1935? So wait, when he says dig trenches, they shall not pass, is he saying it's time to attack Germany, or that they should sign a separate peace with the Reich?
I don't get what the history lesson is. War hasn't destroyed us. I'd agree with what I take it That Fuzzy Bastard is saying in that it saved us against Nazi Germany. Perhaps I'm obtuse.I started reading your blog when Marginal Revolution linked to it because I am completely opposite your viewpoints (libertarian, if MR didn't make it obvious enough). You're clearly a very good writer, from a stylistic standpoint, but with each blog post you refer to current events but never really seem to say anything transcendent, just remark on the current topics. I'd be very interested in reading a post - any amount of words - on why you think that all killing is morally equal, why you apparently think that if I stumbled upon a man, say, raping a woman (or another man, who cares) with a knife to his/her neck, if I killed him, I am committing an immoral act. But most of your posts are about current killing in which you simply assert that viewpoint (and then in one say "bring on the keyboard flamers." I'm not a keyboard flamer, but I'd like to hear more about why you believe this, and I've looked in your old posts.) I'd also be very interested in people who you believe are advancing your current field of rhetoric, because frankly I agree with the gentleman who on Twitter said that there was nothing to your Resentment Machine post than a bunch of purple prose.I am genuinely interested in all of this, though I wouldn't be surprised in some snide dismissal, because from what I read you do quite a bit of it, though half of your posts are bashing others who do such a thing. I do not mean to get in an argument about that; if you think you don't, then fine. But, will you write those thousands of words I have asked? I'm not demanding it, but I'd be interested in reading them. But if you don't write back to everything I have asked, here and henceforth, if you dismiss it, are you being the equivalent of the man on Twitter? Sometimes, some people feel some things can simply be dismissed. To me that's not the fault of Twitter; it's like blaming the Atomic Bomb for making us want to kill people.
Credit where due, though: It does take sincerity of conviction to write, a few months after Hitler becomes sole president and the mutterings about "living space" are getting louder, that "War will destroy us" and to refuse "a policy of polite disapproval" towards those who would initiate the defense of Eastern Europe. Plus---and I suspect this is what really grabbed Freddie---there's an impressive rhetorical deftness in the way the author appropriates the tropes of the anti-fascist interventionists. Similarly, for Freddie to post an impassioned defense of pacifism dated from a few months before the Reich rolled into the Rhineland shows a genuine willingness to defend even what are thought of as the "limit cases" (or would if he were actually defending it, rather than posting and running---seems equally likely he just didn't think about the date)As to Neil's question about whether war would destroy us: One could argue that the war did destroy England as they knew it---by the end of the war, the British Empire was no more, and the austerity years had begun. Of course, whether it was worth it (or inevitable) in order to deal with the explicitly imperialist force of fascism is a question that has to be discussed and debated, and can't really be settled by bleating that peace is nice.
"Ryan Avent can continue to hide in a coward's medium. I, meanwhile, will remain here, ready to fight."
I know you get emails all the time from supporters, so I usually don't weigh in, but I do want to say that many people love you, and obsessive losers such as these just go to show the importance of what you stand for. Incidentally, the idea that Freddie wouldn't have known the relevance of the date that he's posting about is ludicrous, even coming from a committed troll like you. Enjoy your low-traffic blog about movies that nobody reads. --SvP
Now, now. We must be charitable.
Anonymous: If Freddie did notice the date, I'd love to hear his explanation of why he's so fond of a pacifist tract from the year Hitler achieved sole presidency. Does he actually think the world would be better off if England had allowed Germany to roll through Europe? Because the consequences of WWII were so much more severe than the consequences of a Nazi-occupied Europe would have been? Or... what?
Oh, and dude, you really don't wanna play the "You're jealous 'cause Freddie gets more hits than you" card. Aside from the fact that it's ugly and untrue---success in the free market is obviously no proof of virtue---but also because it might lead to someone noticing that Freddie's persistent targets---Sullivan, Yglesias, and Advent---get more hits in an hour than de Boer gets in a month, and where would we be? I actually don't think that has anything to do with his attacks on them, but you don't seem to understand what premises you're arguing from any more than Freddie paid attention to the sources on his quotes.
Post a Comment