they explore the meaning and implications of this finding.

This publication is available on the following link(s):

The above provided by : https://politicalscience.yale.edu/publications/unitary-executive-presidential-power-washington-bush

The reader is just one paragraph into  Mr. Ganesh’s essay and we are deep into the territory of his ideological map of misreadings, or is it cultivated ignorance, of the most specialized kind?

The third paragraph offers this:

When the Senate acquits Mr Trump in the coming weeks, partisan fealty will be the main reason. That, and what Michael Gerson, the former speech writer to George W Bush, calls “understandable cowardice”. Republicans who believe that Mr Trump has a case to answer also know that he will turn his tweets, his voters and his donors on any who defy him.

With the collapse of ‘Russiagate’ followed closely by the ‘Impeachment’ of Trump by Pelosi, Schiff, and Nadler, and its maladroitly confected ‘evidence of presidential wrong doing’ , a monument to Schiff’s political hysteria: he is the reincarnation of Joe McCarthy and his notorious ‘list of names’ .

Look to the House star witnesses Sondland , Vindman and Fiona Hill as part of the central evidentiary linchpins of the case against Trump. In nearly 30 hours of ‘testimony’ as exemplary of Schiff clear evidence of a misbegotten dramaturgy, held together by well timed strategic leaking of what the Corp. Media characterizes as ‘Bombshells’: in service to a re-invigoration of the case. Note that the two weeks of secret hearings gave Schiff ample opportunity to cobble together his Presidential Abuse Melodrama, that satisfies an utterly  uncritical Press, suffering from an advanced case of ‘Trump Fatigue Syndrome’. A ‘Press’ that is complicit in the rise of Trump, as are the Republicans and The New Democrats!

The newest ‘event’ is this melodrama is  the possibility that Republican Senators Romney,Collins and Murkowski will breach the long forgotten 11 th Commandment, and vote for Impeachment!

So much more to say, yet I won’t quite commit the crime against the readers patience committed by Mr. Ganesh, or at the least my crime is just a misdemeanor.

American Writer

https://www.ft.com/content/8bac9b2c-41f0-11ea-bdb5-169ba7be433d

 

 

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

American Writer: diary entry January 25, 2020.

After finishing Domenico Losudro’s  Liberalism : A Counter-History , which is a history and polemic against a nihilistic political/civic mythology: and its perpetrators of colonialism, slavery,the indentured servitude of the ‘lower orders’, not to speak of the genocide against native peoples . Liberalism’s salesmen Locke, de Tocqueville, Mill, Spencer, the list of bad actors embraces almost all the prominent thinkers of the Enlightenment, and their precursors and natural inheritors . This presented in a relentlessly compelling narrative. Losurdo book is a negative revelation.

While waiting for my print copy of Alexander Zevin’s Liberalism at Large: The World According to the Economist ( I had downloaded the e-book from Verso, but I am a reader of books!) As a reader of the Economist- regular and irregular – I was an avid reader of a history of this ‘newspaper’, although the e-book is inhospitable to my retrograde sensibility.

While waiting for Professor Zevin’s book to arrive in the mail,  I looked at my book shelf, on my way into my room, and saw Ernest  Samuels one volume edition of his biography ‘Henry Adams’ in one of the corners, of the top shelf. One of the expressions of my curiosity, allied to my unslakable intellectual/literary ambition. Perhaps Kant’s imperative of ‘dare to know’ has been my unknown point of reference?

My copy of Prof. Zevin’s book arrived, while I am on page 228 of ‘Henry Adams’ . It reads like a novel, whose main character is Adams, and a host of others personages great and small. While I am nearing 75 years, I read Adams as his 48 year old self, in Samuels telling , who has lost Clover, and seeks to rebuild his life, by way of his history writing, that has become a chore, his ambition has reached an ebb? While surrounded by a coterie of women, as the temporary replacements for Clover.

I think I have, maybe, five good years left, in which to read, think, and write. Am I a fool to believe in a future for myself?

Where might this essay by J. C. Levenson ,The Etiology of Israel Adams: The Onset, Waning, and Relevance of Henry Adams’s Anti-Semitismfit into the portrait of Henry Adams, provided by Samuels? Checking the index, pages 315, 316, 320, 321, 346, 405, 455 are the page numbers on which Anti-Semitism is given as a subject.

Two quotation from page 405 of the Samuels book are illuminating:  Bernard Berenson on Henry Adams:

‘We had much in common , but he could not forget that he was an Adams and was always more embarrassed than I was that I happened to be a Jew’

Henry Adams on Bernard Berenson:

‘As usual, I got more information from Berenson than from the rest, and yet Berenson , – well! Berenson belongs to the primitives’ 

Given the above, as a kind rhetorical snapshot of my state of mind, if that describes it accurately…

I had seen Edward Luce’s interview with Chrystia Freeland in The Financial Times of  January 24, 2020, and decided to continue reading Samuels’ biography, as a better investment of my time. Note the economic metaphor. 

