More Lessons in Propaganda from the NYT: The Great Divide Phantasm.

We can always rely on the New York Times, aka the Old Gray Lady, to instruct us on some of the finer elements in elementary propaganda. The quality varies from writer to writer in this ragzine, but Paul Krugman seems to best follow the old rusty groove demanded by the far leftist political stance of this so-called news paper. The NYT is a propaganda rag—not a ‘news’ paper. Proof follows.

In our current lesson, we look at a middle-grade structured piece of misinformation. Krugman has done better in the past, so we give him a B^- for this one.

In the title we read there is some Great Divide[1]. This is the conclusion being stated up front in classic circular logic format. The usual method is to start with your conclusion and make an outline of whatever is necessary to support the premise and then fill in the blanks at random  like a chum chucker feeds the fish. The reader is now to be rewarded with a detailed and maudlin explanation of just how this obvious divide will affect the world. Next we look for a political lever to pull that amplifies the conclusion in the title and we find:

“Yesterday The Times published a highly informative chart laying out the positions of the presidential candidates on major issues. It was, I’d argue, a useful reality check for those who believe that the next president can somehow usher in a new era of bipartisan cooperation.”

Now, we have a definitive reference that will serve as some kind of reality filter to identify who can work with “bipartisan cooperation.” Recall that Nancy Pelosi refused to let Republicans even see much of her legislation in her ‘first 100 days.” That stance is actually an acceptable form of bipartisanism in the leftist or radical[2] lexicon. Why are we surprised to learn that liberals celebrate dictators like Castro[3], Kim, Chavez[4] and Ortega? Such a work is known as an apologia.

Next, the reading of this exciting ‘reference’ shows that the Republicans want to continue the War on Terrorism in Iraq while the Democrats want out with failure or whatever as a consequence as they did in Viet Nam and focus on higher taxes, more and free health care[5],even higher taxes,  and the environment,  which may be conveniently translated as the Global Warming Follies[6],[7].

We now have the players in two distinct camps and there can be no other choice but to vote for a Democrat!  This is explained as:

“Because the G.O.P. is still controlled by a conservative movement that does not tolerate deviations from tax-cutting[8], free-market, greed-is-good orthodoxy.”

Nazification of the opposition is great politics in the radical camp and we see this crude smear used frequently in the construction of such propaganda pieces at the NYT. The opposition is intolerant. We can translate this as follows: the lefties are not part of the major corporate world, the World Trade Organization, have only half of Congress at best, nothing in the White House are short a vote or two in the Supreme Court and have no say so in the War in Iraq, so we have to grunt and grab some power!

The last string of accusations from the quote above [highlighted in red in honor of Lenin] can be translated as: the left cannot survive without massive taxes and really have no regard for the growth that tax cuts offer and profits are unnecessary to run a fine society like the USSR or Cuba. Vote against Republicans at all cost.  Depression, political unrest, revolution and such are just fine with the left.

While the choice for any future elected person in the US is thusly limited to very few liberal Democrats, the author of this piece does mention the person who is least likely to win the national election. Mike Huckabee is viewed by the NYT as some kind of side-show religious freak that will alienate all Democrats and most moderates and become the Republican reincarnation of George McGovern. He will lose so Hillary or Obama can win. Edwards is a joke from the last round.

Now, the prior favorite of the NYT is shown in a strong brown light with this fluff:

“But Mr. McCain now says that he supports making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Not only that: he’s become a convert to crude supply-side economics, claiming that cutting taxes actually increases revenues. That’s an assertion even Bush administration officials concede is false.”

The worm has turned! And he was John Kerry’s[9] pick for VP too! Traitor!

This is also a lie and, as such, is perfectly acceptable to the NYT[10]. The truth is relative in leftist speak and has little to do with the facts. There are no persons in the Bush groups or associated conservatives who are adept in economics that can deny that tax cuts do not spur revenues[11]. Remember Jimmy Carter? Krugman, a self-professed economist in his own mind, but not supported by his views, has probably never viewed the S&P 500 chart[12] since Ronald Reagan came into office and cut taxes spurred sustained growth. He cannot tolerate a guileless dialogue about tax cuts or the marginal propensity to save [MPS], the basis of investment in America. This is merely the old stale mantra known as the Eternal Whine of the Tax Whores[13] or the tautological moans of the Tax Hike Zombie[14], the author of this piece. The criminals in the Clinton and Gore camps are not criticized.[15] Liberalism is based on many faults[16] and lies structure the most  important part of this organization.

The Tax Hike Zombie ends the article with a surprising accurate conclusion:

“On economics, and on much else, there is no common ground between the parties.”

“There’s a fantasy, widely held inside the Beltway, that men and women of good will from both parties can be brought together to hammer out bipartisan solutions to the nation’s problems”

Those parts are actually correct. Sometimes, Paul does get something about right. But he did slip in some notions about good will and that ruined the thrust.

Missing from this elementary specimen of propaganda fluff are comments on racism, drug addiction, more ‘education,’ illegal aliens, terrorism[17],[18], diplomacy[19] or oil prices. Racism is the absolute bottom line of the Marxist propaganda machine that the NYT is based upon. They must have that precious voting edge in cities or their influence evaporates. The Walter Duranty Papers erred by several omissions in this particular issue.[20] They must try harder.

It is important to keep abreast of the mundane aspects of propaganda writings because the NYT might become even more frustrated and break into new political avenues.  Stay tuned.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

Why You Should Hug a Commie [or a liberal] Today.

We must conjecture at the entertaining antics of the far left as they sort out their proclivities and process their plans for the future. Much of the time there is seemingly no apparent pedestal of reason that directs their actions or explains their howls. We must also note that their political past has, in their own minds, been erased, ruthlessly redacted or never happened. The evil past of their enemies, much to the contrary and the focus of much of their attention,  is sorted and explained  by the leftist  elites and truncated without too much regard to the stark truth save for being recycled  in packages to provide ammunition for their constant artillery barrage against Fortress Capitalism.

Reading David Horowitz’s book The Politics of Bad Faith[1], and others, we find that the left is actually divided into two portions: the leftists and the radicals. The compleat understanding of these two groups soars beyond the scope of this essay as it is complicated as some players apparently toggle their political banners in a fog of ignorance and mangle their directives.  We must study Eric Hoffer a bit and sift through his True Believers[2] to assemble parts of their mental composition for a decent view. In addition, we need to analyze their past efforts in trying to constantly attack capitalist leaders such as Ronald Reagan as recorded in Reagan’s War[3], as he became the principle target of their actions since he was an anti-Communist. They became anti-anti-Communists. For other sources we need to review the Demonization of Senator Joe McCarthy as his is one of the few success stories in their long battle to defend Communist, and worse. Works by Whittaker Chambers (Witness) offer an insight into policy matters and those who suborn spying against the United States. The execution of the Rosenbergs, Julius [code name Liberal!] and Ethyl, is also a matter that requires some in-depth study as well as the story of how the Stalinist Lillian Hellman slithered out of danger during the hunt for Communists and spies in our system. They were paid spies although the leftists cannot seem to acknowledge this fact. Ann Coulter’s book Treason[4] explains much of this. The deciphered VENONA[5] Files give many details as to their spy works and payments in cash from the USSR for their traitorous deeds.

The remaining factor here in any attempt to understand the leftists and radicals of the Party of Democrats is to analyze their economic and social failures and attempt to synthesize some coherent explanation of how a party  controlled by losers could survive in the most successful capitalist and religions country in the world. The answer to this is relatively simple.

We can begin with their own celebrated icons, track their progress in politics, war, famine and ultimate failure and then try to fit them into some kind of framework. We start with the alcoholic blowhard Karl Marx and his phony economics. Here, he tried everything he could to remove profits from all capitalist systems and place the ‘workers’ in charge of all means of production. This meant outlawing private property and using the government to control society in terms of transportation, education, the media, agriculture, steel production and everything else. This scheme fails on two accounts: [1] the law of supply and demand is warped so that a surety of surplus or scarcity is guaranteed and [2] government people make economic decisions although they rarely have any talent for doing so. As such, the populace must endure hardships, shortages and have no incentive for good work. No problem for liberals here. That model is just fine with them.

Lenin warped Marx’s strict revolutionary rules and was an opportunist who used murder and vengeance to grab control of a backward agrarian country headed by a hated monarch. Trotsky noted that Marxian revolutions were supposed to occur, spontaneously, in highly industrialized nations via the revolution of the proletariat. This did not happen. There was an early prospect for this in Munich by Rosa Luxemburg in 1919, but the socialist anti-communists wrecked this attempt. Later Mussolini and much later Hitler and then Franco put an end to Bolshevism in Europe. Fascism halted the vaunted rise of Bolshevism and their leaders became symbols of hate, the basis for the anti-Communist propaganda efforts ever since.  Those three ruined a lot of leftist dreams. Asia fell later with disastrous economic results. The Great Leap Backward of the People’s Republic was as much a failure as the 74 years of Communism in the USSR. The liberals took these events as self-inflicted giving Ronald Reagan no credits and went calmly into environmentalism. They became the EcoNazis of today.

So, much of what we can sift from the torturous histories of the brutal social wreckage of the far left is based partly on a warped theory of government, part on those leaders, socialist or capitalist (Hitler and Mussolini were strict socialists and Reagan was a strict capitalist) as it may be and the need to grab power via taxation and governmental control. Their revolutions were successful only in the limited sense that they did grunt and grab massive quantities of wealth but squandered this immediately in naïve economic projects such as excessive iron production

We cannot assemble a workable description of the left that liberals and their political allies by assuming that the leftists and radicals are mere drooling idiots whose sincerity can be estimated my measuring the thickness of the encrusted slobber on their shoes, although many of their lesser cadres fit this description.  We cannot assume they are stupid or epsilon semi-morons or even mentally impaired in any form although drug addiction seems to indicate otherwise in a few cases. A way must be found to show their contentment with economic failure to explain how they operate. That way is outlined below.

The way is actually simple: they cannot win economically and do not want to! A review of history shows that the simple act of grabbing power and wealth and fomenting a revolution is the satisfying part of their collective nature. If one of their revolutionary projects crashes they merely pick another place where money is concentrated in the hands of a few and start all over again. How can they run out of projects? Thus, capitalism subsidizes Marxism by default. They have actually assumed more power from depression and war than from any other source.  Recall that war defines peace. They have been moderately successful in taxing the United States and sending bits of money to their Marxist allies over the earth, but this is small potatoes in the economic game as the United States has an annual GDP of 17 trillion dollars and a new worth of some 300 trillion dollars.  To this we have to add that failure is no barrier to their implementing more and more exotic tax machines and wasting huge piles of  money with useless and counterproductive ‘education’ projects and phony social programs. This is their definition of winning.  Thus, they lose to lose and cannot win.

Their goals are more tuned to absolute power acquisition and the jamming of free markets and restraining standard capitalism than in redeeming social projects. Africa is a great test case for liberalism and for  their ‘education’ and such as every Marxist banana republic in Africa has crashed in tribal  bloodshed and a hurried flight of capital leaving disease , poverty and revolutionary armies hunting each other in the bush as a result. The current list of so-called ‘leaders’ in their party include treasonous persons such as John Murtha, John Kerry, Jane Fonda, Jesse Jackson, and others. They include phony academics with bizarre and contorted adaptations of anti-capitalist economic plans such as those offered by J. Kenneth Galbraith, the Tax Hike Zombie Paul Krugman[6] of the New York Times and howling racists who accuse others of racism such as Al Sharpton, Quannel X[7], Senator Schumer, Senator Al Gore[8] and Senator Byrd or the alcoholic murderer and parasite Senator Ted Kennedy, a person from a clan where it is difficult to find someone who is not accurately described by at least two items from the following list: murderer, liar, alcoholic, drug addict, pervert, criminal, convict, felon, cheap thug or playboy.

The use of a criminal, drug addict, hypocrite or other form of loser for a national spokesperson is useful for the left. We can wonder for hours how a liar, flip-flop artist, traitor, blowhard and phony soldier like John Kerry[9] can be a leader of a national political movement when he got three purple hearts from three drops of blood, was discharged early (no explanation for this was given) and worked against the United States in France by consorting with the enemy from North Viet Nam. Conservative talk show hosts frequently pose the simple question to the far left: Do you want the US to win the war in Iraq?? There is never a firm yes .There is always foraging for some excuse to say that they ‘support the troops’ and then the ‘but’ and then silence. The fact is that they are very willing to sacrifice our soldiers and military in any way they can, such as John Kerry voting against virtually every weapons program since he was elected. He still ran on his ‘war record.’ Such a phony coward and liar is quite suitable for leadership in leftist politics.

So, to wrap up this essay and answer the questions proffered above: The far left of the Party of Democrats have no intention of maintaining a viable economic society here or any place else. There is always more money to loot from others. The left cannot generate funds while operating in the capitalist mode and fume when others do so. Their solution to capitalism is always higher and higher taxes[10] as Jimmy Carter showed us with his malaise era. Much of our current prosperity is based on the Reagan Tax Cuts. They cannot bring themselves to sanction any form of tax cut. They prefer poverty to private property ownership and severe supervision of all citizens. They demand to judge and supply all human wants from specifying exact toilet flush volumes to the Internet. Their goal is only to destroy our system and redistribute the wealth in a phony Marxian way although many of their elites will become even richer from the plunder. Leon Trotsky predicted this. You can be a criminal, a pervert, a liar and thieves like the Clintons (or their stooges[11]) and get rave reviews from those who ignore their crimes for political reasons.

The left are losers who want others to lose with them.  Fortunately, they have not had much control of our society since 1900 except for FDR. They have lost much and deserve a good hug for being such losers. If they were competent we would have had our society destroyed by 1920 in a wave of Bolshevism. For being blundering idiots or a close approximation of same we need to give them a second hug and salute them with:” Thank you so much for buggering your own plans and projects and ruining your future. We look forward to more dim-witted mistakes in the future as we build on our 401(k)s and build more homes and businesses and enjoy the fruits of capitalism.  Thank Stalin, Mao, and a cluster of Marxist loons in Africa and give a special thanks to Castro too for his fine work in destroying economic competition for us.”  They need to sanction the illegal ‘import’ of uneducated and frequently criminal ‘workers[12]’ from Mexico or other worthless countries to stuff ballot boxes and burden the health care system. Somehow they think the ‘future’ of American must hinge precipitously on the need for uneducated labor.  It is the illegal votes that they desperately need to survive. They demand to enlist the votes of other losers.

And, their next plot is to tax capitalism around the globe[13] in a feverish effort to stop the nonexistent rise of the earth’s surface temperature in the Global Warming Follies[14]. No Lenin ever had a plan that huge. They want it all this time around.

It is obvious that they are not suitable in any form of government. They are so inept they cannot even be good Communists.  They need simple monotonous tasks to keep them busy such as sweeping the streets or harvesting corn. Vote accordingly.

rycK