Pepe's failure to answer this question of mine is proof that he does in fact endorse candidates who believe in the Supernatural. Remember this when he takes his condescending tone towards Jesus Freaks and any other Superstition. Also note his failure to address my question, a method that Pepe has used more than once during our quaint little conversations. Here's a rehash:
My Frontier Thesis said...
Pepe, I don't see how your athiest ethos allows you to support a candidate like Chavez, a man who interjects God and the Devil regularly into his political rhetoric.
12/04/2006 1:40 PM
Pepe's response:
focus alert ???
12/04/2006 2:17 PM
My Frontier Thesis response...
Focus alert? Is this how you want me to address the contradictions that you find in my own Libertarian ethos from now on? Again, the French are lax when it comes to philosophy. You've got quite the mythical little worldview down there in the Big Easy, Pepe.
12/04/2006 3:14 PM
Monday, December 04, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Relax, MFT -- in the big scheme of things, this is chickenshit. Just view it as a good example of the shallowness and small-min dedness of just about all that passes for leftist "thought" nowadays. They had their high-water mark in terms of intellectual prowess the 19th century, went through the terrible killings of the 20th century -- tens upon tens of millions of people killed on the altar of Marx/Molloch, and now they are just a shriveled husk when it comes to any kind of intellectual argument. Their only game is to kiss the ass of any tinpot would-be commie despot or stone-age nihilist bomb-thrower that comes down the pike, as long as they equally despise and hate America (or Western Civilization, take your pick). It's all rather sad, but it's nothing really new, it's been going on for at least 70 years. The unfortunate thing is that I very much doubt this kind of freak show can go on for another 70 years, without said Western Civ not caving in, as devoutly wished by the Left. A pity, isn't it?
In the end, history cannot ignore the role of the psyche of men in the fate of events. Obviously.
No worries, AI. I'm not too wound up about it. This is merely Pepe deciding what is Democracy and what isn't based on ideological colors. If Chavez shot his own mother, said he was saved every day by Bayby Jeeesuhs, yet still carried the banner of National Socialism, Pepe would support him.
Even the other day a professor, one of the newest out of an east coast institution, remarked on how Marx never said all the things that Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky, and Co. said that he said. "No, Marx wasn't saying that..." I responded with, "um, pardon me?"
Now I know this professor doesn't give a goddamned about what Marx said, or what another Marxist said he said. On another level, this professor talks here and there about it because there still are so many Old New Leftists within the corridors of academia. It's that nostalgia you see in many former Soviet bloc countries. We might even liken it to that Russian bartender who poured me a shot of tequila in downtown Tashkent, Uzbekistan a couple years ago, and then remarked on how "things were better twenty years ago... at least the government had a job for us."
I agree AA: the history of ideas is just as important as the historical actors themselves.
Post a Comment