phthisis (phthisis) wrote,
phthisis
phthisis

Coffee-House Chatter

In my utopia, this is what the coffee-house chatter would sound like. An aside to my one socialist friend:

I still don't understand why, even in light of completely unrelated socialist doctrines, you would align yourself with an ideology that uniformly claims that the Israelis are 100% to blame, the Palestinians and other Arabs are 0% to blame, and with which the mass murders of Jewish civilians doesn't emotionally register. That is what socialism is. Socialism is a discredited cops-and-robbers cartoon in which the historical narrative becomes fat robber barons who smoke cigars and grind their patent-leathers into the necks of worker-saints. For 100 years, socialists have located empowered and self-defensive Jewry in the place of those robber barons. Find me a socialist thinker, party or movement that says otherwise. When Jews transcend the throng of faceless, pacifist, international drones that are the socialist's vision, they become little gold monopoly men whom it is ok to blow up -- along with their children -- so long as an ever-receding list of ahistorical "root causes" isn't addressed through prostration and appeasement.

Socialism is evil. There is no other way to describe it.
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 21 comments
raise the scarlet standard high!
within its shade we'll live or die.
though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
we'll keep the red flag flying here!
The red flag balmily shades every national liberation movement except that of the Jews, Israeli socialists notwithstanding.
you know, in the uk, the conservative party is full of anti-zionists!
i've found something written by a guy who explains why the british right are "lukewarm" when it comes to israel.

"The root of this lack of solidarity with Israel lies in a visceral romantic reaction to the Middle East - the traditional Tory is very susceptible to starry-eyed daydreams about Lawrence and his Arab raiders, the mystic orient and the monarchy in all its forms. This last point explains how British Conservatives can comfortably detest Hussein and Assad but go all weak at the knees at the prospect of laying into the House of Saud. Layered on top of this are three decades of being the only people in political discourse who understood the need for realpolitik, which led to quite strong links developing with the Arab potentates which Conservatives had to defend - the left having abandoned national interest as a motivating factor in the 1970s. Another part of this latter factor is Britain's close relationship with the Gulf States - which ceased to be British protectorates only during a bout of Wilsonian cost cutting in the 1960s. All of this, combined with some older themes (19th Century boasts of the British Empire being the "Greatest Mohammedan Power on Earth") has built up a considerable amount of goodwill on the British Right towards the Arab world, which is hard to overcome even as it becomes apparent that it is unrequited."

here's the rest http://homepage.ntlworld.com/griffany/james/021203.htm

i don't know if this will help you to understand the mentality of british conservatives or not, but to me it totally sums them up.
Thank you. I haven't yet read that but I will.

Did you get your pink hippie video game togs yet? :)
my what?!
Those cute little pink strange pleated shoes!
Oh, and hon, read Al Guardian or The Independent (Robert Fuckin' Fisk) if you want to see anti-zionist.
don't go out of my way to read either..still doesn't change the fact that the british right are anti-semites.
I certainly believe that Arabist old English farts are both pro-Arab and often Tory; I expect to the extent that they are the former, they can be anti-Semitic.

But the right, either in or outside of England, is not the operative enemy of the Joos these days. The threat, my jaunty Canaanite wife-candidate, is gathering on the left horizon.
What kind of a British socialist -- indeed, any socialist -- doesn't read Al Guardian or Fisk??? I think you are laboring under dual mistaken impressions: that socialism is "liberal", and that your liberalism is contemporary.
no, i am not laboUring under any mistaken impressions. my family has always been very political and i was raised by socialists (a trade union leader and a labour party politician). i know what socialism is. the reason i do not read the guardian or the independent is because firstly, they're written by anti-semetic tory boys, and secondly, my family have not been treated kindly by either of them.
Forgive my arrogance.

I am baffled by your comment that Al Guardian and Al Independent are Tory rags. They seem avatars of what we unkindly term Euroweenie thought, e.g. that mild but pernicious brand of socialism that fosters the interests of terrorists and dictators in their unthinking celebration of left-wing totems, like moral relativism, anti-globalization histrionics, and the autonomic defiance of American hegemony. Care for some Monbiot, Pinter or Fisk? It's true that there is a significant history of Tory socialism, but I thought this had been lost in the passing of the 19th Century.

What gives, O Canaanite queen?
you know rich kids who go through rebellious phases and spend a few months wearing black and "free palestine" badges? that's what those journalists are. they're just public school morons who are in denial about their privileged backgrounds.
Yes, I know the type. And I don't suspect you're wrong about this being one of the psychological motivators underlying the Guardian phenomenon. But surely the producers of these papers -- journalists, editors, maybe even the owners -- would consider themselves to be more subsantive, and titular, socialists.

One thing I wonder about you, especially now that I know your Labour Party provenance, is whether you agree that Blair and his Third Way have much in common with America's "neo" conservatives. That is to say, do you feel this collaborative War on Terror is wrought from true ideological affinity among the two groups, or rather something hidden, something mercenary and sinister?

I vote for the former. Apropos of anti-Semitic Tories and the Jew-hating Old Left, the salutary effect on Israel of Blair and Bush's program in the Middle East can't be lost on you.

But I'm given pause by that last statement, as I thought most Tories supported the UK going into Iraq, and most Labourites did not.
this may seem niave and possibly odd considering the fact that i describe myself as a socialist, but i actually think tony blair is quite sincere. i don't really know much about neo conservatives, i once saw a bbc documentary which described them as a group of zionist jews who have hijacked us politics. is this a fair description?
More later, but no it is not a fair description, and I would have thought you'd be instantly aware of the anti-Semitic implications of that BBC documentary -- which, in the event, was just pilloried in America's premier neocon journal, the (yes) Jewish Commentary Magazine, in a discussion of this very issue.
hhhhhmmm.

did you add me because of the greek plate-throwing thing?
Ooooooopaaaaaah!

No. I added you because you are stunning -- a breathing testament to Mediterranean superiority -- and a bit of a sad one viz a vis the eating disorder. I am smitten and curious.
Any person who would claim that the Israelis are 100% to blame, the Palestinians and other Arabs are 0% to blame, and whom which the mass murders of Jewish civilians doesn't emotionally register is quite simply, AN IGNORANT ASS. They should probably be beaten.

Personally, I don't know anybody who claims that, thank god. Then again, I also don't know anyone who claims they are a socialist. I know a few commies tho ...

Deleted comment

Ok, Gene. Keep parroting that Lenni Brenner horseshit.