Mangled Thoughts

Cultists explain away inconvenient evidence, or ignore it when they can’t. Secondly, they evade confronting their own assumptions, their cultic beliefs. Such is David Brown.

Since yesterday, Mr. Brown has used his scatter-gun again, some of his remarks are very offensive indeed, eg.

“ your feigned sympathy for the victims of Saddam you would have thought him acceptable i’m sure ? “

Readers won’t mistake one’s view of Saddam and the Ba’ath Party, minding also during the war against Saddam, we posted items against his regime and Brown’s fellow travelers, the fifth columnists in the media lying for Saddam and covering up the horrendous crimes he committed against Iraqis. And, against the Kurds and blaming the horrendous crimes of the Ba’ath Party on the US, Australia and Britain!

It’s an odd way of ‘arguing’ blaming the horrendous crimes of socialist butchers on capitalists and the West. Let’s return to Hobsbawm.

Hobsbawm declared the murder of millions, 20 million to be exact, is justified to bring about the communist state. Now, this is what Marx demanded, communism is to be achieved through enslavement and butchery enmasse. This is typical of the Left: the only crimes committed is everything that is decent and true because they stand in the way of their totalitarian aims. Put another way, it is not the crime but who commits it that counts.

Funnier still, according to Brown and his fellow travellers in the media, crimes committed by their heroes are not only not crimes. They attribute them to capitalists and the West, mainly the US and Australia and Britain, and then they are crimes.

Which is it Brown? A crime or not a crime? How, in volte face, can capitalists be blamed for crimes committed by his heroes  from the Soviet Union to China, Cuba, to mainland Latin America? Turgid is not the word. Of course the master of the cult, Marx, said crime exists only for those unlike him and his adherents in his The German Ideology. When they commit atrocities they are charitable acts.

Yesterday evening I retrieved Marx’s The German Ideology from its well buried place of dishonour and went through it again. Yes, it is the work of a violent, pathological little man bent on inflicting hell on many. It is also trash. It is so bad wading through that mush, is like wading through a deep bog, it’s the mud. Amusingly, his drivel could be summed up in, oh, all of ten pages at the most. How on earth could anyone have taken such a crude, banal fiction seriously is a mystery. But then, there are cultists who seek a cult through which they can appear to be non-cultists and have this notion Marx is it.

Allende and Pinochet. Now this, this deserves a dedicated article. I am enjoying writing it up. I’ve still a little bit more material to put together and then we bang it down. I really have taken care over this one. It’s why I haven’t posted so far today, evidence extraction is a joy, passed most of the day in pleasant compilation.

To remark on Brown’s abuse of the New Testament, Old Testament, the Christian confession and the ancient history of the Middle East would require a monograph. I can do it, but it would take time and probably bore the socks off readers because it is not exactly thrilling reading for the layman. Let’s, therefore, sum it up:

He shows he has no clue at all about these subjects. It shows in the complete pile of dung he purveys as history, including “Jesus was a socialist”. I realise dumbed down clerics say so, but they are ignoramuses too in history, biblical scholarship, and theology. This is all par for the course for them and Brown, as his nonsense on capitalism, slavery, democracy and ‘economic history’ all too plainly discloses.

No, truly, what this guy has written to date, such as it is, is so bad he has to begin his schooling all over again, right from basics. He really should sue his Leftist teachers, lecturers and professors, whose capacity to teach is nothing more than having mastered the drivel words of the socialist cult and a long list of anti-capitalism, anti-Christian, anti-Western lies and this is the history of each meaty field of learning according to that pack of parasites.

For reasons we have explained, this statement by Brown is a lie:

“Trotsky was diametrically opposed to stain and lenin ideologically.russia was in a state of civil war during the kronstadt rebellion. needless to say violence does occur during such times. the captalists were responsible for the deaths and slavery of millions. they make trotsky look like mother teresa. how are you going with your homework?”

The only disagreement between them was the desire to be the number one butcher, and they were all faithfull to Marx. Trotsky ordered the kronstadt massacre of the workers, who rose up against the communist regime. This daring to fight to regain freedom is what Brown calls civil war. Ignoring also, all the butchery committed by the communists by then. To repeat, no hard left journalist in the media would dare venture, “capitalists were responsible for the deaths and slavery of millions”. They know what little veneer of a reputation they have will be shredded instantly. In contrast, there is the over 100 million men women and children killed by communist regimes, and still being killed in North Korea and Cuba and by Marxist fronts.

In this item, we are not going through all of Brown’s latest evasions. For now, let’s turn to slavery again.

How amusing, after having accused me of justifying slavery and other evils,  Brown puts in special pleading. Having only expressed how humanitarian Arab-Muslim slavers are, he has now thrown in, “I in no way condone slavery be it white christian or muslim in origin.” I never said he did, it’s his judgement that is in doubt. However, he continues, “according to the quran no race is superior to another.”

How he squares this with, commencing from Mohammad himslef, the worse than racist record of Islam can only be put down to complete ignorance. Jews are to be exterminated. Mohammad himself lead a massacre against Jews. Dhimmis are at best inferior and can be killed.  This is for starters, chilling enough and yet he condemns Judaism and Christianity,

“the old testament teaches that blacks originated from the outcast son of noah [ ham ] this is derogatory. and points to a racist agenda by white slave traders.”

Now, just keep in view the above remark, he is not equipped at all on the OT. To dispose of his garbage, it is not ‘teaching’, nor dogma, nor doctrine. There is no “agenda’, no ‘racist agenda’, and no ’slave trade agenda’ in it. It’s not there. Neither has any eminent scholar found such an ‘agenda’. On this nothing at all he condemns Jews and Christian, but principally the Jews. Who is the real racist?

Yet, Brown’s comment can’t be accidental. Marx declared the capitalist world and its bourgeois’ values is all due to the Jews. He was in no doubt, eradicate the Jews to eradicate capitalism, freedom! Brown’s beloved Marx spoke, it must be true, so there.

Contrast this:

“Contrary to the myth that Islam is a religion free from racial prejudice, slavery in the Moslem world has been, and remains, brutally racist in character.  To find truly endemic, open, raw anti-Black racism and slavery today one needs to go to the two Islamic Republics in Africa: Mauritania and Sudan. Black people have been enslaved on such a scale that the term black has become synonymous with slave. The mixed-race, predominantly Negroid but self-avowedly “Arabic” denizens of the transitional sub-Saharan zone have been indoctrinated into treating their pure-black southern neighbors with racist disdain. (To this day it can be dangerous to one’s life to ask a dark-looking but Arabic-speaking Sudanese or Mauritanian Moslem if he is “black.”)

Even free blacks are regarded as slaves in Islam.

The hard Left supports the efforts of Arab-Muslim terrorist fronts to exterminate the Jewish people and destroy their country Israel. More-over, as we have documented on this site, the UN expends considerable funds taken from Australian, US, and British taxpayers to achieve this end. Brown cannot spot real racists because they are his fellow travellers. The destruction of Israel is a core aim of theirs, and the fifth columnists in the media maintain anti-Israel propaganda in their ardent support of Arab-Islam terrorist fronts, as does Chavez who trains Islamo-terrorists inside Venezuela. Chavez is not a Christian.

However, we are talking about slavery. Arab Muslim slave trade and enslaving non-muslim people commenced right at the beginning of Islam with Mohammad, and continues today, and it is has been brutal all the way down. By the way, Brown, there are no black populations in the Arab-Muslim countries of the Middle East because, as we noted, they castrated blacks, to stop them procreating.  Even the decidedly leftist Wikipedia has recognised a few truths unpalatable to Brown.

Under Islam, slavery continues in Muritania, Sudan, Niger, Mali and Chad and it is brutal. For example,

Islamic Slavery in Sudan

But concern for condemning slavery is not Brown’s point. He wants to equate capitalism with slavery and depict it as the worst type of slavery ever, unlike his ‘huminatarian’ Arab-Muslim slavers. Unlike the slavers of communist regimes. The real slavers are Jews, Christians and capitalism. Except for one thing, it is false.

Workers created capitalism, as we wrote, They brought slavery to an end in the free world, as we wrote. Even Marx, as bad as his drivel is, didn’t assert the capitalist West is a world of slavers, because it did not occur at all. Capitalism is free market action, actions of free men not slaves.

Indeed, from the beginnings of what was not the ‘Industrial Revolution’ in the C18^th  but the revolution of capitalism, common law is rooted in inalienable rights and free markets and rapidly reflected the great advances under capitalism. Also, Law Lords in their judgments condemned in their findings any assertion of any form of slavery including “positive law” (Lord Mansfield 1772 Judgement). The English struck slavery down because it was a violation of all good values on which they stood as free men and women.

Brown, however, knows better. He asserts capitalism is slavery. This really means, millions of modest men and women from the beginning of the capital revolution engaged in slavery as traders and owners. The enormity of this assertion, forget genuine sound economics, is so spectacular an asinine lie even the treacherous left in the media would choke before they tried telling that one. But it’s worse. He makes these sorts of assertions and where is the evidence? Where is the evidence, Brown?

There is none. Brown is only faithfully reciting lies told him by his leftist teachers and professors. He’s a true believer. He can’t help severely embarrassing them. They really don’t expect their prodigies to be so publicly honest in displaying how corrupt the hard left ‘professorariat’ is. Yet, he pays tribute to them, for he knows they will back up this claim that was obviously drilled into their prodigy, “the capitalists were responsible for the deaths and slavery of millions”.

Nothing in history substantiates the claim. Nothing to buttress the odd notion that so many committed these terrible crimes. Brown glibly compresses his tutors’ lies and out came that garbage. It doesn’t stop there. Brown just knows  -

“you obviously see nothing morally wrong with child labour, as it was practiced by the British capitalists . five year old children forced down coal mines ?”

Until the capital revolution, children had to go out and engage in hard labour because they and their families had to survive. This wasn’t forced labour, it was the fact there was not the capital to raise earnings beyond a hard life.This is what decided it, children had to work or enjoy outright destitution. Guess what?

As the age of capitalism advanced, children in ever increasing numbers did not go to work. In the 19^th century, they were spending at least a few years in school because the absolute majority were prosperous. By the mid C^19th schooling was as close to 100%, all due to free markets, and it has never been bettered. Parents voluntarily sent all those children to school, and socialists and bureaucrats and politicians did not raise and fund the schools. It was all done volitionally by the capitalists, the workers.

