Monday, November 15, 2010

Communists never have to say they're sorry

‘New York Times’ Gushes Over Communist Community Center

So, in last Wednesday’s New York Times, Channing Joseph wrote a glowing piece [1] on a community center for communists – a place called Brecht Forum, where, “Smiles abound.”

And when I mean a glowing piece, I mean, really glowing. Like a pregnant lady holding a nightlight made of kryptonite.

On the sun.

Anyway, Joseph describes these “revolutionaries” playing foosball, table tennis and even Marxist Monopoly.


Follow link for video that goes here.



Basically it’s a “Dave and Busters” built on mass graves.

I know, small fact: Communists killed like 50 million people.

But, as Joseph shows: it doesn’t mean its desciples can’t have a little fun!

And despite existing only to gloss over the horrors of a wicked ideology, it is a “surprisingly open and idealistic place.”

And – they play poker!

Now, I often judge writing not simply on an author’s clumsy biases – but what I call “barf” moments. These are moments that occur, while reading- in which you actually throw up.

Here, there were a few.

But the two lines that buttoned up this F-U to humanity could turn even Stalin’s stomach.

The writer spews:

While Mr. Balagun waved me out the front door, I imagined Marx’s ghost floating in the hazy light of the evening, watching over the poker players. Behind his famous thicket of a beard, I could almost see a grin.”

Now if you’re imagining Marx’s ghost, then I’m sure you can see his grin – not “almost” see it. I mean, you are imagining it.

Just like you imagined the rest of this loathsome crap.

Channing Joseph, congrats – you have created the first ever literary emetic. If a child is choking, simply read those two lines out loud. And stand back.

…and if you disagree with me, then you’re a racist, homophobic communophobe.

Comment posted


Whenever someone tries to flack for Marx, I like to refer them to this insightful piece by Paul Johnson. Here's an excerpt on Marx. The entire piece is worth reading at this link:http://www.fortfreedom.org/h11.htm

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was another example of a man who became
convinced that it was his duty to put ideas before people. Hence
his relentless and often unthinking cruelty to those around him
became a kind of distant adumbration of the mass cruelty his
ideas would promote when they finally became the blueprint of
Soviet state policy. His father, who was afraid of him, detected
the fatal flaw: "In your heart," he wrote his son, "egoism is
predominant." Marx was particularly odious to his mother, who
rebuked him for his financial improvidence and ceaseless attempts
to dun for cash. What a pity it was, she remarked, that he did
not try to acquire capital instead of writing about it.

There was an enormous gap between Marx's egalitarian ideas and
the way in which he actually behaved. In one way or another he
inherited considerable sums of money. He never had less than two
servants. He had a horror of what he called "a purely
proletarian set-up." He made his wife send out visiting cards in
which she was described as "nee Baronesse Westphalen." He would
not let his three daughters train for any profession or learn
anything except to play the piano. He kept up appearances by
pawning the silver and even his wife's dresses. He seduced his
wife's servant, begot a son by her, the forced Friedrich Engels
to assume paternity. Marx's daughter Eleanor once let out a cri
de coeur in a letter: "Is it not wonderful, when you come to look
things squarely in the face, how rarely we seem to practice all
the fine things we preach -- to others?" She later committed
suicide.

Marx's whole life was an exercise in emotional or financial
exploitation -- of his wife, of his daughters, of his friends.
Studying Marx's life leads one to think that the roots of human
unhappiness, and especially the misery caused by exploitation, do
not lie in the exploitation by categories or classes -- but in
one-to-one exploitation by selfish individuals.

Nor is this indifference to others a mere human failing in a
great public man. It is central to Marx's work. He was not
actually interested in real human beings, how they felt or what
they wanted. He never met a member of the proletariat, except
across the platform at a public meeting. He never made a visit
to an actual factory, rejecting Engel's offers to arrange one.
He never sought to meet or interrogate a capitalist, with the
solitary exception of an uncle in Holland. From first to last,
his source of information was books, especially government
bluebooks.

No comments: