So this post — Fish And Water — got echoed by a friend on FB. This is a person whose books I’ve read, though I only know him on FB, and also a person who normally doesn’t echo blog posts.
Over the next day I watched people comment and wondered if I wanted to get involved. There was the utter crazycakes “USSR’s Agit prop was a huge failure.” Really, tovarish? Did you live in an European country (A WESTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY) and watch people take the glossy photos of “Soviet Life” seriously? Did you have people tell you face to face that the USSR was only as evil as the US and that there was nothing to choose between them — despite the fact that the USSR was stuck at about the 1930s and had long lines for every normal staple, while the US had long lines for… black Friday. Despite the fact that every country that fell in the Western sphere of influence was living pretty affluently while the ones gobbled up as a shield by the USSR were living miserably? Despite the fact that you could see the difference between east and west Berlin from the AIR? Despite all this people thought that a USSR win and a USA win were “about the same.” AND THAT was a failure of Agit Prop? May G-d send me many failures like that.
But then there was the “centrist.” Oh, you know the centrist. He shows up in every political discussion to show how mature and well informed he is.
He started by critiquing my blog post — A BLOG POST — by saying I’d provided no examples or citations and that my blog was “emotive writing” and what proof did I have that soviet agit prop had shaped western opinion.
Of course I had provided no examples or citations. THIS IS A BLOG NOT A FUCKING ACADEMIC JOURNAL. I didn’t spend six months researching for the post, so I could cite “just the right sources” to convince our “centrist” gentleman. For one because I need no sources. No, really. Look at the examples above. Are any of you going to dispute that life in the sphere of USSR influence was worse than in the west? Are you going to tell me that the US helping west Germany rebuild was the same as the USSR bleeding East Germany dry? (And yet, in the US itself kids are taught that Communism is a great way of life and/or it’s never been tried, and that the “good guys lost the cold war.”)
Academics will try that. Because what they don’t understand about the economy would fill several encyclopedias, they think buying and selling from a country is “economic oppression” on a part with sending your troops to loot it. And that too is an example of the success of Soviet Agit Prop, albeit Soviet Agit Prop that slotted into a flaw in Western thinking that “smart people” should also be rich, which allows every man jack with a college degree to feel hard done by capitalism. But the entire explanation of “economic imperialism?” Well, that came from the USSR tovarish. It was right there, in books, magazines and pamphlets they put out.
And then the centrist gentleman expounded on his thesis. I was, he said, just like the SJWs. When they claim that things are the result of patriarchy and white privilege. That’s what I was doing claiming that things were the result of agitprop. Yep. He was centrist, well informed, the adult in the room, and look how he was hitting both sides. Don’t you admire him?
I’ve been bizarrely busy. No, seriously. Beyond trying to finish a book, brainstorm a collaboration and getting another started, my duties for instapundit, my work here, my work as publisher for the entire family, I have been trying to get Robert’s basement apartment ready for class start on Monday. This is because at that time he MUST be independent, able to cook/eat on his own, and having the living space fixed as it will be till his Christmas break. Because he simply won’t have time to tinker with it while studying.
So I considered several times answering the “centrist” but I didn’t, mostly because I got called away. I do have an answer, besides “you want citations? Come to the comments, my commenters will provide plenty.”
The answer is: Sure the SJWs say there is “institutional” stuff we don’t even notice, just as I say there is institutional stuff distorting your thinking. There are two differences: I’m not calling for silencing those repeating crazy Marxism. Let them talk. BY ALL MEANS, we WANT them to talk. Because once things are out in the open, it becomes obvious how crazy cakes they are. I’m simply calling for us to be aware of and expose the narrative.
The other thing is: Okay. So, where are the courses in “The benefits of Patriarchal Thinking” or “Exploring what White Supremacy can do for our nation” or…? Go ahead. I’ll wait. Meanwhile, in every college, even in conservative parts of the country there is at least ONE course on Marxist analysis of this or that. And courses on how Marxism can help you with everything from hair growth to the heart break of psoriasis. Meanwhile for “cases of patriarchy” the left has now descended to hunting micro aggressions, on their way to pico aggressions.
If you think there is a parallel and both sides are the same, between trying to defend your country from the leftovers of USSR propaganda which have openly and BLATANTLY infected the entire educational/entertainment/news industrial-complex and hunting for the snipe of patriarchal and racial aggression in things people might not phrase very well, congratulations: You are a useful idiot.
The Agit prop of the USSR succeeded and continues to foster oikophobia and hate of the west in the west because it infected the minds of people like you. Not that there was that much there to infect.
You’re the sort of people who thinks that “both sides are equally guilty/bad/etc” is ALWAYS the appropriate answer. Virtue is always in the middle, right. If someone wants to bayonet babies and someone wants to keep them alive, virtue must be in the middle: let’s shoot babies in the head.
Extreme? Of course it’s extreme. And seeing no different between SJWs wanting to silence people, and the non-Marxist side wanting to EXPRESS DIFFERENT OPINIONS UNMOLESTED while still letting the SJWs talk all they want to isn’t extreme? Funny definition of extreme.
It is in fact “another easy trick to avoid thinking.” So long as you can say “both sides are wrong” you don’t need to consider any facts, even blatant ones. A certain number of people will assume you must be right because you’re not an “extremist” and you can peacock about as the adult in the room.
The fact that your nonsense leads by default to the most aggressive and totalitarian view point winning (the middle between “we just want to talk” and “we want to silence them” is not “both sides talk.” It’s “We’ll restrict some talk” OR more likely “we’ll restrict the side that’s not calling for restrictions, because the OTHER side is really loud.”) and that you are fostering the destruction of western civilization in the name of a long-dead but strangely still stirring imperialism should cause you no qualms.
After all, you’re centrist and an adult.
You may wipe your hands to the wall. Toilet paper isn’t going to take care of your magnificent works all by itself.