Best of all, adults found they could no longer had to work 7 days a week. They were taking time out for family and leisure. Medicine, schooling, plenty of good food, good clothes, conveniences and on through a long list of inventions that continued to accelerate in range and quantity and quality. Increased health and life-spans, whichkept on increasing. Today, the average life span is increasing again.

Is Brown trying to assert that people go to supermarkets because they are destitute? That, unlike in North Korea, the defunct Soviet Union and in Cuba, there is nothing on the shelves? That what they enjoy in the West, though markets are hampered, is real slavery? The socialist regimes real pleasure paradises?

Ah, it is all clear now. Brown can take out the truncheon and polish the jackboots he collected as souvenirs during a ‘whizz bang’ holiday in the gold old days of communist East Germany. He can apply to Castro for a job, educating the Cubans in the wonder of socialist life. He can visit the nice schools, in which Gueverra murdered teenagers to eradicate anti-socialists and had fun doing it.

What’s disappointing is that while a boy defied Gueverra right up until the butcher shot the lad in the head, cornered in Bolivia the great hero of the Left, Gueverra, pleaded for his life. But according toBrown, thugs like Trostsky and Gueverra and Chavez and Allende are democratic, considerate, compassionate types. If one could ignore the carnage and the graves of the over 100 million slayed (and still counting) by them, and ignore the totalitarian truth to socilaism, and ignore its anti-capitalism squalor it dictates for all but the heroes, some daft idiot might agree with Brown. Some nutter might agree that that is not slavery at all.

This is a hurried response to Brown by way of notes. Failing with his first two attempts, he has decided to use a ’scatter gun’ approach today, reeling off every lie his fellow travelers have told in the hope something sticks. I do thank Mr. Brown though for one thing:

This reply clears the decks for a follow-up, careful item. Best of all, I won’t have to go through the tedious list of his ‘arguments’ in detail again. He has given so generously it makes the follow-up item a real delight to write.

One of his latest objections will be dealt with now rather than in the body of this brief. Brown wrote this:

“it was amusing how you justify the slave trade by saying ‘everyone did it? there is never any moral accountability for capitalist crimes. be it for slavery, resource wars , murder, torture. they even avoid responsibilty for the gfc, blaming it on jimmy carter cowardice is their repeated theme…”

As with the absolute majority of his comments, this is a slur and a lie. Also, what on earth is he rambling on about? As for the real cause of the global financial crisis, no one blamed Carter. More-over, capitalism certainly did not cause it. Mr. Brown can go to Brookesnews  to find out what did.

I did not justify slavery at all. I pointed out the history of slavery contradicts Brown’s facile, non-existent grip of the history of slavery. His ignorance has lead him to assert this lie:

“other cultures also treated their slaves far more humanely than the capitalists.to the muslims their slaves were a valubale asset, and wre treated as such…”

He prefaced it with this lie:

“while many societies have practiced slavery. [ the spois of war ] the capitalists were the only ones to use it completely for economic reasons.”

Did Mr. Brown get this rubbish from the Institute for Public Affairs and the Chris Berg-Andrew Kemp paper on “Islam and the Free Market”, because it certainly looks like it. This crew purveyed as the truth of economic history and the history of economics a complete fraudulent fabrication of history that they cooked up. In it, they asserted exactly the lie Brown asserts is the truth. This is how much damage the likes of the CIS, HR Nicholls Society, Quadrant magazine and IPA cause (despicable, it truly is despicable).

Another lie:

“it certainly was not abolished by the capitalists who still use slave labour today in third world countries.people fough for liberation. it was not ;given to them .”

It is easily appreciated how repugnant these comments are to any decent man and woman. The Left, of course, have no idea what decency is and so they are not offended as long as it does not involve being confronted with the real history of socialists, which is an offence according to them. As for Muslims, muslim countries practiced slavery for centuries. Why are there no black populations in Arab-Muslim countries?

Slaves were cruelly treated. First, they were castrated. They were castrated by Arabs to prevent them procreating. After all, the river of slavery that ran from Africa to the Middle East provided an inexhaustible supply of dispensable labour. Those who survived castration were better off dead. So much for Brown’s great humanitarians.

In all respects of treatment of slaves, in contrast, western-christian values restrained not capitalist but agricultural slave masters of the Southern US states. Even so, because it was repugnant, an evil, the capitalist west raised the anti-slavery movement and went to war. Capitalists, not socialists, stopped slavery, and were prepared to die and did to do it. The Democrats, this socialist party, was the party of slave-owners.

Here is my courteous rebutal to Brown’s latest ‘arguments‘

Brown still refuses to condemn socialist crimes. Like all leftists, what matters to this creep is not the crime itself but who does it. So much for his humanity and sense of justice.

David Brown wrote:

“it was the west who actually put Saddam into power. and kept him there. Castro delivered his people from the hands of a murderering dictator[ american backed ] the think tanks you mention are there to keep their corporate masters in power, not to protect truth and liberty”.

No, Saddam was a thug who found his true outlet in the Iraqi National Socialist Party (Ba’ath), which had set about usurping the legitimate government of a prosperous people with bloody violence. Saddam alone murdered many Iraqis who stood in their way.

Brown wrote:

“the aAmericans have been resposible for the deths of 8 million [ maily civilians ] since 1945. the left and the right are both capable of mass murder to protect their interests. true socialists believe in democracy, that includes both marx and trotsky. capitalists just believe in profit”

Another blatant lie even hard, treacherous lying Leftists in the media wouldn’t dare write, because they know they would be totally discredited the instant they told it. Only the Left have shown and demonstrated Brown’s claim the “capacity for mass murder”. The Right would be horrified by and recoil at the merest hint they should involve themselves in mass murder.

Trotsky

Brown wrote:

“by the way stalin was no friend of marx or trotsky.stlin actually had trotsky murdered. both marx and trotsky believed in democracy. as do all true socialists. you seem to be forgetting hitler in your history of mass murderers. oh thats right he was a socialist too wasnt he ?”

They were all true Marxists. They were rivals for power. Marx and Trotsky did not believe in democracy. His notion is of primitive savagery, which vile notion Hobbes and Rousseau propounded; man the savage noble, man the noble savage. This is absolutely hostile to freedom, decency and dignity.

Marx saw his aims to be realised through a mass murdering tyrannical party that kills all who stand in its way, and kills those who are no longer of any use to it. Trotsky was a butcher.

Trotsky ardently upheld Marx’s horrendous views. His disagreement with Stalin was, after Lenin, that he should be the unero numero butcher. He too was a true successor to Marx.

Two further points: Trotsky massacred the Kronstadt workers in 1921 for striking against Lenin’s murderous regime. Secondly, Brown still refuses to condemn socialist crimes. Like all leftists, what matters to this creep is not the crime itself but who does it. So much for his humanity and sense of justice. Here, we return to

I’m not Stiller, Continued from last Friday: Koba the Dread

The item is anchored in an evaluation of Martin Amis’ Koba the Dread. Leftists such as Jason Cowley were furious. They delivered ad hominem attacks, as did Cowley the editor of Leftist rag The New Statesman. It’s understandable why they did. The milieu of intellectuals who give intellectualism a bad name is the milieu in which Martin Amis grew up in. He saw it first-hand from the inside.

Amis relates it and attacks their treachery. The distinguished David Pryce-Jones did the same in an article. In it, Pryce-Jones concentrates on devout Marxist and propagandist for Stalinist regimes, Eric Hobsbawm. His vile beliefs did show through his papers on history, he couldn’t help himself. Here is Pryce-Jones shredding him and fellow travellers: The Communism of the Intellectuals (The New Criterion, 1/3/2003).

Hitler and the Nazi Party were socialists. Hitler himself proclaimed the Nazi party the true German Socialist Party. They also did what Marx wrote of, the “Jewish problem’ had to be eradicated.

Brown wrote:

“more and more scientists are becoming critical of climate change ? name them. and also name what peer reviewed journals their findings are in? ‘pinochet never received american backing ? apart from being untrue that is illogical. why would they ‘not’ support an anti communist leader ?”

Go to this site, Still Waiting for Greenhouse, which has collated the material from not 1,000 scientists, but hundreds of thousands of scientists. Many are Nobel Prize winners and eminent, the most distinguished scientists. This is the work of the man, John Daly, whom liars pretending to be scientists smeared.

Whereas, the frauds pretending to be scientists pushing the lie carbon emissions causes climate change have been demonstrated to be perpetrating fraud not only when the East Anglia fraud was uncovered, but for well over a decade now. All exposed for fraud by hundreds of thousands of scientists including the most distinguished scientists.

By the way, Brown, Viscount Monckton’s reputation and integrity and courage in the face of the hard Left needs no defence. It shines and I have said so before on this site and will be doing so in other items.

Amusingly, that bastion of hard leftists, ABC, screened a documentary on the Allende coup d’etat, and it was a coup  d’etat. The documentary expressly stated this fact also! It also stated the following facts:

These Marxists were very violent thugs. They terrified and did worse to Chileans. They also brought Chile to the point of total economic destruction. These Stalinist thugs did this, by a coup d’etat.

It was a crisis for good men and women such as Pinochet. How to oppose the Allende regime when the conventions of democracy had been overthrown by the Allendists was a serious moral problem they worked through and, how is this, the ABC documentary also stated this.

It was late, when Chile was on its knees, when it was realised there was no other way but to remove the murderous thugs. Pinochet acted only because what he did was constitutional! The Supreme Court of Chile authorised him, mark this, authorised him, to remove Allende from power for non-compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Chile and creating a communist state.

Here is an important quote:

“Hear me loud and clear!” Salvador Allende himself boasted the following month. “We will employ revolutionary violence!” This was more than an idle boast by Allende. Among the myriad unreported (by the mainstream media) aspects of the Chilean coup were the dozens of “Guerrilla” schools being set up throughout Chile by Soviet bloc agents shortly before that coup.”

“Marxist death squads were also roaming Chile, murdering “bourgeois elements” with impunity or with the tacit support of the regime. When Salvador Allende visited Moscow in December 1972 among his longest meetings were with Boris Ponomariev, the Kremlin’s head of “irregular warfare” for the Western Hemisphere. By 1973, 60 per cent of Chile’’ arable land had been confiscated by the government, often with the aid of these death squads. Rolando Matus and Jacinto Huilipan were among the many farmers who protested Allende’s “Agrarian Reform” and would up kidnapped and murdered.”

[Augusto Pinochet: the untold story, Humberto Fontova, Brookesnews]

Brown wrote:

“chaves is a catholic. latin american countries [ now virtually leftists ] are strongly catholic. that seems to contadict your view that socialism is anti christian. marx subscribed to end religion through education not mass murder. you need to ‘unmangle ‘ your thoughts”

No need to “unmangle”. Whether Chavez was or was not a Catholic I do not know but he is certainly is not Catholic. His actions show he is anti-Catholic, anti-Christian. This virulent anti-Christian thug, hailed as another Fidel Castro, supports, funds and trains Marxist and Islamo-fascist fronts and endorses the Islamo-Fascist theocracy of Iran.

Marx’s position is the eradication of Christianity. Christians don’t cease being Christians just because of totalitarian thugs. Christians stalwartly faced the terrors and anti-Christian  progroms of Trotsky, Lenin and Stalin. They did so under Mao, and they still do. They do so in Cuba today. Oh, the Allendes persecuted not Leftists who had penetrated the Church . What, hurt their own fifth columnists!

They persecuted stalwart Christians. Here is the case of one cold war warrior who also declared, as stated above, Pinochet’s actions were in fact constitutional, in defence of democracy:

Father Poradowski

I shall return to Father Poradowski in another item, because I was acquainted with a Polish Priest who survived the Nazi and Soviet regimes. I use the past tense because he died in the mid-1990’s. He was married.

 

He was ordained during the Soviet era. His wife died, his sons grown up and married and so, at he end of the Soviet Union, he came to Australia for what remained of his life. A few miserable years after a lifetime of blistering hard work, then standing bravely as a Priest against socialist thugs.

 

Then there was another great cold war warrior who had lived under both socialist regimes, Pope John Paul II. He also was in no doubt Marxism is hostile to Christian faith. Brave men who stood bravely against socialist regimes.

Yah, Marx’s ‘education’ is through brainwashing into anti-intellectual garbage, the gulag and mass murder.

Brown wrote:

“the school of the americas was responsible for the deaths and torure of thousands.the victims have names that are documented. . the american backed dictators of latin america were overthrown for obvious reasons. they were criminals. and criminals that the west fully supported”

This is a flat lie. Read what I wrote.

A bloody lie. The Peron socialist party, the Allende junta, the Castro regime and Chavez and his gang of cocaine peddling, terrorist funding thugs, they all overthrew legitimate democratic governments of countries whose people were all prosperous. They reduced those people to misery, enslaved them, in pursuing their aim to impose Marx-Stalin- Trotsky-Lenin type regimes. Their record of mass murder, and destroying Latin Americans economically is truly horrendous.

I recently had the pleasure of chatting with an entrepreneur from Chile. He certainly has no complaints against Pinochet. We discussed how things are today in Chile. He said things are vastly better. How about investment, I asked him. He replied,”very good,picking up steam”. How are people? ” Everyone is doing much better, there is general, increasing prosperity. We have ended the troubles. We are free.”

Who are these western criminals, Brown? In the US murderers are dealt the death sentence. They don’t send them to  other countries.  So what on earth are you talking about?

Brown asserted aged pensions are due to socialism. This is another lie. There is nothing socialist about age pensions or any kind of subsidy for the elderly or the poor.

Anyone with a passing knowledge of British social history would know this. Even if they were socialist reforms the cultic Mr Brown lacks the wit to see that capitalism pays for them. Capitalism does not equal abject poverty. One need look no further than Cuba and North Korea as evidence of this fact.

He tells another repugnant lie:

“capitalism is reckless of the health or length of life of the labourer. unless under compulsion from society. [ karl marx ] the real reason for the abolition of slavery.”

It is capitalism that lead to rapid improvement in health and life-span. This can be checked against, the history of not the “industrial revolution, but what was in fact the revolution called capitalism in the 17th/18th century. The hard historical evidence, Mr. Brown, shows how shabby your grasp of history is.

Having covered considerable ground, we finish off by answering another of Brown’s calumnies:

According to the Brilliant Mr. Brown a slave is now defined as anyone in a ‘Third-World’ country who is employed by a Western company even though their wages exceed those paid by local firms. Brown is attacking a process that adds to a poor country’s capital structure and raises wages and living standards. Like it or not – and you don’t, Mr Brown – foreign investment raises wages in poor countries.

Why else do the locals flood to these firms for work? Brown would obviously prefer these people to starve in the gutter rather than work for an evil foreign capitalist. A typically leftist stance: callous and sanctimonious.

In contrast, Mr. Brown, this as a continuing horror attesting the truth, the real slave masters are socialists:

Castro is the real exploiter. Dan Rather: Cuba’s useful idiot

Mr. Brown took exception to an item, In response to,Viscount Monckton-Professor Plimer tour (Part I). He accepted the offer to submit an article substantiating his claims. True to my editorial principles, it is published entire. I’m amazed, I over-estimated David Brown; I’ll never make such a silly mistake again.

First, his objection:

“mangled thought , capitalism made profit for a minority at the expense of the majority. it was the slaves and the working classes who pulled us out of the swamp. now capitalism is on its kness due to greed and corruption . its end is nigh . and what a great day that will be”

Here is his monumental thesis:

“the transatlantic slave trade, the colonisation of most of the world,child labour in the uk itself and the british empire . thats the history and the economic history of one capitalist identity. i could go into the histoy [ and present ] of american capita; ism if you wish ???”

Idiot. Too dumb to grasp:

- The fact that the working class created capitalism and they abolished slavery

- Why pick on the transatlantic slave trade? What was special about that? Slavery had existed since time immemorial and was one of the world’s oldest institutions.

- It was a capitalist society that abolished it. Your argument could only hold if slavery emerged alongside capitalism. Therefore, blaming capitalism for slavery is complete rubbish.

- Your statement about child labour is equally stupid.

Child labour was the norm throughout human history until capitalism rendered it uneconomic. Once again, it was capitalism that came to the rescue. This exposes your insinuation that the British Empire exported child labour as utterly ridiculous.

- Your suggestion that capitalism was the cause of colonialism ignores the history of ancient empires

Meanwhile, there are tremendously wealthy real slave owners: the Stalinist thugs of North Korea and Cuba.

Fidel Castro and his brother did not like it one bit when they were hit with the truth about their anti-capitalism ‘freedom loving’ regime. Then there are those who managed to escape the terror regime of Trotsky, Lenin and Stalin, and Mao. They can attest what slavery means and, get this Mr. Brown, I have had discussions with many victims of such regimes and these people know what is to be really feared. They came here for freedom, and it means capitalism and they are very certain of this.

If, capitalism is tagged ’slavery’, I stand with those men and women who withstood terror regimes. They too love ‘capitalist slavery’.

You are a complete historical and economic illiterate: an obvious victim of  left-wing ‘educators”. I strongly suggest you sue them.

Senior Liberal Party and City sources are demanding a few latter day “Longshanks”.

If Abbott had his wits about him, he would have run his blade through Greg Hunt. Why, will be explained tomorrow.

IPA conceded Rudd Cabinet’s carbon tax. What’s news, and Abbott did the same but there is a difference. Michael Kroger and Green cult watermelon Guru, David Kemp, had the say.

IPA has come up with another fabrication, courtesy of their Gnius College Professor of History, Chris Berg, on how Islam brought intellectual freedom to the West. Careful, guys, for I could agree because of one, fine detail:  when the West butchered the bastards.

But since it is a Kemp-Kroger outfit, Chris Berg their one man walking University, with Stinker Pinker Sinclair Davidson as their adjunct scholar of tripe, speculation is rife in less learned circles and in the City and among senior Liberals on how much did a Wasabi Saudi have to pay after their last propaganda effort, Islam and the Free Market. Oh, yes, not only is yours truly taking a keen interest in this, so are many others and to make it all the merrier, so too are Hard Leftists. Here’s the Hollywood extravaganza ‘blurb’:

  How the idea of religious toleration came to the West,

“…a central aspect of the development of liberalism… how it evolved is regularly downplayed by political…”

Date: 9/2/2010. Chris Berg

Also splashed is, Berg will set out why pensioners and those approaching pension age should jolly well earn their own keep. Not for the first time either. Calling pensioners smelly little leeches is an IPA practice -eg.  Social Justice’s Endless Maw. Mind, they are in good company. The HR Nicholls Society and the CIS also know propping up the likes of runty little oafs is nothing more than a backdoor socialist plot. Well, we hope Berg is consistent and accepts, when the day comes, being tossed into a garbage truck and dumped.

I will be most interested to hear why pensioners and those about to obtain it should be made to keep working until they are dead because, they only bloody well paid taxes all their lives because politicians decided to keep what was a war tax to pay for war, income tax, and told all Australians they will enjoy an indexed pension. Well, some do: Politicians and retired top Public Servants, as a few of the Right wing gurus are, can explain what a splendid scheme it is too, because no other sodding little pensioner can.

Today, even the worst off modest pensioners are lucky to receive a full pension. Whether they do or not do, it is so bloody inadequate they have to go out and work! Unlike the Kemp clan, their inbred cousins - Berg springs to mind, and their new putative boss, Michael necrophiliac man Kroger. And these sodding parasites wonder why so many voted ALP. Well, shit runs and this is what that lot have, shit for brains.

I know what will be missing in Berg’s tour de force, the intellectual history of Western civilisation entire. I would like to set out what will be said. It is easy to predict but, heck, why kill the surprise and give these kindergarten hacks a chance to try and find someone even more developmentally arrested than they are to take the punishment than Berg, as well as his congenitally twinned idiot soul mate, Andrew ‘Andy Pandy’ Kemp. I doubt, however, someone so genetically enfeebled can be found because they would have died at the moment of conception.

There are some other surprises smelly I won’t foreshadow - reduces slightly the pleasure of lobbing them. This is a short note to say, today was spent in tracing out and tying together some nasty matters that are hurtful to not only the left, but also to the Right. Tomorrow, after a couple of jobs in the morning, we shall have fun posting.

Readers, carry a lantern walking into “Right House”. You spot diseased little sorts and then, watch out for the bubonic plague carrier, rattus rattus.

Just two of many, another is a descent into fascism but this, because of the gravity of the matter, requires a separate item.

The Greens’ lie of, Co2 emissions causes global warming is, in the assault against science that it is, is a descent into belief in magical forces. This is primitive savagery. It did not occur because the Greens’ cult was admired in its beginnings, not that the Greens’ cult was new, its beliefs were laid in the rot of Hobbes and Rousseau, in the Romantic movement, fused together in the second half of the 19th century. It was useful for socialists.

The Greens’ movement was not a spontaneous Western movement. It was established by the KGB in the 1960’s beginning with West Germany. It was the application of Stalin’s doctrine on how to enslave the West to the Soviet tyranny, summed up by von Mises in Planned Chaos.

The contention between Stalin and Trotsky following the death of Lenin was their thirst to wield absolute power and a question of tactics. Von Mises:

He (Trotsky) tried to construct a Trotsky doctrine as distinguished from the Stalin doctrine. He branded Stalin’s policies as an apostasy from the sacred legacy of Marx and Lenin. Stalin retorted in the same way. In fact, however, the conflict was a rivalry of two men, not a conflict of antagonistic ideas and principles. There was some minor dissent with regard to tactical methods. But in all essential matters Stalin and Trotsky were in agreement.

… Stalin was not deluded by the spurious tenets of dialectical materialism…

Trotsky was so blinded by his orthodoxy that he refused to admit that the Bolshevist methods had failed. But Stalin realized it very well. He did not abandon the idea of instigating revolutionary outbreaks in all foreign countries and of conquering the whole world for the Soviets. But he was fully aware of the fact that it was necessary to postpone the aggression for a few years and to resort to new methods for its execution.

The Greens’ movement was conceived and established as an anti-capitalist (-free market) front that should not be traced directly to the Soviet regime. It should appear an entirely spontaneous movement of Western youths united in a concern for ‘nature’. It required recruitment and indoctrination of youths into the formal beliefs of the ‘movement’ by a cadre who knew exactly what the aim for the movement is. Their target was well off, middle class youths. The Soviet regime collapsed but the KGB has obtained a tremendous victory in its aim.

We know it has been successful because while the ‘main stream’ ridiculed Greens, they adopted their ideas and the main culprits were politicians of ‘mainstream major parties’ who found in the diseased ideas of the Greens an excuse to extend state power. This was the origin of the IPCC. The IPCC was inaugurated as a political cudgel. Science and the truth of the Greens’ claims was not its brief. Its function was nothing more than a propaganda mission for the Right to advance statist control and for the Left socialist tyranny.

Yet, in sneering at the Greens (certainly the Right in Australia and even enough on the Left made a great show of their ‘contempt’ for the ga ga Greens), the Greens made appalling inroads. They indoctrinated large numbers of youths. It was very noticeable by the 1990’s, in the sheer numbers of youngsters canvassing for the Greens in the streets of Melbourne.

Peter Garrett is one of the corrupters of youth. And this scumbag is considered fit to hold a seat in Federal parliament!  From this, the Greens have built a large voting block, and the number of Greens MPs is the hard, incontrovertible evidence. But this is due to ‘mainstream’ politicians and their advisers who conceded core, destructive Greens lies. They handed the Greens territory.

“Mainstream politicians”, their staffers and their think tank advisers did not smash the Greens. They propagated the horrendous beliefs and cult of the Greens and to check this, three Right-wing MPs caused tremendous damage when they were ministers in the Howard Cabinet -

They are David Kemp, Malcolm Turnbull and Ian Campbell.

They rammed down measures that Rudd and Wong are intensifying, expanding, and will finish Australians off altogether with Co2 taxation. This totalitarian pogrom has been advanced by the Right. The CIS has dropped all pretence and is running propaganda on behalf of the cult of the diseased Greens.

The damage is great. The lies are pumped into schoolchildren as science. The lies fill airwaves and newspapers and everyday speech. There are many Australians who, while they laugh at the Greens, nonetheless believe the great excuse for totalitarian measures is true.

Notice that weather reports predicate gales and storms, hurricanes and floods as ‘wild weather’. The expression was coined by the boosters of the lie to instill the notion that it is being caused by Co2 emissions altering climate. TV, radio, newspapers are truly appalling.

Sign No 2

Ttalian fascist regime was satisfied with its ” home-grown ingredient of Fascism… the theatrical style of its processions, shows and festivals” (Von Mises, ibid.). Much the same can be said of the National Socialist regime of Germany and its pageants and national, organised sport, and mass rallies.

The Soviet regime  was also committed to organised sport. “Universities” dedicated to sport were set up. A few years ago I was approached by a product of one of those “universities”. His English was very bad and he was desperate for a better paying job.

He wanted a city job no less. He assumed anyone in a suit could hire him on the sport. A few questions quickly established he had no experience to equip him for what he believed to be vacancies oozing out of every office floor. He showed no comprehension of business and markets and how to work in them or do some sort of work for enterprises. Further questioning dragged out his ‘expertise’, he had a degree in sport from one of the Soviet sports universities. He related he has a young family to support. Though sympathetic to the poor man, sympathy doesn’t help those so badly astray and in a nasty predicament.

What do we see in Australia but academies of sport, professors of sport, scholarships for ‘underegraduates in sport.

And, the sheer numbers of school students ‘asipring to a career as professional, well paid sportsmen and sportswomen’. These youngsters are clueless.  The tremendous sums local councils, States and Federal politicians swipe from Australians to throw at organised sport and call it “investment”, has created the delusion that many youngsters can not only aspire to ‘well paid sporting careers’ but they are entitled to have one. This is all wrapped up in strident Nationalist expression.

Today, however, things have degenerated further. The mass, cultic hysteria over the death of Michael Jackson is another sign. It was stunning that, as reported in the news, there were some who even committed suicide. Another way of looking at it is through the Herald Sun and its exaggerated reporting of the recent marriage of Rove McManus to Tamsa Watson

“Rove is happy now”. When his first wife died, it was the same poisonous, superficial sentiment which could be summed up as, Rove is unhappy now.

This is not a callous snipe against Rove, his first wife and second wife. On the other hand, many watch their closest die from cancer. They have to bear up. Someone dies in an accident or a crash, it is horrible, and Christians might pause for the dead, but life goes on. It is the bereaved to whom grief properly belongs.  Grief, the modest suffers alone, unnoticed, the departed are departed.

So, in the collectivist cults of today, according to the Herald Sun, when Rove is sad, we are all sad. When he is happy, we are all happy. When he grieves we feel his pain because he is so so important to everyone.

To use the ugly expression, x has meant so much to the lives of all, he changed their lives and made them better. X “was there for you”. What a load of garbage. This is the garbage that stamps the cult of Michael Jackson. This garbage was the ‘content’ of the ‘eulogies’ at the mass collectivist hysteria sob-in for Michael Jackson. All over the damned radio and it’s worse.

Neslon Mandela was hooked in, and who can question Mandela who weeped crocodile tears, ‘he was our dearest friend and was there for us.’ I can and here is why:

The ANC and Nelson Mandela are hard Marxists. Arparthied was a grave injustice, but the way through it was economic freedom. The ANC used it as an excuse for their anti-freedom, totalitarian aims and terrorism. It is why Mandela does not call terrorists murdering scumbag, he calls them ‘freedom fighters’. The only thing that has given the ANC pause, induced it to not impose its grand scheme to reduce South Africa to another Marxist hell was that Mugabe got in first. As for Mandela himself:

… South Africa’s apartheid regime was no model of liberty. But even its most violent enemies enjoyed a bona-fide day in court under a judge who was not beholden to a dictator for his job (or his life.) When Nelson Mandela was convicted of “193 counts of terrorism committed between 1961 and 1963, including the preparation, manufacture and use of explosives, including 210,000 hand grenades, 48,000 anti-personnel mines, 1,500 time devices, 144 tons of ammonium nitrate,” his trial had observers from around the free world.

“The trial has been properly conducted,” wrote Anthony Sampson, correspondent for the liberal London Observer. “The judge, Mr. Justice Quartus de Wet, has been scrupulously fair.” Sampson admitted this although his own sympathies veered strongly towards Mandela. (Indeed, Sampson went on to write Nelson Mandela’s authorized biography.)

In sharp contrast, when Ruby Hart Phillips, the Havana correspondent for the Castrophile New York Times, attended a mass-trial of accused Castro-regime enemies, she gaped in horror. “The defense attorney made absolutely no defense, instead he apologized to the court for defending the prisoners,” she wrote in February 1959. “The whole procedure was sickening.” The defendants were all murdered by firing squad the following dawn.

Castro’s chief prosecutor/hangman, Che Guevara, had established the rules very succinctly: “Judicial evidence is an archaic bourgeois detail. We execute from revolutionary conviction.”

Hugo Chavez’s Red Terror on hold, Humberto Fontova, Brookesnews, 22/10/08.

Soon after Michael Jackson died, photographs of his father in the company of “Reverend” Al Sharpton were splashed generously through newspapers. How interesting, for the “Reverend” is a vicious, treacherous hard Leftist. I recollect ‘trainee clergy’ praising the bastard, as they also adulated Mandela. Here’s an item that details only some of the nicest things about the slime:

Let us return to Adams’ fulsome praise for the self-styled Reverend Al Sharpton, race-baiting hustler and anti-Semite. Venting his left-wing loathing for Western values Adams shamelessly reported how he sat at Sharpton’s feet in the pretentiously named Hall of Justice (Rupert Murdoch’s Australian, 17/7/99)…

Isaac Abraham, for one, has no difficulty in spying Sharpton’s racist colours. This is the same Abraham who acted as a spokesman for Rosenbaum family and who tirelessly worked to bring Yankel Rosenbaum’s murderers to justice. (Yankel Rosenbaum was murdered during the 1991 Crown Heights riots in which groups of young blacks attacked Hasidic Jews).

Abraham issued a statement calling for a federal investigation of the role that Al Sharpton played in causing the massacre at Freddy’s clothing store in Harlem, stating that the “Rev. Al Sharpton is caught on tape spreading hate against Jews and whites. In Crown Heights, Sharpton did his share in inciting the riots but former Police Commissioner Lee Brown only said ‘Sharpton came close to the line of inciting but did not actually cross it’ and did nothing.”

The massacre at Freddy’s certainly exposed the viciousness of Sharpton’s racist credentials. Freddy’s Fashion Mart was a white-owned discount business in Harlem. In 1995 Sharpton helped organise a protest against its operations, accusing its staff…

the media revelation that Sharpton had suborned Louima came just as a jury found good Ol’ Al Sharpton and Co guilty of making false accusations of an especially vile nature against Steven Pagones, an assistant district attorney. In 1987 Sharpton, C. Vernon Mason and Alton Maddox accused Pagones and several white men of kidnapping, raping and sodomising Tawana Brawley. The story was found to be hoax and was dismissed by a grand jury. Pagones sued and won.

Phillip Adams: loving anti-Semites and hating President Bush

Sharpton shed crocodile tears at the ‘ceremony’, saying:

‘Michael meant so much to us all. There are those who tried to dig into the stench to get at Michael but he is better than they are. He is above the stench. He brought us a message, he gave us his message. His was the message of love.”

Well, that’s one way of looking at Michael, a walking ‘message of love’. As for the stench, there is no stench without rotting bodies and here they are in, When they are paying my salary, then I’ll worry, Arlene Peck, Brookesnews, 6/7/09.

Sir Winston Churchill was the only commoner (until Princess Diana) accorded a State Funeral. Londoners lined the streets, not out of false sentiments but out of respect for the man whose resolute action saved England.

Respect is paid to great actors who have died but there is no false collectivist sentiment. I read obituaries to mark notices of the passing of war heroes who fought against totalitarian regimes, again out of respect for the fact, that they fought to defend freedom. They were loving men, and were loved by their kith and kin, but this is entirely different, the affection and abiding love was reserved for the proper object, their dearest.

One can admire great people but that is not the same as false sentiment. The mass hysteria, crude emotion driven outpouring is infantile and centred on one-self:

It is not the action of adults. It is the expression of the developmentally arrested. A false action reflective of the spiral into collectivism. Let’s illustrate this from another direction.

Not only leftist clerics but also ‘orthodox’ clergy fulminate from pulpits the individual is a nasty ideological ‘construct’ only. Their notion of man is organistic: individuals are really no more than mere aspects of Man/Humanity. Action, emotions, experience are percieved to be particular to the individual but in reality they are flawed flashes, windows into the One Humanity. All are no more than persons, as the One Man incarnates itself into mere material bodies and it is this that generates the false perception of individuality. Behind this is, in truth, the totalitarian notion of Plato. Clergy are committed to a destructive lie.

The individual is not an ideological mistake. It is most definitely a physical truth. The clergy lie on a second account, because their organistic notion is in fact against the Christian confession. The individual is in fact paramount, a truth that cannot be surrendered without grave danger, in the Christian Confession. This is fundamental to understanding, by the way, why Bonhoeffer, Lutheran, broke with the Hegelian theologians who, following Hegel cloaked socialism in mystical garb and proclaimed it the content of the gospel.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd pretends to know Bonhoeffer. He no more has a clue about Bonhoeffer than he does about Hayek and Austrian School Economics. On economics, he is in good company with the CIS and IPA. Rudd doesn’t merely insult Bonhoeffer. Bonhoeffer would recgonise in Rudd what he turned against and spit on the little fascist moron.

Even if Michael Jackson was not the rotten, Jew hating scumbag that he was, it still does not alter what the cult of Michael Jackson the pop singer is a sign of. The same could be said of the mass hysteria over the death of Princess Diana, whose funeral was swamped with a totally different regard than was shown on the death of Sir Winston Churchill.

The death cult of Michael Jackson only serves Israel-Jew hating, Ilsamo-fascist hugging, Obama and the treacherous Left in the Democrats and here are some more examples of their treachery and anti-semitism from Shamrak’s Report:

 Israel Must be self-Reliant!

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton revealed that an Iranian attack on Israel would no longer be considered as an attack on America. Speaking during an interview on ABC TV, she said…

In other words, she has only said, Israel’s Islamo-fascist enemies can help themselves - “Go ahead destroy Israel and exterminate the Jewish people. We support you.” Unspeakable in itself but, to remind Rudd and his Attorney General, McClelland, the Islamo-fascist enemy regard destroying Israel as also the ‘beach-head’ for conquest of the West.

 

2. Don’t tell Jews where they can live, by Joseph Farah:

Barack Obama is taking what he and his administration refer to as “a more balanced approach to Middle East policy.”

It means the U.S. government is now using its clout with Israel to insist Jews, not Israelis, mind you, but Jews, be disallowed from living in East Jerusalem and the historically Jewish lands of Judea and Samaria, often referred to as the West Bank.

I want you to try to imagine the outrage, the horror, the outcry, the clamouring, the gnashing of teeth that would ensue if Arabs or Muslims were told they could no longer live in certain parts of Israel - let alone their own country. Of course, that would never happen with “a more balanced approach to the Middle East.”

It’s the 1930s all over again. This time, it’s the enlightened liberal voices of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who are telling Jews where they can live, how they can live and how far they must bend if they want to live at all.

…Israel is being reduced to “Auschwitz borders.” Jews have already been told they can no longer live in the Gaza Strip. Now they are being told they can no longer choose to live in any of the areas being set aside by international elites for a future Palestinian state.

…Obama and Clinton - and, thus, by definition, you and me, the taxpayers of the United States - have determined they will yield to the racist, bigoted, anti-Semitic demands of the Palestinian Authority that no Jews be allowed to live in their new state.

… It is the official policy of the Palestinian Authority that all Jews must get off the land! Why is the United States supporting the creation of a new, racist, anti-Semitic hate state? Why is the civilized world viewing this as a prescription for peace in the region? Why is this considered an acceptable idea? Is there any other place in the world where that kind of official policy of racism and ethnic cleansing is tolerated - even condoned?

… Now, keep in mind, there are already quite a few Arab and Muslim states in the Middle East. Many of them already forbid Jews to live in them. Some prohibit Christians as well. But now, the only Jewish state in the world, and one that has a claim on the land dating back to the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, is being told Jews must keep off land currently under their own control, but destined for transfer to people who hate them, despise them, want to see them dead and will not even accept living peacefully with them as neighbours.

…I say, “No more ethnic cleansing. No more official anti-Semitism accepted. No more Jew-bashing. No more telling Jews where they can live, how they can - and if they can live.”

These are no more than ugly signs of the descent into darkness.

Quality control is a dead letter to the Right and the clunker tanks. Berg sums it up.This chump has written a long list of pieces any treacherous Leftist would be proud of but it has for them a distinct advantage, they don’t face being savaged for them and Berg does great work discrediting the free market cause. Let’s begin with some of Berg’s lighter moments:

Che chic: you’ve ignored the horrors, now buy the T-shirt The Age Sunday, October 14, 2007 and in the IPA’s collection of classics.

Berg stated:

“In 1940, Charlie Chaplin’s The Great Dictator mocked the effete airs of Adolf Hitler, without diminishing Chaplin’s serious contempt for the Third Reich.”

It didn’t gel with him that leftist Charlie Chaplin’s made “The Great Dictator” as a stinging attack on the Nazi regime.

He speaks of “capitalist culture”. The left uses this expression to attack capitalism and free markets. He also doesn’t know the source for the notion of “culture” asserted by the Left and in his flippant phrase, Hegel’s collectivist rot.

He states,

Guevara was a Marxist guerilla who made a specialty of executing his opponents and prisoners without trial. He pioneered techniques of psychological torture. And he directed “suicide squads” that were sent into battles with no hope of victory.

He also founded Cuba’s concentration camp system, extolled the virtues of class hatred, and persecuted homosexuals.

Yet, he triviliased it by a reprehensible continuation:

Even when he wasn’t waging war against civilians, he was still a disaster. After the Cuban revolution, Guevara took a government position as Cuba’s central economic planner, and promptly drove the economy into the ground. Michael Moore and Oliver Stone may flatter the achievements of Fidel Castro, but much of the blame for the poverty of Cuban socialism must be laid at Guevara’s feet.

He completes his inane descent by stating:

There is hardly a more recognisable symbol of revolutionary chic. Guevara’s image is plastered on T-shirts, backpacks and posters. One online store sells clocks with his iconic portrait to emphasise just how anti-establishment wall-mountable clocks can be.

For this reason, it would be easy to chalk up the modern admiration of Guevara to dormant totalitarian fantasies in the left. But there is already too much self-righteous indignation in politics. Just because someone has a poster of Guevara on their wall, doesn’t immediately imply that they want to send homosexuals to a prison camp and execute those who are not doctrinaire Marxists.

his is hardly surprising. Popular culture has a wonderful habit of appropriating meaningful symbols, processing them into accessible packages, making jokes…

But Nazi kitsch has not been so comfortably embraced by popular culture — perhaps a testament to our continued inability to fully comprehend the horror of the Holocaust.

Or, “perhaps it is testament to our continued ability to fully comprehend the horror of the Holocaust.” Perhaps Berg might ponder why neo-Nazis are reviled, and neo-Nazism a criminal offence in Germany. I have plenty of Jewish friends who survived Auschwitz and Buchanwald. Perhaps Berg can enlighten my friends directly, repeat it directly to them.

He finished by telling another grand lie any hard Leftist happily asserts and it sums up Rudd’s anti-free market rubbish too:

But capitalist culture doesn’t obey moral judgements.

He continued that flippant remark with,

Ironically, Che Guevara’s longevity as a cultural symbol has been thanks to the very economic system he sought to destroy.

Well, he is the kid who could dismiss values as a vague notion. He is the kid who doesn’t have a clue that free markets and capitalism involves high moral values. This is a kid who completely ingores something else in his generalised smearing of capitalists (don’t forget, the IPA is supposed to defend capitalism):

It is the diseased Left that pushes Che Guevara and Castro. The treachery of the Clintons and the US Demoncrats, and their co-operation with that Stalinist regime are no secret. It never entered the pea that is Berg’s brain it is the left who are engaged in a major propaganda exercise by producing that “chic merchandise”. There he is, helping treacherous lairs and the nice touch in all this is, The Age, aka The Spencer Street Soviet galdly published it. But this is not all.

In another article on the death of Fidel Castro in the IPA Review, he trivialised the continuation of that Stalinist regime and depicted Raul Castro as someone with whom the West can get along with. Never mind that Raul is a Stalinist butcher too - eg.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright: The Cuban Connection, Humberto Fontovo, Decemebr 2008.

Associated Press’s terrorist-linked photographer honored in NYC, David Paulin, December 2008

These are only two of a mountain of items stretching back some years (I cannot recollect how far back) relating what jolly ‘teenage idols’ those butchers are.

Due to the very helpful assistance of Obama and the US Democrats, Raul has resumed the suppression and worse of Cubans with renewed vigour:

Heads roll in Havana as Raul Castro tightens his grip, Fontovo, 23/3/09

This is what Berg wrote, Castro’s retirement brings out the narcissism of the Western left.

