McCarthyism

March 26, 2008

There is a five page posting in a patriotic youth group on the Internet about apologizing to MIM. The responses will serve as excellent material for history. They demonstrate exactly how far out to lunch the left-wing of parasitism is and has been for several years. There is no prophylaxis at work, while even MIM Lite accepts that it is impossible to keep everyone in a patriotic youth group informed. The point is that protective concepts have to be formed and applied to keep the unconscious from anti-communism. In contrast, Michelle Malkin at least gives reasons for her attacks.
Now we have McCarthyism debated by Clinton and Obama camps: “‘I think given all we have heard and seen, he would not have been my pastor,’ Clinton said in a news conference in Greensburg, Pennsylvania.”(1) Hillary Clinton said this in connection to Obama’s pastor Wright. In saying that one cannot choose family but one can choose one’s pastor, Clinton echoes Michelle Malkin, who said it before her.
Bill Clinton kicked off a discussion of McCarthyism by indirectly questioning Obama’s patriotism. “Mr. Clinton, in a speech to voters on Friday in North Carolina, said ‘it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country.'”(2) A retired Air Force general replied for Obama: “‘I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors,’ General McPeak said, ‘so I’ve had enough of it.'”(2) McPeak has probably done his share of travelling the world with the Air Force. Now we have a passport scandal in the news as well.(3) There are those who point out that Joe McCarthy was building his party and really believed in what he was doing. Bill Clinton is attacking Obama and revealing cynicism with his McCarthyism. CNN is calling the situation a discussion of “21st century McCarthyism.”
Especially now that there has been an all-volunteer military for over a generation, Amerikans can consider a Jeffersonian approach to patriotism. In that case, patriotism is just making sacrifices to engage in the public affairs of one’s country. Such a definition does not prejudge whether one should be in the minority or majority and nor does it hold that patriotism requires a willingness to die to kill people in other countries.In The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama points to a survey that showed that 66% of Amerikans believed that Saddam Hussein had a direct role in 9/11. The fatuous left-wing of parasitism is inclined to believe that such results are on account of poverty’s leading to a lack of political education. MIM believes the opposite that the situation stems from economic well-being which leads to carefree existence but also an occasional willingness to cover for one’s leaders and to invent vicious reasons covering for their actions–a whiteness solidarity.
Unlike Obama, we at MIM do not love the 66%. Of course, the mentally retarded should be excused, but taking such an approach to the 66% is unnecessarily elitist in its own way. Such a love of country is not love in our book, just condescension. The Amerikans knew they might be just covering for Bush in coming up with justifications to start the Iraq War. It is only now that they see the results–after the fact–that we see polls running in other directions. So if loving the 66% is a requirement of patriotism, MIM is not patriotic. We have seen evidence time and time again that the majority can be consciously and unlovably vicious. If one would not love a boyfriend or girlfriend who made up stories to carry out mass murder, then one should not love the 66% who made up stories about Saddam Hussein.The fact is that there was no one with any discernment in the patriotic youth group spreading private information about MIM over a period of many years. It readily sided with the imperialist state against MIM again and again and ended up comparing unfavorably with many in the state itself not 100% enthralled with either Clinton or Bush, especially once they discovered that neither Clinton nor Bush could 100% protect them.On a related note, a “counterterrorism blog” has already compared the McCarthyism situation to Watergate. The blogger said that Deep Throat should have appealed to the “Left” for help. Deep Throat was a source in the Watergate stories that brought down Nixon. The counterterrorism blog says that once FBI leaders realized they were on questionable legal ground, they started playing both sides–Nixon’s and that of his opponents.This is unfortunately a point well beyond our would-be “Left.” There would not be five people anywhere who would understand it in the activist groups. Moreover, when Putin or his underlings talk about “counterterrorism cooperation” and “continuity” there is no one here outside the state to understand what he is talking about. We would tell our counterterrorism blogger that there is nothing to worry about because there is no “Left.” What there is is a bunch of people unable to reason independently from the state, unable to stand by themselves and unable to contribute anything except regurgitation of the state–except with their own racist pornographic modifications and axes to grind thrown in. With a would-be “Left” easily bought off with trinkets, there is only Deep Throat, nothing else. It were as if there did not have to be a Democratic Party office to break into in Watergate.To obtain an apology from MIM’s Internet critics would be pointless, because the same thing would happen again, if not to MIM, then to future communists. A meaningful apology would have to come with a policy against using the good ole’ boys’ network, and that is not going to happen in a white nationalist Internet organization. Clinton may be the one offering the theory right now, but patriotic youth groups will be delivering the practice as they have in the last several years.The accusations levelled over years by leaders of the patriotic youth association against MIM stem from myopic pragmatism. The hope is to hurl enough charges of an uninvestigated nature that some stick. If sufficiently embarrassed, the pragmatists then apologize but only for an individual instance. To do otherwise would require a method in
one’s madness and that is not possible for the pragmatist Liberals. The inability to reason from ideological principle and the inability to put facts in scientific categories are the same underlying problem. One unable to reason from ideological principle is also unable to see the point of scientific endeavor. For pre-scientific people there is only the case-by-case approach.

Both the patriotic youth group and the astrological patriotic
association would have been better off following MIM orders. They have ended up as crude tools of Bush and Clinton. That’s a tough concept to swallow with Leninism so unpopular in the imperialist countries. On the other hand, it will also be tough to swallow how little evidence there is for a “Left” in the imperialist countries if certain MIM struggles are examined carefully.

It is imperative to dispense with ultra-democratic and pseudo-
anarchist ideas that the leaders are abusing followers even before the
leaders have state power. Quite the contrary, the “live wires” always
attract a disproportionate response from the state. Lenin got that
right and the bourgeois Liberalism masquerading as some kind of
radicalism, whether anarchist, ultra-democratic or other exotic “ism”
got it wrong. Getting it wrong is not just academic but leads directly
to counterrevolutionary activity. If the patriotic youth group had any
integrity, it would admit that. The lack of ability to discuss that
point proves again why MIM’s emphasis on quality and raising the bar
is correct. It is unfortunate that Lenin is correct, but he is correct.
If he were not correct, the anarchists and ultra-left would have already
mobilized the “masses” to rebuff the new Watergate and McCarthyism. Their lack of accurate understanding of the strategic balance of forces ends up delivering youth to militant anti-communist tendencies.

Unfavorable comparisons between a would-be “Left” and Deep Throats arise because MIM’s third cardinal principle is correct in spectacular fashion. What would be a “Left” is really just a pornographic transmission belt for the imperialist state.

Notes:
1. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/clinton.wright/
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/us/politics/23obama.html?ref=politics
3. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/25/justice.passport/
4. “Of Telecoms, and “Twisting Slowly, Slowly in the Wind”: Watergate Reprised,” By Jeffrey Breinholt, http://counterterrorismblog.org/2008/03/of_telecoms_and_twisting_slowl.php

The first paragraph of this article is factually false, because FISA does spell out exactly that authority for spying on Amerikans does not exist elsewhere. However, the article is mostly about analogies to Watergate in the current day and is thus useful.

[I apologize for the formatting problems in this article over the last few days, problems which seem to change without my doing anything. MIM Lite is unfamiliar with wordpress.com formatting at this time, but we will get up to speed eventually.]

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: