Tim Blair

Daimnation http://www.damianpenny.com/
has a link to the following
http://www.sicmuse.com/weblog/
There is a rant about Fisk in which said Naomi Klein is used to whitewash Robert Fisk's "Eulogy of the Dead".

Oh, her whole family is nasty. Her husband avi lewis is a CBC tv host, his father is Stephen Lewis, professional socialist/UN guy, and Avi's mother is the evil Toronto Star columnist Michelle Landsberg (ie, the big fat idiot).

They practically run the country!

I find it hard to disagree with her central point that the War on Terrorism is the new McArthyism and becomes a justification for all sorts of restrictions by government on civil liberties.

Let's just hope the War on Terrorism gets a better result than the War on Drugs.

If the ultimate aim of globalisation is to benefit the world through genuine economic competition, First World countries could therefore LOSE out in the competition and become poor. For example, if TRUE free trade existed, unions were abolished and protections removed, it would be likely that manufacturing industries would leave First World countries in search of cheaper labour. This would inevitably be followed by a departure of many of our skilled workers as demand for their knowledge increases overseas.

So in the interests of preserving the superiority of our tribe over their tribes, we actually use our power to ensure that Third World countries do not develop in a way that is not to our liking, so that they never get wealthy or independent enough to develop weapons that may seriously threaten us. This protectionism comes in many forms, including sanctions, subsidies and pre-emptive invasions - after all, great steps forward in human development often come out of extreme repression (ie: slavery gave birth to the American Civil War, new concepts of freedom and racial equality, artistic developments like the blues, jazz etc).

Therefore, is fighting al-Qaeda a representation of "natural market forces", or is it "social engineering"? For example, what if one of those Third World countries could have one day evolved into a society that is SUPERIOR to our own through the repression/evolution dynamic described above. A society that is more socially cohesive, wealthier and more enlightened? So is it rational or moral to control the development of other countries in this way? If it is moral, it is only moral from OUR perspective as we define our morality according to subjective self-interest.

Just wondering what you guys think, being as you are the self-appointed guardians of "dynamic civilisation"...

I think you just demonstrated the danger of proceeding from a false premise, thepusher. Economics is not a zero sum game. The US didn't become richer by making everyone else poorer. There is no evidence that First World countries would lose in competition and become poor. If African produces cheaper food than we do, although it could hurt our farmers, we would be able to buy cheaper food.

Then, proceeding from that false premise, there's the big ole leap to "so that's the guiding force behind US foreign policy". Apparently we're trying to keep Third World countries down. Subsidies aren't a sop to an entrenched special interest group in order to get votes, no, they're part of the master plan. MWAHahah! Sanctions had nothing to do with Saddam's invasion of Kuwait. It was about preventing Iraq from becoming "more socially cohesive, wealthier and more enlightened" than the US. Because there was a real danger with that, they were only a couple of children's prisons away.

Of course, we developed GM food to poison the starving Third World.

This is either sarcasm or the literal truth depending on your point of view.

"we define our morality according to subjective self-interest". Evidently so.

All of pushers' examples of "extreme repression" in the entire history of the damned planet come from America. That's because we are horrible, horrible sub-humans. Come visit America and see how pointy our horns are. And feel free to make moral judgements according to your self-interest.

thepusher, I'm astonished at the level of ignorance which you display. You seem completely unfamiliar with the concept of comparative advantage.

May your level of economics knowledge one day rise to at least that of Karl Marx, who knew that economics was not a zero-sum game. Instead, you're stuck somewhere far below the Luddites.

I think poor Naomi is upset because the War on Terrorism has distracted public attention from her War on Capitalism.

is fighting al-Qaeda a representation of "natural market forces", or is it "social engineering"?

How about "getting rid of people who want to kill us?"

How could you take seriously someone posing as a writer who comes up with "stick-to-it-ness"?

Well, as none of you have bothered addressing what I'm saying, I'll put it another way...

Look at the Roman Empire. Basically this great civilisation ended up getting overrun by barbarians, and that set in train the events which leave us here, in our "higher state of evolution". So how do you know this isn't happening again, and that this will ultimately be a sacrifice for a better future. You explain the deaths of civilians in the war on Iraq as a sacrifice for a better future, so how come it can't apply to us? Maybe al-Qaeda will smallpox us into submission and get us all slaving away in those cotton fields, singing as we work and inventing some wild new improvisational vocal techniques. They'll trash our old culture for us, so when they eventually break into two warring factions ("free the Infidels" vs "enslave the Infidels") and duke it out we can get "reintegrated" into their society, take the best bits of all the old civilisations and start anew with a far better understanding of the consequences of intolerance.

"Look at the Roman Empire..." Zzzzzz...... That phrase is always a signal that it's time to stop reading whatever anti-American screed contains it. I'm going to call it the "Empire! Empire! Awk! Awk! Awk!" argument-stopper.

By the way, I wonder how thepusher sees himself -- willing slave to the "better future," or plantation overseer? Betcha I know which job he'd prefer.

"Look at the Roman Empire..." Zzzzzz...... That phrase is always a signal that it's time to stop reading whatever anti-American screed contains it. "

So obviously you wouldn't read "a history of the Roman Empire" then. Sounds like self-censorship to me. Not a healthy sign...

By the way, you guys REALLY need to get a sense of humour. Your starting to sound like gloomy navel-gazing Lefties...

Notice how Naomi picks up on the Indonesian Co-ordinating Minister for Policing and Security Affairs' unequivocal statement about the bombing victims at that point in time being more important than human rights.

A self-evident truth from the Minister, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. But not to those who inhabit Planet Left, for whom the giant balsa raft of human rights bobs around on an ever-shifting ocean of sanctimony and self-justification, it's debatable.

The Pusher is right about one thing. If the no-nonsense clarity of thinking displayed by Minister Yudhoyono becomes a dominant way of thinking in emerging third world countries - nationals of which have been sufficiently close enough to years of death, destruction, poverty and hopelessness to know a braying jackass Western overfed Leftie when they hear one approaching - then indeed Third World countries may overtake the West on a number of counts including common sense.

I doubt old Bambang woud give No, No, Naomi time of day.

thepusher, haven't you ever heard of "setbacks"? Maybe getting overrun by barbarians isn't necessary to reach a "higher state of evolution"? Please excuse those of us who want humanity to avoid living through more "Dark Ages".

"Maybe getting overrun by barbarians isn't necessary to reach a "higher state of evolution"

Yeah, but how would you know if you are at a lower state of evolution. We could be just like those tribesmen in Africa before the lovely Americans came and carted us away.

Anyway, if it does happen you'll just have to accept that it is "market forces" at work...

Get a sense of humour you morose dickheads!

HEY TIM! WHAT DO YOU THINK????

"you guys REALLY need to get a sense of humour"

You're on to something there. That line was far beyond parody, and is unlikely to be out-funnied.

I'll look at your initial post.
"...this protectionism comes in many forms, including sanctions, subsidies and pre-emptive invasions - after all, great steps forward in human development often come out of extreme repression"

Well, it is simply bizarre to call sanctions and subsidies, as distasteful as they may be, extreme repression. As far as the pre-emptive invasions - there has been an (one) pre-emptive invasion. Let the reader decide whether the Iraqis have been introduced to or freed from extreme repression. It is certainly not worth sending more words to the internet over this.

As far as the story and lesson starting with "Maybe al-Qaeda will smallpox us into submission", well, yeah, okay, that's possible, as are all wild-ass distant future scenarios. Let the Alquedalypse begin!

thepusher, we're not "addressing what you're saying" because it's nonsense. The opening lines of your post reveal an understanding of economics that is so completely feebleminded that the entire rest of your argument is not worth reading.

You're obviously arguing from a completely unsound premise. You don't understand comparative advantage (please, search for the phrase online and read), you don't understand trade, you don't understand economics at all.

Since your entire argument rests upon a statement which is simply contrary to fact, there's nothing to address. There is no argument; nothing to rebut.

"Anyway, if it does happen you'll just have to accept that it is "market forces" at work..."

I'll accept that, along with temporary acceptance of the "market". If fifty nukes hit city centers because we're a titch crabby about the crazy damned smallpox, that will also be market forces. Right? Ha! Whoopee! This bud's for you, fuckers! Ka-boom! Tee hee! See, I have a sense of humor.

Christ.

Thepusher was worried about thee being not enough jokes on this site, so I thought I would help out.

Bin Laden is captured and taken to the United States for trial. George W Bush pops in for a chat to see for himself the homocidal freak show for himself and gets chatting with him.

As he is about to leave Osama stops him to ask a question. "Infidel Pig", he says." One more question I have for you"

"What is that, pig fucker?" Asks George pleasantly.

"While I was hiding out in caves, knowing that it was only a matter of time before our forces of enlightenment overran your jew-loving infidels, I saw a lot of television. I used to love watching old reruns of Star Trek and I need to know something. There was white people, black people, asians and russians, but never one arab. Not one anywhere. Why was that??"

George looks at him and smiles.

"Thats because it is set in the future"

I bet Naomi cashes her royalty checks the day she gets them. Hell, she probably has direct deposit. And I bet she sues the pants off anyone who violates her copyrights!

Naomi is an idiot

Todd, finally what I've been waiting to hear! Some good ol' genocide humour.

"If fifty nukes hit city centers because we're a titch crabby about the crazy damned smallpox, that will also be market forces."

You're completely right. And the subsequent nuclear winter which wipes out all life on earth. Except maybe cockroaches, who will mutate and become the dominant life form, until they start to notice slight differences in the colour of one mutant-cockroach from another mutant-cockroach, then you'll go through cockroach discrimination, cockroach reintegration, cockroach political correctness, the cockroach right-wing revival and then the cockroaches end up wiping themselves out too!

"You're obviously arguing from a completely unsound premise. You don't understand comparative advantage (please, search for the phrase online and read), you don't understand trade, you don't understand economics at all."

I'll just defend my economic modelling with this quote I found on a site about the theory of "comparitive advantage":

"Models are, by their nature, simplifications of the real world and thus all economic models contain unrealistic assumptions. Therefore, to dismiss the results of economic analysis on the basis of unrealistic assumptions means that one must dismiss all insights contained within the entire economics discipline."

You forgot to mention the mutant cockroaches will be more socially cohesive, wealthier and more enlightened.

"You forgot to mention the mutant cockroaches will be more socially cohesive, wealthier and more enlightened."

Well, you never know. I certainly can't claim to predict the future.

In its latest edition, conservative e-journal The Federalist asks what led to the collapse of the Roman Empire and points to resemblances in .

... today's America. Try this page.
Sorry.

And while you're at it, bring back McCarthyism!

Nah, who wants Joe McCarthy and his ilk poking their noses under our beds. It is the sort of thing you would normally only get from a socialist country.

Instead how about we start a new pogrom, like the good old days back in the Motherland. Hey, everybody's happy. Right Wing Death Beasts get to kill somebody, and left wing hypocrites get to see those awful JOOOOS dead. That has to be a good thing right??? And you know that the peace loving moslems just have to be in favour of it.

Win Win all round really.

"Right Wing Death Beasts get to kill somebody, and left wing hypocrites get to see those awful JOOOOS dead. That has to be a good thing right??? And you know that the peace loving moslems just have to be in favour of it. "

So where do the mutant cockroaches fit in to the equation?

Hey, why not bring back Stalinism? Or Pol Potism? Betcha those crummy Cambodians are a lot more evolved now. Russia is, of course, a much better country than it was in 1917, thanks to "sanctions, subsidies, and pre-emptive invasions" to say nothing of how all its neighbors evolved.

In fact, bring back Saddam. He was only trying to evolve the Iraqis. A few more children's prisons, a few more gassing of Kurds, a few more ecological attacks like on the Marsh Arabs, a couple more pre-emptive invasions like Kuwait, and Iraq would have become Paradise - no need to blow up JOOOOOOOS to get your 72 virgins.

I'm FOTFLMAO here folks. Sensa humor? I got it. Plastic shredders as evolution machines -- aah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha *wheeze, gasp* it just cracks me up. Cattle prods. Whoo-hoo-hooo, uh, uh, uh, gotta get my breath back. Gulags. Entire countries like North Korea turned into prison camps. We gotta have 'em so we can evolve. Stop it, stop it. My ribs are hurting.

Cheap labor. Cackle, giggle, snort. Let's bring back the Middle Ages when labor was really cheap. The hell with Dickens, those kids got paid way too much. hee-hee-heee-heheeeeee. Wow! (wipes eyes)

Thanks, thepusher. I had almost forgotten what an hilarious age we live in. So much to laugh about. I'm changing my stripes and becoming a Lefty. They have all the fun.

Guess I'll go on down Cuba way, I hear that Castro's a hoot. He'll evolve your ass, you betcha. Then off to see Robert Mugabe. Confiscate farms. Deliberately starve thousands, millions. God, I haven't thought of anything so funny since the Three Stooges.

Gotta stop before I laugh myself to death.

JorgXMcKie,

Take us back to the Middle Ages? Hell, the Islamofascists won't be happy until we all live - those of us who are still alive - in the 7th century.

Gotta admit thepusher and his comrades in ignorance are good humour value. The funniest part is, they can't see it.

Will the mutant cockroaches be of the islamic persuasion?

Looks like Tim didn't make in time for the 5 o'clock rush at the Pitt St ADF recruiting office this afternoon. I guess the big Brave Tim continues to have other priorities than putting his own balls on the line. Come on Tim it's up to civilized men like you to save us.

You didn't refer to Naomi's use of the word "dissent". Your standards are slipping.

In a sentence, we got the best summary yet of the philosophy underlying Bush's so-called war on terrorism. Terrorism doesn't just blow up buildings; it blasts every other issue off the political map.

It doesn't just blow up buildings - it kills innocent people. Deliberately.

Soon enough, Sharon's "infrastructure of terror" included human rights observers who were bearing witness to the attacks, as well as aid workers and journalists.

I was going to ask why she didn't include any evidence of this, but then I remembered that journalists have (unthinkingly and unwittingly) smuggled terrorists across checkpoints, so if they haven't been regarded as part of the infrastructure, they ought to be at times.

Basque guerilla group ETA

It's a terrorist group.

This appears to be the true message of Bush's war franchise: why negotiate with your political opponents when you can annihilate them?

When "political opponents" fly planes into buildings, why indeed?

Instead she has called off talks with the Free Aceh Movement and in May invaded that oil-rich province

Oh my gosh, Indonesian forces have invaded the sovereign territory of ... Indonesia!

Big Hawk is some sort of primitive AI, right?

There is no economic equivalence between the Roman Empire and America. America runs the largest current account deficit in world history (sitting at $500 billion and around 5% of GDP). Foreigners earn net income off Americans. How this constitutes an "Empire" will have to be explained to me more carefully by the next person who is into comparisons.

I'm glad Naomi Klein is in Australia, I just hope she leaves before my winter vacation.

And no, she doesn't "run the country" as Kathy Shaidle above suggests, this is a typical response from a Torontonian, they think they are the whole country.

thepusher said: "We could be just like those tribesmen in Africa before the lovely Americans came and carted us away."

How telling. African slaves were first brought to North America ca. 1620. The US didn't declare independence until 1776. We Americans are such accomplished oppressors we were able to bring African slaves to our shores before we even existed.

American Indians had been enslaving other American Indians for centuries prior to the Europeans arrival.

Lastly, who was selling those African slaves to the British, Dutch and (post-1776) American traders? Why, the gentle and humane Arab Muslims as well as other Africans.

Lest thepusher (typically) miss my point, my comments are not an endorsement of slavery nor a rationalization of America's role in that foul business, just an attempt to provide some historical accuracy to counteract thepusher's willful ignorance and tendentious nonsense.

I'm glad Naomi Klein is in Australia, I just hope she leaves before my winter vacation.

Klein is such a socialist retard that Bin Ladin refused to take her in as his new monday night Burqa-Bitch!