.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Visit Freedom's Zone Donate To Project Valour

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Reality-Testing Difficulties At DU

I'm sure this is what Shrinkwrapped calls problems with reality-testing in certain leftist circles. DU reacted quite strongly to the news that Human Rights Watch expressed concern about several of Hugo Chavez's actions in Venezuela:
2. Thanks for posting yet more anti-Chavez propaganda n/t
6. Do a bit of investigation about the HRW rep for the area The credibility of HRW with reference to Venezuela is not absolute:
Obviously these issues are in dispute, and there probably are human rights issues in Venezuela that need to be dealt with, but we mustn't forget the unscrupulous and lying nature of the propaganda directed against Washington's enemies. If the CIA are known to have operatives in the US press, why shouldn't they have them in 'human rights' organisations, especially when 'human rights' has become a justification for invasion of oil producing countries?
Yes, you read that right. The CIA did it.
36. Thx...
You beat me to it...amazing how these groups still rely on old 'branding' and some vague notion of 'good' to react...I haven't listen to a thing these clowns have said for years. (It would be flamebait to post HRWs inconstitencies vis a vis the Palestinians, so I won't

Amnesty still has some credibility, but I always rely on the locals and their NGOs...I don't NEED an transnational company based in the US telling me what to think.
Some poor guy named PhilipShore puts up a valiant fight, and a few others emit groans of disgust:
54. No, the problem is Chávez limiting freedoms and judiciary rights But it's Chávez, he hates Bush, he can do no wrong! This must be a CIA trick!!!
At least one of the Chavists feel that the ICC shouldn't have jurisdiction over claims against Chavez. Human Rights Watch is unreliable when it comes to Venezuela, etc.

What exactly has Chavez done, that makes people trust him? The seizing of private property? Is that what they like so much?
M-O-M, you seem to have spent a lot of time at DU lately. It's amusing, but you have to be careful not to overdose on the stuff. It's like driving past a car wreck on the freeway: you know you shouldn't be watching but you just can't help yourself and your mesmerized by the carnage and wreckage. I'm just worried that too much DU might eat away at your precious brain cells.
Pedro, I'm trying to figure out something in particular. There is a growing debate at DU, and it appears to be something along the lines of liberals vs Marxists.

Tommy, I'm guessing that socialists stick together. They adore Castro too.
Oh! I get it. Anthropological research. Carry on then.

I hope the liberals win.

Tommy, I've thought about this a lot and written about it. Socialists, by placing class solidarity above any other moral and philosophical commitment, are forced by their own ideology to semi-deify certain political figures who fit certain rhetorical requirements. Then, absolute adherence to this one person takes precedence over all other moral considerations.

This is why Communists in the US refused to condemn Hitler until the Nazi-Soviet Pact was broken. If Hitler was allied with Stalin, then Hitler was A-OK by them.

Personally, I feel it's a badge of honor to always be on the opposite side of the political spectrum from Marxists. As PJ O'Rourke says, every moral compass needs a butt end.
Pedro, I like that as a mission statement: To boldly go where no man has gone before, to always be on the opposite side of the political spectrum from Marxists.

Certainly they racked up an astonishing death toll in the last century, and they had some very, very dedicated and fanatical competition.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?