 Chris Berg, Nobel Prize winning economist

This section explores the amazing work of Professer “Sinkers and Sunk” Davidson’s distinguished colleague.  Let’s open with a recent contribution to, surprise surprise, The Age, 28/6/09, as well as in the IPA’s collection of classics;

Crisis? What crisis?

It begins,

By now, we’ve all read the story, dozens of times. It goes like this: the financial crisis has brought down the Potemkin village of consumerism. The recession has exposed the internal contradictions and long-term impossibility of the neo-liberal order.

This garbage ends with a touch worthy of Janet Albrechtsen, who blamed modest house buyers for the bursting of the financial bubble last year and calling them criminals who should be slung into prison. So Berg:

If before the crisis hit you were a reckless spender and debt-accumulator, then I’m glad a recession could come along to shock you out of your idiotic ways. And if you refused to share your clothes with your friends, but now that your investments have tanked you’ve been able to find just that little bit of residual neighbourliness deep within you, then that’s marvellous.

Nevertheless, for the vast majority of Australians, life will continue as before, largely unaffected by the economic downturn. The global financial crisis is a big deal. But it’s not that big a deal.

This is the same wag who in the joint paper with Davidson, Thumping the Table (see article below) dismissed manufacturing as nothing more than a home cottage occupation that should it be wiped out won’t be missed. The Right can’t help themselves, their innate callousness oozes through their pores incessantly.

However, Berg has done a service: he has shown he is not only an ignoramus in economics. He is totally ga ga.

Berg doesn’t have an inkling of the financial crisis was a symptom of and what occurs first, and what the explanation is. Let’s not prejudge this genius too soon, though. In the article below, his efforts on regulation are summed up and it is nothing more than, ‘what is the best way to strangle firms to death’.  Let’s look at Berg, exponent of free market economics and distinguished theorist, and distinguished historian.

Islam and the Free Market, Berg and his playmate, Andrew “Andy Pandy” Kemp.

Not only does the IPA rate this as one of the greatest contributions to scholarship on the history of economic thought, such is the acclaim they followed it with, Islam’s free market heritage (March 2007).

In the second opus, Berg and Kemp give their findings far greater definition and certainty in expression as to the force of their ‘thesis’ than in the first. For example, they declare Adam Smith was indebted to the great Islamic founders of economics, and here it is:

Indeed, Imad A. Ahmad argues forcefully that Adam Smith was ‘simply picking up where Ibn Khaldun left off’. Ibn Khaldun’s writings display a clear and unambiguous familiarity with many of the cenral tenets of what we know as classical economic thought….

In a PDF magnum opus, a bold header is splashed across the top of the page:

Ibn Khaldun recognised the limits of proto-Keynesianism, and he anticipated the Laffer Curve by about six centuries.

Chris Berg found remarks I made on Islam and the Free Market ‘vituperative’. This cretin doesn’t know what the meaning of expression of vituperation is. He and Andrew Kemp and the IPA are bloody lairs. That muck, and I got it right the first time, is a deliberate falisfication of history. It is a betrayal of history, the history of economics, and the West.

In a bad, straw-man of an attempt to rebut Jackson’s masterful criticism of the paper and setting the historical record right, Berg asserted theology and by implication also philosophy are indebted to Islam.

It was plain then that he was told to write what is another travesty and betrayal of history in the ‘rebutal’. These myopic halfwits seem to believe there is no-one who is actually read and steeped in a field. I rebutted the rebuttal with this:

Rebuttal of Chris Berg’s Apologia (his defence of the IPA - Berg- Kemp Paper)

Here’s a summary of some points, IPA and its editor, Chris Berg lies to readers, to Australians, and their donors.

It must be noted, their primary authority was an obscure editor of an obscure newspaper in a country that has a certain Islamo-facist connection, Turkey. That was their formidable scholarship. The question, and the scandal was very hot, prompted the City to speculate on what interests prompted the heads of the IPA to publish it. The City was speculating on whom and how much.

Berg’s and Kemp’s false, inane ’history’ of economics. Mr. Jackson demonstrated that in an address to a society and completely demolished the paper in what my sources declared a tour de force.

Michael Moore (brother of Des Moore of the IPA and one of the HR Nicholls Society clubmen who completely wrecked the fight for labour markets), alerted to the subject of the lecture, attended the forum. He declared to Mr. Jackson, and I quote sources:

He was there “to represent the IPA”. My sources are firm on this: Moore was attempting to intimidate Jackson, to protect the IPA. Jackson replied to the effect, “I’m here too”.

By the end, my informants related, Michael Moore had crumpled into a cringing heap. He crumpled up in his chair as Jackson thoroughly destroyed the fabrications of Kemp and Berg. He felt worse because he realised it exposed the IPA too - well that was why he tried to intimidate Jackson, fear of exposure.

Jackson followed his lecture on the history of economics with a podcasted survey of the history of economics, on solid vox. 

Economics, theology and philosophy owe nothing what-so-ever to Islam and it is fraud to assert so. It is a betrayal of Western history, and it betrays history to the joy of diseased, treacherous Leftists and Islamo-fascists. The IPA pushed this tripe.

Berg, IPA Editor.

I refer readers back to correspondence with Berg, The Right’s deficiency and, Scoop: Correspondence with IPA and noting the introductory remarks:

The point to this is not about Berg, as the following comments make plain. Mr. Berg is incidental, a minor figure.

It is about those at the IPA on top of Berg. Next,

It also confirms, due to their warped view, Mr. Jackson is black-banned. This, some readers can recollect from an earlier item, was confirmed by none other than Mr. Tim Blair, over the Internet.

We have more to say on this, but the response from Berg was not needed to confirm it, it only provides another block of evidence. The following needs correction:

It’s unfortunate but true that our so-called right-wing would rather see the country sink than admit they don’t have all the answers.

It’s not that they don’t have answers, it’s the reason why they don’t, lousy economics and they have no depth at all and their ‘publications’ and those of the CIS too demonstrate  it - vacuous, tedious rambles matched by self-referential bibliographies showing that they have not even begun to read in the field they claim to profess let alone defend it.

I stress the conclusion to the introduction:

I thank Mr. Berg for his candour and his request that the correspondence be published (as expressed in his final reply). It had never occurred to me to do this. Though reluctant to do so, the signal importance of the material that Mr. Berg is correct.

The IPA

The Right, the CIS and  IPA like to pretend they are big-hearted guys, more sinned against than sinner. They are not. They are back-stabbing vicious houswives who put up a front to donors and Right-wing heavies. Berg is only one more reflection of them.

Berg, an economic illiterate who happily asserts fabrications that otherwise only the treacherous Left would be content with. It is not, though, simply Berg.

Berg’s garbage is what the IPA pushes as well reasoned analysis and commentary. This lot has the hide to assert their vicious tripe is a defence of the free market cause. It’s not simply Berg discrediting great causes. It’s the IPA doing a spiffing job in betraying and wrecking grave causes.

This lot have the hide to smear those who are their superiors behind their backs but whine when someone comes at them from the front. What a pack of gutless, craven mendacious pansies. These are what Harold Clough and Ron Manners consider guns.  

Berg’s record amplifies how bad, feeble and incompetent they are. He amplfies them, is transparent to them and the great damage they have caused and why they have caused it.

Broadcasting in Australia 

Tiny Tim Blair makes nothing of the contrast, and runs away from censorship fights (which will be written up in the next item). The Right is slightly confused.

Somehow, in their addled way, the Right has arrived at the firm conviction that intellectual feebleness is genius writ large and cowardice as Terror personified, which is why they are reduced to bullying and smearing genuine Liberals. Don’t assume for one moment  Imre Salusinszky fathomed the smears he wrote against Michael Darby all by himself. It is easy to spot why he didn’t:

1. He pretends to know.

2. The Right simply get together and tell stories about genuine Liberals.

Imre Salusinszky did a Tiny Tim Blair, swallowed smears whole and wrote them up. Imre, Tiny Tim, Janet Albrechtsen, Andrew “down with ingrate serfs” Bolt, and the rest of the Right-wing brood of journalists were not appointed to their well paid sinecures because they are talented. They depend on their bigger Right-wing pals for survival.

The abysmal state of the mainstream press in Australia is due entirely to a fatal flaw, Federal Government regulation that has eliminated the freedom for entrepreneurs to build firms that people would happily patronise with their custom. In Melbourne alone, the Herald Sun is as detested by the man in the street as nearly as much as the The Age aka the “Spencer Street Soviet”. As one wag put it, those who read them begin with The Age in order to enjoy a full lobotomy, so that they can progress onto reading big, coloured pictures in the Herald Sun.

Television? The same happens and in this order: ABC, the “Austalian Broadcasting Socialist Collective Commission”. Then, SBS, short for Socialist Broadcasting Stupidity. Then the commercials, to end up completely a-brainal.

Radio, no need to expand but for a couple of points. As the Herald Sun, it is an exaggeration to say Melbourne’s 3AW is the answer to the Left, as some believe it is. Interestingly, some enterprising souls did found an independent radio station, and meeting the regulatory hurdles nearly crushed it. 3MBS is, however, strictly classical.

3MBS began as a delightfully eccentric broadcaster, It did bring in some good types, very much relieved, from ABC radio; namely Cargher. Lately, however, it is noticeably turning “native” and this is not delightful. That’s it, in Melbourne. Alternative reporting and commentary is non-existent.

Sydneysiders are luckier. They have gutsy Jim Ball on radio 2UE. The drawback is that he holds the graveyard shift, midnight to dawn. Never mind, Ball is active on the internet here. 

There is no mistaking what Ball stands for, and unlike the Right, happily refers to Brookesnews on economic matters. Still, things are not overly rosy in Sydney. The Right managed to engineer the sacking of Michael Darby, who wrote editorials for John Laws at 2UE, behind Laws’ back, as set out here.

(Another treacherous action of the Right and again Tiny Tim Blair refuses to attack what he believes are his pals, the Right. If “piss” was taken out of the phrase ending “… weak”, Tiny Tim still defies even this elevation of his standing in the halls of the brave).

In the rest of Australia, things are no better and in one State things are worse. That State is Tasmania. As Tasmanian politicians, the press there also shows not only contempt but also blatantly regards modest people as infant serfs. I have received complaints from Tasmania, including from retired newspaper men, about how appallingly bad the press is. But, hey, to penetrate the very thin veneer of the mainland firms is to realise the differences are marginal and they are all, as far as I am aware, at 2UE.

Diversity in broadcasting is thin. Any thinner and it would be extinct, and there are those who are of the view that it is. It’s a small, closed world “Down Under” and the politicians, Left and Right, have made sure it stays that way. Don’t forget, readers, the Right hold the same position as the hard Left, “More censorship”. Markets held shut by regulation will do that, as the contrast demonstrates:

Broadcasting in the United States of America

In 1949, the Democrats under Truman imposed the “Fairness Doctrine”.

In 1974, it was brought under the control of the Federal Communications Commission, which spelled out what they would do to any broadcaster who defied it. The “fairness law” was challenged a number of times through the courts but it was Ronald Reagan who set about ripping it apart, with the sound advice and encouragement of some advisers, one of whom was FCC Chairman Mark S. Fowler.

Fowler related that staffers were trying to convince Reagan to retain the ‘law’:

“the only thing that really protects you from the savageness of the three networks—every day they would savage Ronald Reagan—is the Fairness Doctrine, and Fowler is proposing to repeal it!”

Reagan did not hesitate to strike it down. The Democrats tried twice to restore it through Congress, in 1987 under President Reagan and in 1991 under President Bush. Reagan vetoed the first “bill”, and the Democrats ceased the second attempt as soon as Bush told them he would veto any such “bill”.

Since the “Fariness Doctrine” was razed, the number of radio shows boomed from 70 odd in 1987, to 3,000. That’s just talk shows. Roughly the same increase in new broadcasters occurred, and established stations multiplied their branches. Though I am not sure of numbers, but as far as I am aware of, there was an explosion in newspaper numbers. With Microsoft and the development of the Internet, webs and blogs opened up a new phase with many independent sources able to publish.

Rupert Murdoch several years ago, as a News head, considered the Internet as a serious direction for publishing and broadcasting. He was uncertain at the time as to how, but he was certain of it. The future Murdoch foresaw has arrived. The following relates how one entrepreneur did it: 

Chris Ruddy: Conservatives’ great online ally

Commencing with $US 25,000 and raising $15m from investors in 1998, he has built Newsmax.com into earning of $25m per annum to date. He did it by focussing on what consumers demanded, which was impossible under the “Fairness Doctrine”.

Newsmax.com is only one of very many new, independent online newspapers established in the last few years. This is on top of the sheer number of independent, well encouraged and supported by Conservatives, good to first-rate websites and blogs in the US. The output is tremendous and effective.

What consumers demanded is reflected in the success of not only Rush Limbaugh, but also very many broadcasters thriving because they are conservative and free market principles driven commentators and debaters. 

The openness has been a catalyst in the United States. It has worked well with the Republican Party, even though it is a genuinely democratic party, with Congressman and Party officers genuinely answerable to the members. Broadcasting freedom has strengthened these virtues.

As it is, some Republican Party Senators have betrayed Republicans by voting for Obama’s horrifying spending binge. These are Senators who also sapped the Party in its election fight against the Democrats. Other Senators have openly stated, those Senators now face retribution at the hands of the ordinary members of the Republican Party.

Notice that last point. What a contrast to the situation in the Australian Liberal Party, and in Victoria the Right, through Michael Kroger, have re-written the Constitution of this Division of the Party twice to ensure that they are never accountable to the members, and the members have no vote on anything at all. (We shall pick this up in another item).

Therefore, while it is true major broadcasters and papers are dominated by treacherous Leftists, and the U.S. equivalent of the Australian unprincipled, gutless Right and their pet journalists, all ensuring the advance of the Left in Australia, and in the US the Left in those newpapers. The reality, however, is that the Left and the US equivalent of the Australian Right-wing clique are now fighting for oxygen against a robust media that is still building.

Americans can tune in or hook into over the Internet in a matter of seconds mountains of material informed by and carrying genuine free market, conservative principles on all grave matters they face in America. Material written not only by dedicated generalists, but also some of the finest exponents of crucial disciplines, and applying them to analysing affairs inside the U.S., from science to economics. Moreover, they do not only attack the Left. The Conservative side engages in genuine debate, conservatives have to defend what they put before any conservative who challenges them. This is open, public debate.

To survive in America, certainly now, as a Conservative, in Conservative ranks, takes guts. Best of all, Americans expect Conservatives to show guts and go out to smash the treacherous Left. Tolerance for the likes of those who destroyed the Australian Liberal Party is no longer at an all time low. There is barely, if any tolerance at all. The Obama Administration sealed this in cement.

What is summed up above of the situation in Australia is out of the question in the USA. The only way it can be wiped out is if politicians impose coercive measures again, regulation, that destroy free markets. If the markets in Australia were free, the likes of above Right-wing journalists would not survive, and neither could good people be forced out and suppressed.

Best of all, there would be in Australia publishing and broadcasting services customers, from advertisers to readers, would gladly pay for and follow. It’s not the situation, which is why a number of firms in Australia in these sectors are on the edge of bankruptcy, and why, as part of the fraud involved, the politicians compel Australians to pay for those hovels for lying, treacherous Leftists called SBS and ABC.

Conclusion

To readers entertaining any question about why this item:

Apart from the obvious, the contrast is itself a very important observation to draw, it has force for other matters too, including censorship. Yes, it’s also part of build-up to deliver something else.

The broadcasting and publishing field is not only not clear for the hard Left in the US. The Conservatives have turned it into a ferocious battlefield. Though the Democrats hold Office, the Right are littering the field with the carcasses of Democrats. The Democrats are foaming at the mouth, because all that they have behind them is Obama’s Chavez style Presidency.

How the Right attacked a genuine Liberal in the N.S.W. Division of the Liberal Party. It was reported on by Prodos here, and, here. Lying Leftist journalists naturally co-operated by smearing Michael Darby.

Darby’s ‘crimes’ are:

1. He’s principled and is motivated by principles to engage as an activist in the Liberal Party.

2. He is concerned and determined free markets and their cornerstone and the cornerstone of freedom, property rights.

3. He doesn’t expect voters to vote Liberal. He makes the effort to convince voters of Liberal principles.

4. He has directed his actions to what the Right despises, the man in the street, he genuinely respects the man in the street and, to compound this crime, those of non-English backgrounds.

5. His principles are matched by spine, here and overseas - as his efforts on behalf of all the victims of that brutal regime of Mugabe (whose support for a “U.N. Security Council Seat” Prime Minister Rudd is trying to buy with millions of dollars taken from Australians via taxes and the Right have not fought this as they have not fought Rudd in funding the Terrorist hole aka the “Palestinian State”).

Darby stated an all to familiar habit of the Right, their suppression of alternative advice. What also stands out in the Right’s treachery against Darby and others is they are not about attacking the Left. They are not only afraid of some Leftists, they co-operate them.

Next, the Right work to maintain tight control over the Party, and try to eliminate any talent, because they view talent as a threat. The Right showed also something one passes frequent comment on, they are venal, this is their motivation.

A tactic of the Right is to contrive kangaroo trials in order to have members charged on some bogus breach of Party rules, in order to have them deselected, even thrown out of the Party (as in the case of Darby).

The second link above is an item that uncompromising evidence of the viciousness of the Right. It, unsurprisingly, documents the Right jobbing into seats and offices their fellow parasites, who have also ensured the Parliamentary Party is wrecked, the likes of Senator Helen Coonan

Having documented the thuggery of the Right, through Kroger and the boot lickers he flung into Party Offices, against the Richmond Branch and Prodos,  these two cases are not a-typical. The Right are liars. The Liberal Party has been hollowed out by the Right-wing clique, ‘dry’ and ‘wet’, to advance themselves only. It is why, in Canberra, there is also the Punch and Judy show- Turnbull and Costello, their argument being only about who gets to play chiefy weify.

Lastly, one has been remiss in commenting on the Darby Affair. I apologise to Mr. Darby. Genuine Liberals do need the support of genuine Liberals.

Here is an example of the media smearing Darby and it isn’t by a Leftist. It is by Right-wing guru, economic ignoramus, and toady to Leftists, Imre Salusinszky:

Libs suspend ex-president for TV comments

Salusinszky is so busy shining Leftists’ boots he must have permanent blackened tongue damage. This is before considering his efforts in destroying Liberal Party causes such as the fight for free labour markets:

Rightwing columnists stuff up labour market reform debate

Openness, that’s what.

[This is a two part item]

Hoover’s policies were not genuine free market policies. They were an overthrow of free markets, because they were anti-free market policies. Hoover’s policies paved the way for Roosevelt’s catastrophic New Deal Just. Yet, the Leftist lie, the Great Depression was caused by free markets is an accepted vulgar blief. So it is today, the current recession is blamed by the Left on free markets instead of anti- free market policies that caused it. Another upshot of the 1930’s is, Leftists in America corrupted the sound word, Liberal, by redefining it to mean Leftist ideology. So, our American friends adhere to calling themselves Republicans and Conservatives.

Fighting against corruption of language is as important as fighting for any other good cause. It is very unfortunate good words are lost because the diseased have so successfully sapped them of their true meaning that it is difficult for principled types to even contemplate using them. Thus Republicans and modest Americans have been cheated out of a good word, as well as many others.

For American readers not familiar with the usage, Liberal in Australia means the same as Republican and Conservative - the principles they stand for.

It looks very much the case that genuine Liberals in Australia have been cheated of a good word too, but not by the Left in Australia. The Right have corrupted the word, and evacuated it of content. This perversion of language reflects what they are now close to completing; their great effort to destroy the Liberal Party.

Looking at the numbers and the ongoing treachery of the venal, Statist Right, genuine Liberals are now staring at a brutal, blunt fact, the Liberal Party will be finished before 2009 is out. It is being discussed among genuine members, and they include very senior figures. It’s a litote to say the mood is glum.

The openness of the Republican Party

It is  genuinely a democratic party.

Oh, the equivalent of the Australian Right did do considerable damage. They did not support genuine free market and conservative President Bush, and turned on him, and Sarah Palin during the election campaign. A number of Republican Senators and Congressmen have betrayed the principles which is the reason for the Republican Party, to the disgust of members.

Yet, despite the damage that Right-wing clique have caused, and they are responsible for the election defeat (the Democrats won by default only), they are not the Republican Party. They are only a clique, a small clique in a great Party; the clique’s influence has been way out of proportion when this fact is faced.

Many Australians do not have an inkling of how vigorous the Republican Party is. Despite the clique, the Party is genuinely owned by the members and this is reflected in: the voting control of members, open, robust debate, and that officers of the party and Congressmen and Senators do have to face the members and defend themselves.

