I have a question....

What is the difference between the keyboard warriors who see "Islamofascism" as the greatest threat to our civilization, and the keyboard warriors who see BushCo, the MIC and rising domestic fascism as the greatest threat to our civilization?

I mean, I know one fundamental difference is that the former is delusional and the latter is correct, but, in the end, what is the difference? Neither group is willing to actually shoulder a weapon and put their ass on the line for democracy/liberty.

Thoughts? -- adnoto

Monday, February 18, 2008

Really? No responses? Interesting. I guess the truth must be that neither is a potential threat to our way of life.

-Today's the Day!

The first warm, springlike clear day in the Putrid Sound. Time to drag out the Hawk and the Duc, and leave no turn unstoned!

Lemme' go see if the Duc will start- it's been a while-

Nothing with less than four wheels, though....

I understand and agree with your critical comments about the personality types seeking Enemies to punish but think you are wrong that they have just been harmlessly indulging their personal paranoid fantasies before 9/11:

"Over the past couple decades, prior to the Bush Era, the people who needed the sort of psychological fulfillment that comes from prancing around as Hofstadterian faux-warriors waging Civilization Wars obtained their fulfillment from playing board and video games or, at worst, dressing up on the weekend in camouflage costumes and -- rather than playing golf or going fishing -- marched around in militia formations, primed to defend the nation from Janet Reno and her squadrons of hovering U.N. black helicopters. It was equally pathetic, but at least the damage was minimal."

I think they have been around in great force as warriors for the Religious Right's Culture Wars and have done great harm with the prohibitionist War on Drugs, for example. We've had a 35 year movement in this direction and the parallels between what you described and what has already happened once, albeit on a smaller scale, are remarkable but I usually see them ignored in Salon. Is it because Democrats have been supporters of this assault on our own citizens or are they afraid to appear weak on "drugs" (and on dominating people different than "us?") The only other answers I can think of is fear of reprisals from government or employers or some kind of prejudice.

I don't read you these ways so I'm left confused but something is terribly wrong when this glaring omission is made so consistently, even by people who seem very savvy otherwise. I think it is proof the Religious Right won the War on Drugs, making "good vs. evil" a bases for problem solving, planning or evaluating in American government, culture and journalism.

Hermit

Sorry adnoto, but the reason nobody responds to you is that nobody wants to abet your preening in front of the mirror as you admire yourself, along with what you imagine is your amazingly admirable willingness to shoulder a weapon and fight for democracy. Which of course you aren't actually doing, and don't have the slightest idea who here would be willing to do so should the necessity actually present itself. You're the one who is no different than the keyboard warriors who prance around in their camo in front of the mirror. You talk and talk and talk about what a waste of time it is to do so. Run along and play army.

I mean, I know one fundamental difference is that the former is delusional and the latter is correct, but, in the end, what is the difference?

Other than that one is correct and the other not? Mind like a steel trap, that one.

If the difference between being correct and not pales in your estimation to the willingness of either side to take up weapons, then all you really care about is taking up weapons, for whatever side will give you the chance to do so. You're just a bored to death American in need of some action. Smash a Starbucks window, shoot a raghead, whatever. As long as people understand that doing something violent is what really matters. That about it?

The lack of cultural literacy and not even caring to learn about a culture is rather astounding. And not only have our Troops built a military base on top of some of the ruins of Babylon, they have, I believe, 28 major installations throughout Iraq and our state department has built a 6 billion dollar fortress in the heart of Baghdad. I said “rather astounding” because nothing these thugs say or do anymore can ever again astound me.

Thanks everyone for the most interesting Nasruddin and related stories. I saved them all.

... between the keyboard warriors who see "Islamofascism" as the greatest threat to our civilization, and the keyboard warriors who see BushCo, the MIC and rising domestic fascism as the greatest threat to our civilization?

Good question.

One group has a mania about Boogeymen.

The other group believes in the Fourth Amendment and wants to protect it from the Boogeyman-maniacs.

This group is aware that threats to the Constitution have traditionally come all wrapped up in Boogeyman-mania.

Case in point: the well-known boogeyman-maniac J. Edgar Hoover and his fascistic plan to junk habeas corpus and the fourth amendment to replace them with massive illegal detentions and kangaroo courts:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/washington/23habeas.html?ei=5090&en=51115b422df80200&ex=1356066000&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1203373411-ZkTSMxPHdCRWQ8cWN2VYgQ

Neither group is willing to actually shoulder a weapon and put their ass on the line for democracy/liberty.

One group targets the general area of "Muslims" and "brown people", ensuring they'll always have an existentially dangerous ideological opponent, conveniently enough for their philosophy.

Who exactly are you expecting the other group to take up arms against?

I was running down the Google News coverage of FISA and ran across this gem. See if you can guess (without a web search) where I found this. I'll post the answer a bit later:

Over the course of the post-9-11 "War on Terror" — a "war," by the way, which has never been declared by Congress, as the Constitution mandates — the Bush administration has constantly escalated its demands to engage in spying. A January 27, 2006 Justice Department policy paper, "The NSA Program to Detect and Prevent Terrorist Attacks, Myth v. Reality," complained that "FISA requires the Attorney General to determine in advance that a FISA application … will be approved by the court before an emergency authorization can be granted, and the review process itself can and does take precious time."

When it came time to renew FISA, the administration decided to close up what it perceived as one weak area in its authority, the liability of the government's private partners. A Washington Post writer noted on January 25: "The White House and Republican lawmakers are pushing to make the law permanent while also adding legal protections for telecommunications companies, which face dozens of lawsuits."

Because of the wisdom and foresight of our Founding Fathers, Americans have enjoyed a level of privacy free from government surveillance almost unmatched in the world. We cannot repeat the words of the Fourth Amendment too often:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Had modern technology existed at the time the above words were written, electronic methods of communication undoubtedly would have been added to the list of things protected. It is not enough to say that we are fighting a war against terrorism and use that as a pretext for increasing government power to the detriment of our citizens. As Thomas Jefferson noted in 1821:

"When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated."

The President's Day recess has bought us precious time. Americans still have time to stop the extension of FISA's powers by contacting their U.S. representative while he or she is back home during this district work period. Find the number of your representative's district office in your telephone directory, under government listings, or click here to take action online.