Why would I associate Chrystia Freedland with Anti-Semitism?

Headline:Why Is This Canadian Foreign Minister ‘Proud’ of Her Family’s Nazi Past?

Sub-headline: Chrystia Freeland apparently blames Russian disinformation for her grandfather’s Nazi editorials that described Poland as ‘infected by the Jews’

When asked at a press conference on March 6 about the allegations that her maternal grandfather was a Nazi collaborator, Chrystia Freeland, newly appointed Foreign Minister of Canada, former journalist and a writer, a master of words, found only clumsy sentences to deliver what would have earned no more than a ‘C’ in a high school debate class.

“It’s no secret that Russians do not like you and banned you from the country,” began the question. “Recently, there has been a series of articles in pro-Russian websites about you and your maternal grandparents, making accusations that [your grandfather] was a Nazi collaborator. I’d like to get your view—is this a disinformation campaign by the Russians to try to smear you and discredit you, which they have a tendency to do?”

With a poorly-camouflaged expression of pain on her face, Freeland replied:

“It’s public knowledge that there have been efforts—as U.S. intelligence sources have said—by Russia to destabilize the U.S. political system. I think that Canadians and indeed other Western countries should be prepared for similar efforts to be directed at us. I am confident in our country’s democracy and I am confident that we can stand up to and see through those efforts.”

“I don’t think it’s a secret,” she continued, “American officials have publicly said—and even [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel has publicly said—that there were efforts on the Russian side to destabilize Western democracies, and I think it shouldn’t come as a surprise if these same efforts were used against Canada. I think that Canadians and indeed other Western countries should be prepared for similar efforts to be directed at them.”

Why Is This Canadian Foreign Minister ‘Proud’ of Her Family’s Nazi Past?

Freedland wan attempt to put the onus on Putin, as an explanation for her grandfather’s politics was assisted by a ‘reporter’s’ question framed in the New Cold War mythology of Putin The Terrible!

Freedland was once a part of a coterie led by, the now politically irrelevant Michael Ignatieff,  as advocate of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) along with Samantha Power:

Headline:  The Moral Logic of Humanitarian Intervention

Sub-headline: Samantha Power made a career arguing for America’s “responsibility to protect.” During her years in the White House, it became clear that benevolent motives can have calamitous results.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/09/16/the-moral-logic-of-humanitarian-intervention

The interview of Freedland conducted by the Financial Times pundit Luce doesn’t quite meet the standard of the reverence, laced with cynicism, allied to a maladroit, flatfooted comedy, of his ‘Kissinger Interview’ . Out of all the chatter, carefully orchestrated by Luce, to avoid potentially embarrassing questions, this reference to Porcine Spartan Robert Kagan informs the reader that there is no political difference between the under attack  ‘Liberals’ and Neo-Conservatives.

Freedland cites The Jungle Grows Back, a book by Robert Kagan, the American author. “I believe that public support has to be constantly cultivated,” she says. “We need to keep watering the garden. The fact that you ran four times last week doesn’t mean you don’t have to run four times this week to stay healthy.”

https://www.ft.com/content/f4f88f32-3b83-11ea-a01a-bae547046735

American Writer

January 25, 2020

 

 

     

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

My reply @Freakus

@Freakus
Thank you for your comment. But @Buckley’s Ghost has provided a reply. Its last sentence seems to lack a certain decorum, but provides a quote from  Obama, or at least provide a usable paraphrase.
Your definition of the ‘marginal voter’ is exactly that, your definition. If you had read Brooks’ notion of ‘Theyism’ , it has no author,  but is of the product of the zeitgeist. In sum, Brooks’ denial of intellectual/political responsibility!
Ganesh’s straw -man of the ‘marginal voter’, shares in Brooks’ denial of responsibility.   It also serves a second rhetorical purpose: to construct an argument in which the ‘marginal voter’ shares the lead role in his political melodrama with Sanders, that equals a propinquity of political irrationalisms: ‘Socialism’, and ‘Social Justice Warriors’: one of the primary Myths of Jordan Peterson: who has faded from the political scene, like his long dead, invented enemy, the ‘Marxist Post-Modernists’ .

StephenKMackSD

https://www.ft.com/content/99048c50-3cf8-11ea-b232-000f4477fbca?commentID=11b3238f-3f09-491a-858e-ffe81f5266a7

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment