Re: The Intellectual Origins Of America-Bashing By Lee Harris

From: A and B Vitale (
Date: Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 13:11:55 GMT

  • Next message: Wade T.Smith: "Re: The Intellectual Origins Of America-Bashing By Lee Harris"

    ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeremy Bradley <>
    > I am glad that you pointed this matter out as many people conflate the
    > I am a socialist, but not a Marxist. Likewise I am on the 'left', but only
    > because the ones who I disagree with most claim that they are 'right' (not
    > to be confused with correct).

    it's an important distinction. in the aftermath of 9-11, the left is getting slammed and slandered everywhere. finding convenient ways to associate the left with failure makes the journalists who spew their right-eousness look like they are actually making a valid criticism. and as the left is far and away outnumbered in the media by the center (which most see as the left) and the right, there is little in the way of public discourse and defense. perhaps part of the issue is that the Left does not tend to centralize and does not tend to package its message in sound-bytes read by puppets.

    because substance is not included within the "news" that most people receive from the media, people have been trained to read for "association." the conjunction is a useless part of the language now. as long as you can equate two encapsulated buzz-words, you have all the news that's print to fit. lumping in the Left with Marxism is one of those associations which have no substance. the strategy works because when forced to defend these allegations, the right pulls out another spin tactic: find a marxist and prove they are on the Left. Since that, too, is read through associations. the associative equation goes from: Left=Failed ideology to Person X=Left=Failed ideology.

    there are many other left myths, based on the same associative spin. here are a couple:

    1) the anti-war left supports terrorism. This despite the fact that criticism of the Taliban had been slung from the Left since its inception...that human rights groups have always decried the mistreatment of women in fundamentalist regimes...that even the marxist and academic left were critical of the dangerous games being played by the US in their funding of local warlords. however, since this time the US has pronounced war on an ideology that is justifiably dangerous, it's forced anti-war efforts to change strategy...instead of emphasizing that war is a mistake, the anti-war left has to explain alternatives to perform the same end. and such alternatives require attention to substance, which is just not something that the media carriers care for.

    And, of course, it's not just the left that supports's drug addicts, too. commercials have shown, by association, that drugs are sold by dealers who get their drugs from people who finance terrorists. associative equation: drugs=supports terrorism.

    The same equation was never made for oil. a more accurate one would be: oil=supports nations which support terrorism.

    2) the left are proponents of a failed economic system (marxism) This despite the massive anti-globalization movements dominated by non-marxist thinking. the public has been trained to think that you are either a capitalist OR you are a communist. thus, the associative equation: Anti-Capitalism=Communism.

    > Oh BTW are you A, B or A and B, and are you positive or negative?

    i am the "A" in "A and B," positively.

    > PS: Just for the record, I don't think that capitalism will work either

    i agree...mostly because it propels centralization and larger populations, requires exploitation, and is very good at becoming a pandemic.


    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon 09 Dec 2002 - 13:08:22 GMT