Replies

"Intellectuals, by the very nature of their professions, grant enormous attention to words and ideas. And they are attracted by socialist ideas. They find that the ideas of communism are praiseworthy and attractive; that, to them, is more important than the practice of communism.

You don't have to be an intellectual to fit that bill. I don't consider journalists to be intellectuals (perhaps that's an error), but journalists do nothing but talk, and therefore they promote talk above action. To do so they take every opportunity to denigrate people who get things done - police and the military, businessmen, engineers . . .
Journalism is just cheap talk, and the cheapest talk of all is the second guess. And sometimes they are caught in outright lies such as the "TANG memos" and the Fauxtogrphs. Democrat voters tend not to internalize responsibility for getting things done and consider themselves victims. But the leaders and wealthy contributors simply promote the same ideas that ooze out of journalism's negativity toward the middle class.
If you start from the question, "Who says journalism is objective," and "What are the justifications for assuming that journalism - uniquely - is objective," you find that the whole liberal project collapses. Journalism selects the stories it will emphasize and the stories it will not report. And since Half the truth is often a great lie. Benjamin Franklin, it can never be proved that journalism is objective. More to the point, the actual perspective of journalism - cynicism toward the people and institutions which actually do necessary things - is in plain sight and that is not only not "objective," is one which profits from bad news and therefore journalism is a special interest. And therefore journalism is arrogant to argue from the assumption that it is objective.
"Liberal" and Progressive" and "Moderate" are simply honors which journalism awards to its acolytes for toeing journalism's party line that criticism of the people who get things done is a higher function than taking risks in the absence of perfect knowledge in order to take necessary action.

Now Nazi ideals, on the other hand, were pure barbarism; nothing could be said in favor of them."

. . . In practice, communism is nothing less than sheer barbarism that makes even the horrors of Naziism pale in comparison.

So although "Fascism" (especially National Socialism) is recognized as a dystopia rather than a utopia, people who are desperate that they get credit which actually belongs by right to the entrepreneur (they want to run the government by the "right" of their desire to 'make everyone equal' - but making the government do that redounds to their credit) are unwilling to give up the idea that the doers deserve credit for their deeds.
But real, existing Communism is no different than National Socialism - nobody but thugs would be capable of instituting such a barbarous system.
Utopias Elsewhere: Journeys in a Vanishing World

Journalism is just cheap talk, and the cheapest talk of all is the second guess.

Nicely put.

...the actual perspective of journalism - cynicism toward the people and institutions which actually do necessary things..."

Journalists, who never produce any tangible products or services, revel in their self-appointed role of critiquing the performance of those who do. They are professionals at second guessing. Rarely do they provide any useful perspective on the circumstances, constraints, etc. faced by those who produce because they don't have any real world experience doing anything even though they portray themselves as instant experts on everything.