The root, the fertiliser, the fuel of the Party’s vigour is principles. Members continually examine and hammer out what the Republican Party stand for. They fight inside the Party for principles. They challenge any to defend positions, and any who would threaten principles.

Those who can cause great damage, because of the positions they are entrusted with, are not spared. Republicans know the meaning of attack and defence, because mistakes, fallacies, errors and betrayals cause great damage, not only to the Party, but when in office, they can lead to perilous policies if acted on. Not even Senators and Representatives can evade for long the blow torch of concerned, energetic, open, honest members.

Added to all these virtues are more virtues. They encourage talent and activism. They encourage anyone motivated by principles to be active. They make effort to ensure people are armed to fight, and they want them to fight, in the streets, in public, in the media, and on Capitol Hill.

They enjoy attacking the hard left from the front. They enjoy hitting politicians whose actions are perilous from the front. Biff is good. And, when they go out biffing, they mean it. There is no tolerance for white-flag wavers, and compromisers who toady to the Left, to Obama, Pelosi and the other deranged treacherous parasites in the Administration and Capitol Hill.

To appreciate all this, contemplate a recent conference that manifested all the virtues of the Republicans. Genuine Liberals in Australia are envious - and I certainly am too, for those virtues have been eradicated out of the Australian Liberal Party by a small clique the “Right”. The conference is CPAC 2009.

CPAC

CPAC = The American Conservative Union. It was established in 1973 for the express purpose to develop and advance activism by conservatives.  Consider a few items on their program for 2009:

Conservatism 2.0 Conference
Sponsored by Pajamas Television
Activists, bloggers, students and scholars discussing new media strategies to shape the future of conservatism

Panelists: Stephen Green, Margaret Hoover, Andrew Klavan, Deroy Murdock, Alfonzo Rachel, Roger Simon, Joe Wurzelbacher (ask Joe the Plumber)

Building the Conservative Hispanic Coalition
Ambassador Ballroom
Mario Lopez, Hispanic Leadership Fund
Danny Vargas, Republican National Hispanic Assembly
Mario Diaz, Concerned Women for America
Moderator: Richard Nadler, Americas Majority

Campus Election Workshop
Congressional B
Sponsored by The Leadership Institute

The Key to Victory? Listen to Conservatives
Regency Ballroom
Michael Barone, U.S. News and World Report
Rep. Aaron Schock (IL)
Rep. Peter Roskam (IL)*
Rep. Virginia Foxx (NC)*
Saul Anuzis, Michigan Republican Party

Public Speaking Workship
Congressional B
Sponsored by The Leadership Institute

This is before advancing intellectual armoury, economics for instance. CPAC is only the tip of the iceberg and yet even CPAC alone illuminates by the contrast how supine, incompetent and unconcerned for anything but themselves the Australian Right is (their notion of engagement is closed workshops - admiring their own navels and also as PR stunts with which to use as a hook to extract donations with which to prop themselves, as epitomised by the CIS and IPA - their seminars are strictly fundraisers to top up their wallets).

CPAC 2009

It was televised live across the nation by Fox News. Rush Limbaugh was invited as a guest speaker, and he stated what the Republican Party stands for, in uncompromising terms. Here is the transcript of his speech. His speech reflects all the above virtues. In view of the cowardice of Australia’s Right, I draw attention to a statement that drew rousing applause:

I have learned how to tweak liberals everywhere. I do it instinctively now. Tweak them in the media. And no reason to be afraid of these people. Why in the world would you be afraid of the deranged?

He continued, politics is not about ‘bi-partisanship’, it is about principles, whereas bipartisanship means conceding to Leftist aims. This drew applause. What else drew applause?

Genuine humility, and genuine respect for the modest man, virtues the Australian Right hold in contempt. Out of humility flows the palpable aim to engage the modest man (also anathema to Australia’s Right). But it is not just Rush Limbaugh. T

The Republican Party is the Party of principled men and women who are there because they want action and they are free to do it in their party. The Republican Party is filled to the rafters with them. It is why so many from very modest beginnings can and do rise in the Republican cause.

As for Republican Senators and Representatives having no choice but to sooner or later account for themselves, a reaction to Rush’s speech also epitomises this virtue. Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele called Rush’s speech “incendiary” and “ugly”. This outraged Republicans who turned a flame-thrower on him. He tried to extact himself, to save his backside by crying he really didn’t mean it, it was a slip of the tongue, and finished with the note the CPAC conference is all against, ‘let’s be bi-partisan’ -

“My job is to try to bring us all together.”(Angry Rush Limbaugh Strikes Back at RNC’s Steele)

No it is not. It’s to serve the Party as a fighting machine that has something to fight for. Steele drew out Republicans wielding axes,

Steele trap? GOP fears grow

The officers and Congressmen of the Party are answerable to its members.

The Australian Liberal Party, in contrast, is dead

This is the second part, which will be written up and posted next Tuesday, the 10^th of March. For, time is fast running out for putting it up today. To foreshadow Part II, a summary of some observations and points that will be made, along with much more axe throwing for good measure.

The cause of the death of the Australian Liberal Party is in the once fortress and fire-base of the Liberal Party, Victoria. The Right-wing clique have taken total control of the party through their functionaries, and the worst of them is a thug called Michael Kroger, with is his pal Peter Costello with him.

Kroger holds no office in the Party but he controls it. It was the Kroger-Costello gang who altered the Constitution of the Liberal Party, to one effect: They own the Administrative Committee of the Party. Ordinary members have had their voting rights reduced to a mere condescending boon, they can approve the minutes of branch meetings.

Ordinary members have no say at all in the affairs and direction of the Party. Liberal Party Officers and Members of Parliament not only believe they are not answerable to members, they sleep peacefully knowing they are not. The Constitution has been re-written by the Kroger gang, and practices developed to ensure they do not ever have to face members. Members are mere serfs.

Needless to say, members have no vote on candidates for executive offices. All the major decisions on positions are made by the Kroger gang. Likewise, it is the Right who decides who will hold important paid executive positions, as reflected in the appointment of the likes of the cretin who makes snails seem bright sparks, Julian Sheezel. The Right job into all key positions, including State and Federal Parliaments’ seats their own followers. Members, again, have no say.

What apparatus there is that is in place to advance the Party, its principles, and develop fighting capacity of members are a desultory few. A useless website and a closed shop in which the Right admire themselves, the euphemistically named Speakers’ forum - Kroger set it up. There is no intellectual engagement. The Right only ’supply input’ and to this, they hooked in the IPA, CIS, and another Kroger invention the HR Nicholls Society (aka “Kroger’s Brains Trust”, if a single celled amoeba can be called a brain).

Talent is suppressed, as the Right sees talent as a threat to themselves. Anyone motivated to engage in Liberal activism out of principles is quickly disabused. It is why Liberal Party ‘forums’ and associated ‘think tanks’ are the preserve of only:

Superannuated geriatrics of the Right, and idiot sons and daughers of the Right.

As a young man, I watched young bloods walk out of the Liberal Party and associated forums for the same reason I did, there was nothing there. The Right’s only interest in young bloods was to collect fees and memberships from them, in short, as cash cows who are permitted to make one noise only, moo or baaa approvingly at every word of the Deah Right Wing Leadahs of the Party and smile gratefully at them. 

Gratefully? Ah, that’s for the privilege of being allowed anywhere near their Presences’ presence.  No new blood, genuine Liberals have quit the Party in a river over the last decade. The Victorian Division is now reduced to, at best, 1,000 active members.

No principles, no intellectual engagement, and no courage stamp the Right. Yet this lot control the Party. The upshot is, they have reduced the Liberal Party. It is devoid of all the virtues that an effective, vigorous Party requires. It is the opposite to the Republican Party. To mark this, the Right never fight the Left either. They cower before the Left and concede grave matters to the Left, and this is not a joke nor an exaggeration. It is why Rudd is in Office.

The Right fully supports Greens’ policies that destroy, and economic policies that cause great damage even before Greens’ policies are added on top. This is the point at which Part II concludes because it leads into a different line of attack requiring dedicated treatment:

The HR Nicholls Society, IPA and CIS, betrayed the Liberal Cause, betrayed the free market cause, for their own ends. Part II will be a blistering assault on their anti-free market, non-existent economics mush they pump out. Mush that has destructive force, as readers are rather familiar with by now. But there is more.

The Left in Australia will not be defeated until the Right is wiped out, and the Liberal Party rendered a genuine Liberal Party answerable to its members and Australians. A Party dominated by men and women who are humble. A party that will fight for the right causes and attack from the front. A party committed to principles. A party with the guts to stand up for principles. A party prepared to go a’biffing because the cause is just. A Party that will not shirk but happily hack the Left into little pieces. A Party that will complete all this with dedication to sound policy when in Office, and principled fight in Opposition. That is a Party that serves members and Australians : it is what the Republican Party does for its members and all patriotic Americans.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I’m away for a few days, but on Tuesday the 10^th  the axe will resume good work.

On Thursday the 26^th of February, it was related Nelson smeared the brave men of the Australian Armed Forces. Later in the evening, there was a little noticed report over the radio, and it was no mentioned in the newspapers the next day (I checked), which ran:

In response to disgust at his smearing of the men of the armed forces, Nelson issued a public explanation, saying he didn’t mean to say senior officers refused to take orders.

Whom did he mean; junior commanders, N.C.O.s., enlisted men in boot camp? Let’s be clear about this: The armed forces take their orders from the Cabinet. The force that anyone can conclude is, officers are committing what are serious offences in military law.

Instead of apologising to the men of the armed forces, Nelson decides, late in the evening, to indulge in a lame attempt to to protect himself,”I really didn’t say what I was saying.”

There is a real problem, politicians of the major parties and bureaucrats abuse the Armed Forces, and they do it because the men of the Australian Armed Forces are professionals. As the scandal that erupted last week also shows, the “politico” stuffed Department of Defence’s rotten actions over their own stupidity in the pay to SAS troopers fiasco and the Minister of Defence went into backside protection too.

Civilians are not officers and men, Mr. Nelson, even though politicians and bureaucrats happily award themselves ranks that are properly the distinction for men under arms only(another bloody insult to the men).

Senior, genuine Liberal figures are disgusted, as they are ashamed of what the Right has done to the Party and Australia (now we have Rudd).

Nelson, a weasel personified.

The Right and their clunker tanks, did not squash abuse of the Armed Forces, the entrenched it when they held Defence Ministerial positions. The men of Armed Forces cannot say this, of course they cannot, but I can.