Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: wastoute; iopscusa; PhilDragoo
You raise a very good point. The left simply will not let go of this. There is another theory to explain why the left reverts to the same old lies but dresses them up and new words. For example, Hillary Clinton said in one of the debates said she did not like to call herself a liberal because that word had assumed bad connotations and she preferred to be called a progressive. As Jonah Goldberg has pointed out, progressives were in many respects worse then the liberals of a decade ago. Goldberg's thesis is that the left keeps recycling the old nostrums which do not work so they must be sold the next time under a new label.

I've been thinking much the same thing myself when I wrote this reply trying to trace the effect of the " anti-anti-communism" crusade against logic which has so taken over academia, then the media, and our culture. We have migrated a long way from a time when a senator could electrify the nation by announcing that there were Communists in the State Department to the point where we elect a president whose most profound associations throughout his biography were with Communists, felons, and terrorists. Here's the reply:

Once upon a Time in America the great divide in our society was expressed by where you stood on Joe McCarthy. Of course, that was all wrapped up with Whittaker Chambers and Alger Hiss and which one of those two you believed. Did you think the Rosenbergs were guilty? The answer that question told everyone whether you were a Democrat or a Republican.

The other American dramas I can invoke to describe the hold the Army -McCarthy hearings had on the nation are the OJ Simpson trial and the Clarence Thomas hearings. I can remember as a boy coming home from school and finding my mother transfixed before a black-and-white television over the Army McCarthy hearings. In our house we believed McCarthy, and Chambers, and we thought that the Rosenbergs were certainly guilty. But this was not the universal opinion of suburbia and certainly not the politically correct version to which I was exposed to in school which was connected to a university.

The impact of McCarthy was not limited to the era which bears his name. In subsequent years in college I learned that my parents must have been real Neanderthals to believe the way they did. Most of this was imparted to me by my professors through innuendo; we quickly absorbed the culture of the University and knew what sort of opinions were acceptable and which were not acceptable to express in learned company.

Today the term "McCarthyism" has assumed a meaning which contains its own DNA and expresses a whole left-wing point of view. We see the same thing now happening with the phrase, "Swift boating." These phrases have been turned on their head by a consensus in academia and in the media which simply ignores any other interpretation of events except the one favoring the left.

McCarthy was connected to Chambers who was connected to Nixon. If the left was irrational in its support of Alger Hiss, it was almost psychotic in its hatred of Richard Nixon. There was a chain of events that led to the impeachment of Richard Nixon for actions that had mostly been done already by previous Democrat presidents. What I find so fascinating so many years later is the question, why was the left so irrational, so emotional in its judgments about the Communists and the anti-Communists? Why was the left so purblind to Communists in high places where they could mortally wound the nation and so viscerally obsessed about the men like McCarthy, Chambers, and Nixon who exposed them?

Why, for example, was President Truman so indifferent to the evidence of Communists in the State Department? Perhaps Truman's inertia can be explained by his parochial Midwestern background, his naïveté, his partisanship, his ignorance of the lay of the land on the day he assumed office. But Roosevelt's involvement was more than indifference. It strikes me that Roosevelt was almost the model of the patrician who sees himself as larger than his own country. John Kerry, of Swift Boat fame, seems to be cast in the same mold, although without Roosevelt's political acumen.

Do men of great wealth like George Soros or Franklin Roosevelt regard the concept of national sovereignty to be merely the outmoded belief systems of the masses, akin to the belief in God which provide some comfort and meaning to their lives, but which is outmoded and not particularly useful in the grand games played for world stakes. Just a thought, but one prompted by knowledge that the financial backer of THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL was also a man of great wealth who founded the school which has done so much damage to our culture. The school was founded for the express purpose of breaking down those institutions which frustrated the victory of communism.

Roosevelt must have known that there were Communists in his government. His vice president was virtually an avowed communist. I believe he just didn't care. Either he was so arrogant that he believed he could control events even as he was being undermined by a fifth column, or, more likely, he didn't care because he didn't think it mattered when viewed from the exalted perspective of his world.

George Soros does not care what passport he holds except as it advances his interests. Patricians in general do not see the world as contained and defined by national boundaries but by markets, routes, and centers of supply and demand.

McCarthyism, like Swift Boating, has been distorted and twisted into a widely accepted definition by political correctness. Political correctness is the explicitly contrived belief system created by THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL. The Frankfurt school was founded by a character who could change skins with George Soros and each could live comfortably in the other's century. They view the rest of us as impediments or useful idiots.

They could be right. The useful idiots enforce the rules of political correctness and obligingly define against the weight of history the meaning of phrases like, " McCarthyism" or, "Swift Boating." I for one choose to count myself among the impediment class.


20 posted on 05/09/2009 3:29:42 AM PDT by nathanbedford ("Attack, repeat attack!" Bull Halsey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: nathanbedford

Great followup post NB...I can appreciate where you come from as far as times/family politics, mine were similar.
You, like many of the current day anti-Communism, do a lot to keep the freedom flame alive, thanks for your diligence.


23 posted on 05/09/2009 4:08:52 AM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: nathanbedford
Thanks for your lenghty and thoughtful analysis. I find myself almost always thinking like you and am always eager to read your posts.

Μολὼν λάβε


32 posted on 05/09/2009 10:00:33 AM PDT by wastoute (translation of tag "Come and get them (bastards)" and the Scout Motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: nathanbedford; iopscusa; Jimmy Valentine; Grampa Dave; BOBTHENAILER
Richard Carlson as Herb Philbrick in I Led Three Lives the black and white series sponsored by Phillips 66.

How quaint--the secret Communist cell--

Now comes Frank Marshall Davis the CPUSA member and his whiskey-and-marijuana comrade Stanley Armour--

And Stanley's grandson the highest mole yet.

Al Gore the darling of Armand Hammer bagman to the Soviet dictators, his father founding the CPUSA in 1919.

Delano was enamored of Uncle Joe, quite prepared to sacrifice the freedom and very lives of millions of Europeans, to insult Churchill, to dismiss charges of infiltration in his administration--

Now comes Hillary the progressive whose homage to Alinsky is unsealed--and her Alinskyite fellow traveler Hussein.

Again it should be emphasized New York Times, Walter Duranty, Uncle Joe, Senator Joe--

Drink the Kool-Aid or be deemed anti-intellectual, a clinger to Bibles and guns.

The institutional pressures you describe are now so pervasive as to be the water which the fish cannot perceive.

Horowitz chronicles serial academic outrage and is met by shouting agitators.

We have met the anti-intellectuals and they are the Left.

Now shapeshifted into the Harvard grease extruder Hussein, an absolute babbler sans his telepromptered lines.

Who was so impressed at the Potemkin metropolis built on the spilled blood of the Tiananmen Two Thousand.

Brother Ayers knows of omelets and bombs, while bony metro usurper whines to be left alone to his waffle.

Thank you again for your illumination of the persistent subliminal sleight of hand of the Left.

It's tyranny and we're not having it--not yesterday, not today, never.


33 posted on 05/09/2009 1:12:32 PM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hussein: Islamo-Commie from Kenya)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson